- 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 T-453/10: Order of the General Court of 6 March 2012 — Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development v Commission (Action for annulment — EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland — Expenditure excluded from European Union financing — Devolved administration — No direct concern — Inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TB0453
62010TB0453
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 138/17
(Case T-453/10) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Action for annulment - EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - Expenditure excluded from European Union financing - Devolved administration - No direct concern - Inadmissibility)
(2012/C 138/33)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (Belfast, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Brown, Solicitor, and D. Wyatt QC)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van den Wyngaert, P. Rossi and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)
Re:
Action for annulment in part of Commission Decision 2010/399/EU of 15 July 2010 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2010 L 184, p. 6)
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.The Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is ordered to pay the costs.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
* * *