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 62016TN0101

    Case T-101/16: Action brought on 8 March 2016 — Klausner Holz Niedersachsen v Commission

    IO C 145, 25.4.2016, p. 35–36 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    25.4.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 145/35

    Action brought on 8 March 2016 — Klausner Holz Niedersachsen v Commission

    (Case T-101/16)

    (2016/C 145/43)

    Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Klausner Holz Niedersachsen GmbH (Saalburg-Ebersdorf, Germany) (represented by: D. Reich, C. Hipp and T. Ilgner, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    find that the defendant infringed Article 108 TFEU in conjunction with Article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union by failing, following receipt of the applicant’s letter of 13 November 2015, to take the decision provided for in those provisions to close the preliminary examination procedures in cases SA.37113 and SA.375009 pursuant to Article 4 of that regulation;

    —

    order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, even if the action should serve no purpose by reason of the adoption of a measure by the European Commission in the course of the proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law by which it claims that the Commission failed to take, within a reasonable period, a decision closing the preliminary examination procedure pursuant to Article 4(2) to (4) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, (1) despite being called upon to act pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 265 TFEU.

    (1)  Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9).

    Top