Order of the President of the General Court of 30 April 2010 - Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Others v Parliament and Council

(Case T-18/10 R)

(Applications for interim measures - Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 - Trade in seal products - Ban on import and sale - Exception in favour of Inuit communities - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Admissibility - Prima facie case - No urgency)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (Ottawa, Canada); Nattivak Hunters and Trappers Association (Qikiqtarjuaq, Canada); Pangnirtung Hunters' and Trappers' Association (Pangnirtung, Canada); Jaypootie Moesesie (Qikiqtarjuaq); Allen Kooneeliusie (Qikiqtarjuaq); Toomasie Newkingnak (Qikiqtarjuaq); David Kuptana (Ulukhaktok, Canada); Karliin Aariak (Iqaluit, Canada); Efstathios Andreas Agathos (Athens, Greece); Canadian Seal Marketing Group (Quebec, Canada); Ta Ma Su Seal Products (Cap-aux-Meules, Canada); Fur Institute of Canada (Ottawa); NuTan Furs, Inc (Catalina, Canada); GC Rieber Skinn AS (Bergen, Norway); Inuit Circumpolar Conference Greenland (ICC) (Nuuk, Greenland, Denmark); Johannes Egede (Nuuk); and Kalaallit Numaanni Aalisartut Piniartullu Kattuffiat (KNAPK) (Nuuk) (represented by: J. Bouckaert, M. van der Woude and H. Viaene, lawyers)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by I. Anagnostopoulou and L. Visaggio, acting as Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Moore and K. Michoel, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for suspension of the operation of Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on trade in seal products (OJ 2009 L 286, p. 36)

Operative part of the order

1.    The opinion of the Legal Service of the Council of the European Union of 18 February 2009 on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning trade in seal products, submitted by the Commission of the European Communities (COM(2008) 469 final of 23 July 2008), set out in Annex A-4 to the application for interim measures, and the extract from that opinion contained in paragraph 16 of that application are removed from the file in Case T-18/10 R.

2.    The application for interim measures is dismissed.

3.    The costs are reserved.

____________