This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010TN0262
Case T-262/10: Action brought on 7 June 2010 — Microban International and Microban (Europe) v Commission
Case T-262/10: Action brought on 7 June 2010 — Microban International and Microban (Europe) v Commission
Case T-262/10: Action brought on 7 June 2010 — Microban International and Microban (Europe) v Commission
OJ C 221, 14.8.2010, p. 51–52
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
14.8.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 221/51 |
Action brought on 7 June 2010 — Microban International and Microban (Europe) v Commission
(Case T-262/10)
()
2010/C 221/82
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Microban International Ltd. (Huntersville, United States) and Microban (Europe) Ltd. (Heath Hayes, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. S. Rydelski, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
— |
Annul Commission Decision No 2010/169 of 19 March 2010 concerning the non-inclusion of 2,4,4-’trichloro-2’-hydroxydiphenyl ether in the Union list of additives which may be used in the manufacture of plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs under Directive 2002/72/EC (OJ 2010 L 75, p. 25); and |
— |
Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
By means of its application, the applicants seek, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, the annulment of Commission Decision No 2010/169 of 19 March 2010 concerning the non-inclusion of 2,4,4-’trichloro-2’-hydroxydiphenyl ether in the Union list of additives which may be used in the manufacture of plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs under Directive 2002/72/EC (1) (OJ 2010 L 75, p. 25), notified under document C(2010) 1613.
In support of its submissions, the applicants put forward the following pleas in law:
|
Firstly, that the contested Decision is not in accordance with the authorisation procedure under the framework Regulation (2) as it lacks an adequate legal basis for its adoption. |
|
Secondly, the Decision adopted by the defendant not to include the product concerned in the Union list of additives without a risk management decision, solely based on the withdrawal of the original application for authorisation, is in breach of the authorisation procedure for the product concerned. |
|
Thirdly, the defendant violated the applicants’ legitimate expectations by not providing for the opportunity to replace the original applicant for the product concerned. |
|
Finally, the procedure leading up to the contested Decision was not in compliance with general principles of EU law, such as the principles of sound administration, transparency and legal certainty. |
(1) Commission Directive 2002/72/EC of 6 August 2002 relating to plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with foodstuffs (OJ 2002 L 220, p. 18)
(2) Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 on materials and articles intended to come into contact with food and repealing Directives 80/590/EEC and 89/109/EEC (OJ 2004 L 338, p. 4).