EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-237/11: Action brought on 19 May 2011 — French Republic v European Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011CN0237

62011CN0237

May 19, 2011
With Google you find a lot.
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

30.7.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/12

(Case C-237/11)

2011/C 226/24

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, G. de Bergues and A. Adam, Agents)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

Annul the vote of the European Parliament of 9 March 2011 concerning the calendar of session periods of the Parliament for 2012;

Order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant relies on a single plea in law in support of its action alleging, first, infringement of Protocol No 6 on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union, annexed to the TFEU, and of Protocol No 3 on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, offices, agencies and departments of the European Union, annexed to the EAEC Treaty and, second, failure to comply with the judgment of the Court in Case C-345/95 France v Parliament [1997] ECR I-5235.

According to the French Government, by laying down that two of the twelve periods of monthly plenary sessions which must take place in Strasbourg every year will be shortened from 4 to 2 days and will take place, in 2012, during the same week of October, the European Parliament has sought to circumvent the rule according to which the twelve periods of monthly plenary sessions, including the budget session, must take place in Strasbourg. The contested vote amounts, in practice, to the abolition of one of the twelve periods of monthly plenary sessions which must take place in Strasbourg every year. Its only objective is thus to reduce the length of time members of the European Parliament spend at the seat of the European Parliament, which is not justified by any requirement relating to the internal organisation of the Parliament’s work.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia