This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CN0167
Case C-167/11 P: Appeal brought on 5 April 2011 by Cantiere Navale De Poli SpA against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 3 February 2011 in Case T-584/08 Cantiere Navale De Poli v Commission
Case C-167/11 P: Appeal brought on 5 April 2011 by Cantiere Navale De Poli SpA against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 3 February 2011 in Case T-584/08 Cantiere Navale De Poli v Commission
Case C-167/11 P: Appeal brought on 5 April 2011 by Cantiere Navale De Poli SpA against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 3 February 2011 in Case T-584/08 Cantiere Navale De Poli v Commission
IO C 173, 11.6.2011, p. 7–8
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
11.6.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 173/7 |
Appeal brought on 5 April 2011 by Cantiere Navale De Poli SpA against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 3 February 2011 in Case T-584/08 Cantiere Navale De Poli v Commission
(Case C-167/11 P)
2011/C 173/15
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Appellant: Cantiere Navale De Poli SpA in liquidation and arrangement with creditors (represented by: A. Abate and A. Franchi, avvocati)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
Form of order sought
— |
uphold the appeal seeking the setting aside of the judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2011 and the related decision of the European Commission of 21 October 2008 and, in so far as is necessary and possible, a direct decision on the substance of the main action; |
— |
in the alternative, set aside that judgment and refer the case back to the General Court; |
— |
order the Commission to pay all costs and expenses relating to the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
By its appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2011 in Case T-584/08 Cantiere Navale De Poli v Commission, particularly in the following respects:
a) |
Procedural defects on grounds of failure to state adequate reasons in relation to:
|
b) |
Breach of Community law in relation to:
|