Information;Order — ECLI:EU:T:2026:28
Date: 2026-01-16
Language of the case: English
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Procedure: Action for annulment;Application for interim measures

Action brought on 9 October 2025 – Chemours Netherlands v Commission (Case T-694/25) Language of the case: English Parties Applicant: Chemours Netherlands BV (Dordrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: C. Mereu and N. Konings, lawyers) Defendant: European Commission Form of order sought The applicant claims that the Court should: partially annul the defendant’s decision of 1 August 2025, insofar as it imposes a quota reduction penalty based on alleged exceedances prior to 2019, in breach of applicable statutory limitation periods; in the alternative, annul the defendant’s decision of 1 August 2025, in whole or in part, insofar as the resulting penalty fails to consider the existence of unused quota legitimately obtained and transferred by the applicant to a group entity during the period 2016-2024, which should offset any alleged exceedance; in the further alternative, annul the defendant’s decision of 1 August 2025, in whole or in part, insofar as the resulting penalty violates the principle of proportionality, by failing to take into account: the applicant’s good faith and consistent disclosure; the applicant’s critical role in supplying low-GWP refrigerants to the EU market (through its contractual agreement with a group company for further supply to the market); and the need for a more proportionate penalty, including the possibility of a phased implementation; and, order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses associated with these proceedings and any related interim relief proceedings. Pleas in law and main arguments With the present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision Ares(2025)6294834 of 1 August 2025 as regards the quota reduction for non-compliance with Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/573 1 on fluorinated greenhouse gases, in support of which, the applicant relies on two pleas in law. First plea in law, alleging the violation of the principles of legal certainty, statute of limitation and non-retroactivity, under EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as the defendant’s decision retroactively penalises the applicant for alleged quota exceedances dating back to 2016, thus violating the principle of legal certainty and exceeding any reasonable limitation period under EU law. Second plea in law, alleging the infringement of the principle of proportionality, as the penalty imposed is manifestly disproportionate in light of the facts, the environmental objectives of Regulation (EU) 2024/573, and the applicant’s conduct. ____________ 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/573 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2024 on fluorinated greenhouse gases, amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 (OJ 2024/573).