- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-421/24: Action brought on 12 August 2024 – UU v Court of Justice of the European Union
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0421
62024TN0421
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
EN
C series
—
C/2024/5837
7.10.2024
(Case T-421/24)
(C/2024/5837)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: UU (represented by: S. Makoumbou, lawyer)
Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision and, accordingly, the previous decisions which the contested decision confirms;
—award compensation for the non-material and material damage suffered by the applicant, estimated ex aequo et bono at EUR 1 200 000;
—order the defendant to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action brought against the decision of 8 May 2024 of the committee of the General Court with competence to adjudicate on complaints, rejecting the complaint lodged against a decision of the Presidents of the Court of Justice and of the General Court of the European Union and a claim for damages, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging that the authority which adopted the contested decision did not have competence as regards the claim for damages.
2.Second plea in law, alleging failure to state reasons for the contested decision and infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
3.Third plea in law, alleging an error of law and a manifest error of assessment in that it was not possible to rely on the entry into force of the Istanbul Convention as a new fact justifying re-examination.
4.Fourth plea in law, alleging (i) distortion of the request for re-examination of 17 November 2023, which is the basis of the conclusion of the contested decision relating to the allegedly belated reliance on new facts in the administrative complaint of 14 March 2024, and (ii) a manifest error of assessment in how the measures prior to the contested decision were characterised.
5.Fifth plea in law, alleging manifest errors in the assessment of the unlawful overall conduct alleged in the context of the claim for damages.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5837/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—