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 62019TN0612

    Case T-612/19: Action brought on 10 September 2019 – UPL Europe and Aceto Agricultural Chemical v Commission

    IO C 399, 25.11.2019, p. 72–72 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    25.11.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 399/72

    Action brought on 10 September 2019 – UPL Europe and Aceto Agricultural Chemical v Commission

    (Case T-612/19)

    (2019/C 399/90)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicants: UPL Europe Ltd (Warrington Cheshire, United Kingdom) and Aceto Agricultural Chemical Corp. Ltd (Port Washington, United States) (represented by: C. Mereu and P. Sellar, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicants claim that the Court should:

    —

    annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/989 of 17 June 2019; (1)

    —

    order the defendant to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted further to manifest errors of assessment.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation results from a procedure during which the applicants’ rights of defence have not been respected.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted in breach of the principle of proportionality.

    4.

    Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation was adopted in breach of the precautionary principle.

    (1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/989 of 17 June 2019 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance chlorpropham, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2019 L 160, p. 11).

    Top