Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TN0584

Case T-584/15: Action brought on 7 October 2015 — POA/Commission

OJ C 406, 7.12.2015, p. 40–41 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

7.12.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 406/40


Action brought on 7 October 2015 — POA/Commission

(Case T-584/15)

(2015/C 406/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pagkyprios organismos ageladotrofon Dimosia Ltd (POA) (Latsia, Cyprus) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the Commission to accept the dossier CY/PDO/0005/01243 lodged by the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus as meeting the conditions laid down by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 21 November 2012, on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ 2012 L 343, p. 1), as provided by Article 50 (1) of this regulation, and to proceed to its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union with reference 2015/C 246/12;

order the Commission to pay the costs of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment of the Commission on the conformity of the application CY/PDO/0005/01243 with Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012

The application CY/PDO/0005/01243 departs from the standard CYS 94 (Part 1 & 2) 1985 concerning the milk content in the ‘Halloumi’ production process.

The application CY/PDO/0005/01243 violates Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission did not verify the compliance of application CY/PDO/0005/01243 with the procedure laid down by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012

No reasonable time was given for the right to appeal.

The national authorities failed to scrutinize properly the objection raised by the applicant.


Top