- 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 C-50/25 P: Appeal brought on 27 January 2025 by Magistrats européens pour la démocratie et les libertés (Medel) and Others against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 14 November 2024 in Case T-116/23, Medel and Others v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62025CN0050
62025CN0050
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
C series
—
C/2025/1881
(Case C-50/25 P)
(C/2025/1881)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellants: Magistrats européens pour la démocratie et les libertés (Medel), International Association of Judges, Association of European Administrative Judges, Stichting Rechters voor Rechters (represented by: C. Zatschler SC, D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero, abogado, E. Egan McGrath SC, A. Bateman, M. Delargy, Solicitors)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Council of the European Union, Republic of Poland
Form of order sought
The appellants claim that the Court should:
—set aside the order under appeal;
—reject the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Commission, declare the applications admissible and refer the case back to the General Court to rule on the substance, and
—order the Commission to bear the appellants’ costs in relation to the plea of inadmissibility as well as the appeal, and bear its own costs in relation thereto, irrespective of the outcome of the case.
Pleas in law and main arguments
First Plea: The General Court erred in the interpretation and application of the criterion of ‘direct concern’ provided for in Article 263(4) TFEU, as well as in the interpretation of the Contested Decision (1).
Second Plea: all Polish judges and judges of the EEA States are directly concerned by the contested decision
Third Plea: Violation of Article 263(4) TFEU, together with Article 19(1) TUE and Article 47 of the Charter, in light of the KlimaSeniorinnen (2) jurisprudence.
—
(1) Council Implementing Decision of 17 June 2022 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Poland (the ‘Contested Decision’).
(2) Judgment of 9 April 2024 of the the European Court of Human Rights in Case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland, App. no 53600/20, CE:ECHR:2024:0409JUD005360020.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1881/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—