With the order of 4 June 2012, the General Court dismissed the applicant’s action for damages, seeking compensation for the presumed harm suffered, following the adoption of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1010/2006 of 3 July 2006 on certain exceptional market support measures in the eggs and poultry sector. The claimant complained about the lack of provisions for such measures in favour of poultry farmers active in the farming and marketing of quails. After a summary of the facts, the short case note focuses on the line of legal reasoning followed by the General Court, paying attention to the constituent elements of extra contractual liability, namely the alleged unlawfulness of the Commission’s conduct, the assumed damages and the supposed causal nexus between the two of them. The conclusions share the General Court perspective and inquire about further profiles of wrongfulness of the above mentioned Regulation.
L'è 'ndàcia la quàia
Paganizza V
2012
Abstract
With the order of 4 June 2012, the General Court dismissed the applicant’s action for damages, seeking compensation for the presumed harm suffered, following the adoption of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1010/2006 of 3 July 2006 on certain exceptional market support measures in the eggs and poultry sector. The claimant complained about the lack of provisions for such measures in favour of poultry farmers active in the farming and marketing of quails. After a summary of the facts, the short case note focuses on the line of legal reasoning followed by the General Court, paying attention to the constituent elements of extra contractual liability, namely the alleged unlawfulness of the Commission’s conduct, the assumed damages and the supposed causal nexus between the two of them. The conclusions share the General Court perspective and inquire about further profiles of wrongfulness of the above mentioned Regulation.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
