This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62023CN0095
Case C-95/23 P: Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
Case C-95/23 P: Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
Case C-95/23 P: Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
OJ C 127, 11.4.2023, p. 27–28
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
11.4.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 127/27 |
Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
(Case C-95/23 P)
(2023/C 127/33)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) (represented by: V. Villante, D. Rovetta, M. Campa, avvocati, P. Gjørtler, advokat)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
Form of order sought
The Appellant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
declare the present appeal admissible; |
|
— |
set aside the order under appeal and declare the action brought by EURANIMI admissible; |
|
— |
send the case back to the General Court for examination of the substance of EURANIMI’s action; |
|
— |
order the European Commission to bear the legal cost of the present appeal and of the procedure at first instance. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Appellant relies on three main grounds of appeals:
First ground of appeal: Error in law in interpreting the Article 263 (4) TFEU and in particular the requisite of ‘direct and individual concern’. Wrong qualification of facts.
Second ground of appeal: Error in law in interpreting the final limb of Article 263 (4) TFEU and the requisite and notion of regulatory act which does not entail implementing measures. Wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.
Third ground of appeal: Wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.