- 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-560/14: Action brought on 28 July 2014 — ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding a.o. v Parliament and Council
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TN0560
62014TN0560
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
3.11.2014
Official Journal of the European Union
C 388/19
(Case T-560/14)
2014/C 388/23
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding BV (Hoorn NH, Netherlands); Agriom BV (Aalsmeer, Netherlands); Agrisemen BV (Ellewoutsdijk, Netherlands); Anthura BV (Bleiswijk, Netherlands); Barenbrug Holding BV (Oosterhout, Netherlands); De Bolster BV (Epe, Netherlands); Evanthia BV (Hoek van Holland, Netherlands); Gebr. Vletter & Den Haan VOF (Rijnsburg, Netherlands); Hilverda Kooij BV (Aalsmeer, Netherlands); Holland-Select BV (Andijk, Netherlands); Könst Breeding BV (Nieuwveen, Netherlands); Koninklijke Van Zanten BV (Hillegom, Netherlands); Kweek- en Researchbedrijf Agirco BV (Emmeloord, Netherlands); Kwekerij de Wester-Bouwing BV (Rossum, Netherlands); Limgroup BV (Horst aan de Maas, Netherlands); and Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij Het Idee BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: P. de Jong, P. Vlaemminck and B. Van Vooren, lawyers)
Defendants: Council of the European Union and European Parliament
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—declare the action in annulment admissible;
—annul Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation in the Union (OJ L 150, p. 59); and
—order the European Parliament and the Council to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-559/14 Ackermann Saatzucht a.o. v Parliament and Council.