# C_2020433EN.01006401.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/64 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/64

---

Action brought on 23 October 2020 — NG and Others v Parliament and Council

(Case T-646/20)

(2020/C 433/79)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: NG and 17 other applicants (represented by: R. Martens, lawyer)

Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul, in its entirety, Article 1 (6) (c)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2020/1054 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 as regards minimum requirements on maximum daily and weekly driving times, minimum breaks and daily and weekly rest periods and Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 as regards positioning by means of tachographs; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, in its entirety, Article 1 (6) (c)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2020/1054 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 as regards minimum requirements on maximum daily and weekly driving times, minimum breaks and daily and weekly rest periods and Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 as regards positioning by means of tachographs;

| — | order the defendants to pay all costs, including all costs reserved in the suspension proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendants to pay all costs, including all costs reserved in the suspension proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 2, 4(2) and 9 TEU, Articles 18 and 95 TFEU, Article 21 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the principles of equality and non-discrimination as general principles of Union law juncto Article 5(4) TEU and the principle of proportionality as a general principle of Union law as to substantive and indirect discrimination. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 2, 4(2) and 9 TEU, Articles 18 and 95 TFEU, Article 21 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the principles of equality and non-discrimination as general principles of Union law juncto Article 5(4) TEU and the principle of proportionality as a general principle of Union law as to substantive and indirect discrimination.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 26 and 56 TFEU, Articles 16 and 52(1) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union juncto Article 5(4) TEU and the principle of proportionality as a general principle of Union law as to unlawful restriction of the freedom to provide services and the freedom to conduct a business. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 26 and 56 TFEU, Articles 16 and 52(1) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union juncto Article 5(4) TEU and the principle of proportionality as a general principle of Union law as to unlawful restriction of the freedom to provide services and the freedom to conduct a business.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging breach of Article 3(3) TEU, Articles 11 and 191 TFEU and Article 37 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as to contravening the preservation, protection and improvement of the quality of environment. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging breach of Article 3(3) TEU, Articles 11 and 191 TFEU and Article 37 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as to contravening the preservation, protection and improvement of the quality of environment.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of Article 296(2) TFEU, Article 5 Protocol 2 TFEU, the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and the obligation to state reasons as to failure to provide for a detailed statement of reasons and failure to carry out impact assessments. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of Article 296(2) TFEU, Article 5 Protocol 2 TFEU, the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and the obligation to state reasons as to failure to provide for a detailed statement of reasons and failure to carry out impact assessments.

| 5. | Fifth plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 91 and 94 TFEU and Article 7 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union juncto the fundamental right to respect for private and family life as guaranteed by Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights and as a general principle of Union law as to seriously affecting the standard of living and the level of employment and unlawful interference in private and family life. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law, alleging breach of Articles 91 and 94 TFEU and Article 7 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union juncto the fundamental right to respect for private and family life as guaranteed by Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights and as a general principle of Union law as to seriously affecting the standard of living and the level of employment and unlawful interference in private and family life.

---