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
(Case T-1/08 INTP)
((Procedure - Interpretation of a judgment))
(2016/C 016/32)
Language of the case: Polish
Applicant: Buczek Automotive sp. z o.o. (Sosnowiec, Poland) (represented by: J. Jurczyk, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann, A. Stobiecka-Kuik and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: A. Jasser, acting as Agent)
Application for interpretation of the judgment of 17 May 2011 in Buczek Automotive v Commission (T-1/08, ECR, EU:T:2011:216).
The Court:
1.Declares that point 1 of the operative part of the judgment of 17 May 2011 in Buczek Automotive v Commission (T-1/08, ECR, EU:T:2011:216) is to be interpreted as meaning that Article 1 of Commission Decision 2008/344/EC of 23 October 2007 on State Aid C 23/06 (ex NN 35/06) which Poland has implemented for steel producer Technologie Buczek Group (OJ 2008 L 116, p. 20) is annulled with erga omnes effect;
2.Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;
3.Orders that the original of this judgment be appended to the original of the judgment interpreted, in the margin of which reference shall be made to this judgment.
(1) OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.