# C_2016270EN.01004502.xml

| 25.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/45

---

Action brought on 18 April 2016 — Grizzly Tools v Commission

(Case T-168/16)

(2016/C 270/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Grizzly Tools GmbH & Co. KG (Großostheim, Germany) (represented by: H. Fischer, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/175 of 8 February 2016 on a measure taken by Spain pursuant to Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, to prohibit the placing on the market of a type of pressure washer (OJ 2016, L 33, p. 12); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/175 of 8 February 2016 on a measure taken by Spain pursuant to Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, to prohibit the placing on the market of a type of pressure washer (OJ 2016, L 33, p. 12);

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | Infringement of essential requirements of form
  The applicant claims that the contested decision infringes the duty to state reasons under the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU in so far as its recitals are contradictory and unclear.
  Moreover, the contested decision infringes the principle that the Commission is to state the facts of the case correctly. In the fourth recital, the Commission incorrectly alleges that the applicant made reference in the EC Declaration of Conformity to the standard EN-60335-2-67-2009, which is incorrect. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Infringement of essential requirements of form

The applicant claims that the contested decision infringes the duty to state reasons under the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU in so far as its recitals are contradictory and unclear.

Moreover, the contested decision infringes the principle that the Commission is to state the facts of the case correctly. In the fourth recital, the Commission incorrectly alleges that the applicant made reference in the EC Declaration of Conformity to the standard EN-60335-2-67-2009, which is incorrect.

| 2. | Infringement of Article 11 of Directive 2006/42/EC (1) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Infringement of Article 11 of Directive 2006/42/EC (1)

1

The applicant claims that the Commission incorrectly took the view that the measure taken by Spain to prohibit the placing on the market was justified.

In particular, the Spanish authorities and the Commission characterised the pressure washer as of dual use, capable of being used not only as a portable appliance, but also as a hand-held appliance. They therefore considered a higher level of safety to be necessary despite the pressure washer not being intended for use as a hand-held appliance and there being no reasonably foreseeable misuse within the meaning of Article 11(1) of Directive 2006/42/EC in its use as a hand-held pressure washer.

---

(1)  Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC (OJ 2006 L 157, p. 24).

1

---