ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber)
17 March 2016 (1)
(Rectification)
In Case T‑75/12,
Nu Air Polska sp. z o.o., established in Warsaw (Poland), represented by R. MacLean, Solicitor, and A. Bochon, lawyer,
applicant,
v
European Commission, represented by A. Stobiecka-Kuik, K. Talabér-Ritz and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents,
defendant,
ACTION for the partial annulment of Commission Decisions C(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and C(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011 concerning applications for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of certain compressors originating in the People’s Republic of China,
THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber),
composed of H. Kanninen, President, I. Pelikánová and E. Buttigieg (Rapporteur), Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1        The General Court has delivered judgment in Case T-75/12.
2        In accordance with Article 164(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, the parties having been given an opportunity to submit their written observations pursuant to Article 164(3) of those rules, it is necessary to rectify clerical mistakes found in the subject-matter of the action, as set out in the introductory part of the judgment, in paragraphs 14 and 20 of the judgment, and in paragraph 1 of the operative part of the judgment.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber)
hereby orders:
1)      In the subject-matter of the action, as set out in the introductory part of the judgment, ‘Action for the partial annulment of Commission Decisions C(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and C(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011’ must be read instead of ‘Action for the partial annulment of Commission Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011’;
2)      In paragraph 14 of the judgment, ‘on 6 December 2011, the Commission adopted Decisions C(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and C(2011) 8801 final’ must be read instead of ‘on 6 December 2011, the Commission adopted Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final’;
3)      In paragraph 20 of the judgment, ‘in Decision C(2011) 8826 final, the Commission granted the application for a refund made by the applicant in the amount of EUR 31 965.09’ must be read instead of ‘in Decision K(2011) 8826 final, the Commission granted the application for a refund made by the applicant in the amount of EUR 31 965.09’ and ‘in Decision C(2011) 8801 final, the Commission granted the application for a refund made by the applicant in the amount of PLN 26 281.68’ must be read instead of ‘in Decision K(2011) 8801 final, the Commission granted the application for a refund made by the applicant in the amount of PLN 26 281.68’;
4)      In paragraph 1 of the operative part of the judgment, ‘Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decisions C(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and C(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011’ must be read instead of ‘Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011’.
Luxembourg, 17 March 2016.
E. Coulon
H. Kanninen
Registrar
President
1 Language of the case: English.