- 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-180/10: Order of the General Court of 6 September 2012 — Nickel Institute v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Classification, packaging and labelling of certain nickel carbonate compounds as dangerous substances — Directives 2008/58/EC and 2009/2/EC — 30th and 31st adaptations to technical progress of Directive 67/548/EEC — Partial refusal of access — Action for annulment — No need to adjudicate)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TB0180
62010TB0180
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
27.10.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 331/24
(Case T-180/10) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Classification, packaging and labelling of certain nickel carbonate compounds as dangerous substances - Directives 2008/58/EC and 2009/2/EC - 30th and 31st adaptations to technical progress of Directive 67/548/EEC - Partial refusal of access - Action for annulment - No need to adjudicate)
(2012/C 331/45)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Nickel Institute (Toronto, Canada) (represented by: initially, K. Nordlander, lawyer, and H. Pearson, Solicitor, and, subsequently, K. Nordlander)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and P. Costa de Oliveira, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the applicant: Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski and M. Pere, acting as Agents) and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, K. Petkovska, C. Meyer-Seitz and S. Johannesson, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application for annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 8 February 2010 (reference SG.E3/HP/psi — Ares(2010)65824) concerning the refusal to grant Nickel Institute full access to certain internal documents, in particular to opinions of the Commission’s Legal Service, drawn up in the context of two consecutive procedures which resulted in the classification of, inter alia, certain nickel carbonate compounds in Annex I to Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ, English Special Edition 1967, p. 234).
Operative part of the order
1.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.
2.The European Commission shall bear its own costs as well as half of the costs incurred by Nickel Institute.
3.Nickel Institute shall bear half of its own costs.
4.The Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden shall bear their own respective costs.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.