Order of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 April 2010 – Makhteshim-Agan Holding and Others v Commission
(Case C‑517/08 P)
Appeal – Directive 91/414/EEC – Non-inclusion of endosulfan in Annex I to that directive – Withdrawal of marketing authorisations – Appeal manifestly unfounded
1.Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230 EC) (see para. 54)
2.Appeals – Grounds – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts put before the Court of First Instance – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58) (see para. 62)
3.Appeals – Grounds – Criticism of grounds without influence on the operative part of the judgment under appeal – Plea ineffective (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 56) (see paras 77, 80, 89)
Re:
| Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2008 in Case T‑75/06 | Bayer CropScience and Others | v | Commission | by which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action for annulment of Commission Decision C (2005) 864 of 2 December 2005 concerning the non-inclusion of endosulfan in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that active substance [notified under No C(2005) 4611] (OJ 2005 L 317, p. 25). |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
| Dismisses the appeal; |
2. |
| Orders Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV, Alfa Agricultural Supplies SA and Aragonesas Agro SA to pay the costs; |
3. |
| Orders European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) to bear its own costs. |