Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62014TN0560

    Case T-560/14: Action brought on 28 July 2014 — ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding a.o. v Parliament and Council

    IO C 388, 3.11.2014, p. 19–20 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    3.11.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 388/19

    Action brought on 28 July 2014 — ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding a.o. v Parliament and Council

    (Case T-560/14)

    2014/C 388/23

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicants: ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding BV (Hoorn NH, Netherlands); Agriom BV (Aalsmeer, Netherlands); Agrisemen BV (Ellewoutsdijk, Netherlands); Anthura BV (Bleiswijk, Netherlands); Barenbrug Holding BV (Oosterhout, Netherlands); De Bolster BV (Epe, Netherlands); Evanthia BV (Hoek van Holland, Netherlands); Gebr. Vletter & Den Haan VOF (Rijnsburg, Netherlands); Hilverda Kooij BV (Aalsmeer, Netherlands); Holland-Select BV (Andijk, Netherlands); Könst Breeding BV (Nieuwveen, Netherlands); Koninklijke Van Zanten BV (Hillegom, Netherlands); Kweek- en Researchbedrijf Agirco BV (Emmeloord, Netherlands); Kwekerij de Wester-Bouwing BV (Rossum, Netherlands); Limgroup BV (Horst aan de Maas, Netherlands); and Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij Het Idee BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: P. de Jong, P. Vlaemminck and B. Van Vooren, lawyers)

    Defendants: Council of the European Union and European Parliament

    Form of order sought

    The applicants claim that the Court should:

    —

    declare the action in annulment admissible;

    —

    annul Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation in the Union (OJ L 150, p. 59); and

    —

    order the European Parliament and the Council to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-559/14 Ackermann Saatzucht a.o. v Parliament and Council.

    Top