Language of document :

Order of the General Court of 7 September 2010 - Etimine and Etiproducts v Commission

(Case T-539/08) 1

(Actions for annulment - Environment and protection of human health - Classification, packaging and labelling of certain borates as dangerous substances - Directive 2008/58/EC - Directive 67/548/EEC - Regulation (EC) No 790/2009 - Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 - Amendment of form of order sought - Temporal application of the fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - No individual concern - Inadmissibility)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Etimine SA (Bettembourg, Luxembourg), and Ab Etiproducts Oy, (Espoo, Finland) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and D. Kukovec, Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: Borax Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Nordlander, lawyer, and S. Kinsella, Solicitor)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by B. Weis Fogh, Agent)

Re:

Application for the partial annulment of Commission Directive 2008/58/EC of 21 August 2008 amending, for the purpose of its adaptation to technical progress, for the 30th time, Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ 2008 L 246, p. 1) and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 790/2009 of 10 August 2009 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ 2009 L 235, p. 1), in so far as they amend the classification of certain borates

Operative part of the order

The application is dismissed as inadmissible.

Etimine SA and Ab Etiproducts Oy are to bear their own costs and to pay the costs of the European Commission.

The Kingdom of Denmark and Borax Europe Ltd are to bear their own costs.

____________

1 - OJ C 44, 21.2.2009.