This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CN0266
Case C-266/10 P: Appeal brought on 27 May 2010 by Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 March 2010 in Case T-530/09: Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
Case C-266/10 P: Appeal brought on 27 May 2010 by Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 March 2010 in Case T-530/09: Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
Case C-266/10 P: Appeal brought on 27 May 2010 by Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 March 2010 in Case T-530/09: Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
OJ C 72, 5.3.2011, p. 2–2
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
5.3.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 72/2 |
Appeal brought on 27 May 2010 by Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 16 March 2010 in Case T-530/09: Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
(Case C-266/10 P)
2011/C 72/02
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: Sistemul electronic de arhivare, criptare și indexare digitalizată Srl (Seacid) (represented by: N.O. Curelea, avocat)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Parliament, Council of the European Union
By order of 22 October 2010 the Court of Justice (Seventh Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.