- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-389/19 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 February 2021 — European Commission v Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Denmark, Republic of Finland, European Parliament, European Chemicals Agency (Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals — European Commission decision authorising certain uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and lead chromate molybdate sulfate red, substances listed in Annex XIV of that regulation — Substances of very high concern — Conditions of authorisation — Assessment of the lack of suitable alternatives)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0389
62019CA0389
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 138/3
(Case C-389/19 P) (1)
(Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals - European Commission decision authorising certain uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and lead chromate molybdate sulfate red, substances listed in Annex XIV of that regulation - Substances of very high concern - Conditions of authorisation - Assessment of the lack of suitable alternatives)
(2021/C 138/03)
Language of the case: Swedish
Parties
Appellant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lindenthal, K. Mifsud-Bonnici and G. Tolstoy, and subsequently by R. Lindenthal and K. Mifsud-Bonnici, acting as Agents, and K. Nordlander, advokat)
Other parties to the proceedings: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev, J. Lundberg, H. Eklinder and A. Falk, and subsequently by: O. Simonsson, C. Meyer-Seitz, M. Salborn Hodgson, R. Shahsavan Eriksson, H. Shev and H. Eklinder, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Denmark (represented initially by: J. Nymann-Lindegren, M.S. Wolff and P.Z.L. Ngo, and subsequently by: J. Nymann-Lindegren and M.S. Wolff, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: S. Hartikainen, acting as Agent), European Parliament (represented by: A. Neergaard, A. Tamás and C. Biz, acting as Agents), European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented initially by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and C. Schultheiss, and subsequently by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and J. Löfgren, acting as Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Sets aside point 2 of the operative part of the judgment of 7 March 2019, Sweden v Commission (T-837/16, EU:T:2019:144);
2.Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;
3.Orders the effects of Commission Implementing Decision C(2016) 5644 final of 7 September 2016 authorising certain uses of lead sulfochromate yellow and lead chromate molybdate sulfate red in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council to be maintained until the European Commission has adopted a fresh decision on the application for authorisation submitted by DCC Maastricht BV;
4.Orders the European Commission, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Republic of Finland, the European Parliament and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) each to bear their own costs relating to the appeal proceedings.
(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140