CELEX: 62019TN0126
Language: en
Date: 2019-02-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-126/19: Action brought on 21 February 2019. — Krajowa Izba Gospodarcza Chłodnictwa i Klimatyzacji v Commission

29.4.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 148/54
            
         
      Action brought on 21 February 2019. — Krajowa Izba Gospodarcza Chłodnictwa i Klimatyzacji v Commission
      (Case T-126/19)
      (2019/C 148/53)
      Language of the case: Polish
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Krajowa Izba Gospodarcza Chłodnictwa i Klimatyzacji (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: A. Galos, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases, on which the contested decision is founded, and as a result find that the contested decision is flawed in that regard;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on 2 pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law: the applicant raises a plea under Article 277 TFEU concerning the invalidity of Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006, the contested decision being founded on that article, to the extent to which it bases the system of apportionment of quotas on reference values resulting from the historically-declared data in relation to F-gases placed on the market from 2009 to 2012, since that constitutes a discriminatory and arbitrary division of undertakings according to their historical activity on the market for gases, and it submits that the contested decision is therefore flawed in that regard.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law: the applicant alleges a breach of essential procedural requirements and the infringement of the Treaty inasmuch as inadequate reasons were given for the introduction of the mechanism for dividing undertakings active on the F-gases market on the basis of the value of the F-gases historically placed on the market from 2009 to 2012, in accordance with Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014.