# C_2021391EN.01002501.xml

| 27.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 391/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 391/25

---

Action brought on 11 August 2021 — Aquind and Others v ACER

(Case T-492/21)

(2021/C 391/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Aquind Ltd (London, United Kingdom), Aquind Energy Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Aquind SAS (Rouen, France) (represented by: S. Goldberg, L. Van den Hende, L. Malý and E. White, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s Board of Appeal decision of 4 June 2021; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s Board of Appeal decision of 4 June 2021; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s Board of Appeal erred in finding that the appeal before it was inadmissible. It is argued that the defendant remained competent to replace its annulled decision (1) with a new one and to grant the exemption to AQUIND Interconnector under Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 (2). Furthermore, it is alleged that the defendant’s Board of Appeal failed to fulfill its obligation to ensure full and complete compliance with the Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 (3). |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s Board of Appeal erred in finding that the appeal before it was inadmissible. It is argued that the defendant remained competent to replace its annulled decision (1) with a new one and to grant the exemption to AQUIND Interconnector under Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 (2). Furthermore, it is alleged that the defendant’s Board of Appeal failed to fulfill its obligation to ensure full and complete compliance with the Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 (3).

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s Board of Appeal infringed requirements in Articles 25(3) and 28(4) of Regulation (EU) No 2019/942 (4) and in the Rules of Procedure of the defendant’s Board of Appeal. It is argued that the defendant’s Board of Appeal did not follow the correct procedure with one of its members not attending the hearing, the oral proceedings not constituting evidence, and no deliberation meeting minutes having been published. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s Board of Appeal infringed requirements in Articles 25(3) and 28(4) of Regulation (EU) No 2019/942 (4) and in the Rules of Procedure of the defendant’s Board of Appeal. It is argued that the defendant’s Board of Appeal did not follow the correct procedure with one of its members not attending the hearing, the oral proceedings not constituting evidence, and no deliberation meeting minutes having been published.

---

(1)  Decision A-001-2018, of 17 October 2018, of the defendant’s Board of Appeal.

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on conditions for access to the network for cross-border exchanges in electricity and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1228/2003 (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2009 L 211, p. 15-35).

(3)  Judgment of 18 November 2020, Aquind v ACER, T-735/18, EU:T:2020:542.

(4)  Regulation (EU) 2019/942 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 establishing a European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2019 L 158, p. 22-53).

---