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 T-318/24: Action brought on 25 June 2024 – WS v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0318

62024TN0318

June 25, 2024
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

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2024/6263

28.10.2024

(Case T-318/24)

(C/2024/6263)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: WS (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of EPSO (which is attributed to the EU Commission) to reject the applicant’s requests submitted by his letter of 04/01/2024, namely requests under the EUDPR, (1) as far as they were not fulfilled by EPSO’s answer of 15/04/2024;

order the European Commission to pay the procedural costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following plea in law, alleging that EPSO breached its obligation of complying with Article 4(1)(a) and (f) and Article 4(2), Article 14(3) and Article 17(1)(a) and (c) and Article 17(3) EUDPR (whereby these breaches are attributed to the EU Commission).

The applicant backs his claim especially by submitting that EPSO neither provided purposes nor recipients or categories of recipients of consultation operations disclosed, that the disclosed consultation operations were not complete, and that it did not provide copies of the personal data of the applicant undergoing processing.

Further, the applicant submits that by not complying with its duties arising from Article 17 EUDPR, EPSO also breached Article 4(1)(a) and (f) and Article 4(2) EUDPR, by not demonstrating that the applicant’s data have been processed following the principles stipulated in those provisions (whereby also these breaches are attributed to the EU Commission).

Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ 2018 L 295, p. 39).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6263/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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