Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/3028

10.6.2025

(Case C-881/24 P)

(C/2025/3028)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: SC (represented by: A. Kunst, Rechtsanwältin)

Other party to the proceedings: Eulex Kosovo

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

—set aside the judgment under appeal;

—uphold the initial application as upheld by the judgement by default (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) ;

—in the alternative, refer the case back to the General Court to adjudicate again without the errors of law set out in the appeal;

—order Eulex Kosovo to pay the costs of the proceedings together with interest of 8 % including T-242/17, C-730/18, T-242/17 RENV, T-242/17 RENV-OP, and the costs regarding the present appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant relies on four grounds of appeal.

The first and second ground of appeal allege an infringement of Article 41(1) of the Charter by the General Court holding that the decisions relating to the 2016 competition of prosecutors complied with the duty of objective and subjective impartiality and thereby rejecting the second and third pleas of the initial application. The two grounds of appeal are inter alia based on the General Court applying in paragraph 82 erroneous criteria in assessing objective impartiality and in paragraphs 63 to 80 erroneous criteria in assessing subjective impartiality contrary to this Court’s case law.

The third ground of appeal alleges an infringement of the General Court’s Rules of Procedures, including Article 89(3) (d) and the appellant’s rights of defence by the General Court refusing, as requested by the appellant, to order Eulex Kosovo to disclose full and legible interview documentation and explanations preventing her from proving possible bias and irregularities relating to the 2016 competition of prosecutors.

The fourth ground of appeal alleges an infringement of Article 41 of the Charter in connection with Article 340 TFEU by the General Court finding (a) that the first plea in the initial application alleging procedural irregularities (including the unlawful lack of advance notice regarding the composition of the selection board) is ineffective and (b) that none of the heads of damage derive directly from the procedural irregularities.

Appeal allowed to proceed

By order of the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) of 29 April 2025, the appeal was allowed to proceed in part. The response shall relate to the first and second grounds of appeal.

—

Judgment of 19 October 2022, SC v Eulex Kosovo (T-242/17 RENV, not published, EU:T:2022:637).

—

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3028/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—