CELEX: 62017TN0191
Language: en
Date: 2017-03-27 00:00:00
Title: Case T-191/17: Action brought on 27 March 2017 — Boehringer Ingelheim International v Commission

6.6.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 178/27
            
         Action brought on 27 March 2017 — Boehringer Ingelheim International v Commission
   (Case T-191/17)
   (2017/C 178/40)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH (Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany) (represented by: C. Schoonderbeek, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Commission Implementing Decision of 19 January 2017 C(2017)379(final);
            
         
               —
            
            
               state that the effects of this Commission Implementing Decision remain in force until the European Commission has adopted a new decision; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the European Commission to pay its own costs and those of the applicant.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s decision of 19 January 2017 constitutes a violation of Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, read in conjunction with Article 11 of Directive 2001/83/EC and the Notice to Applicants.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s decision of 19 January 2017 is not consistent with the application of the relevant provisions and guidelines and regulatory practice in other cases and thus constitutes a violation of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination and results in a distortion of the level playing field.