- 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-451/24: Order of the General Court of 26 March 2025 – Messiaen and Ballegeer v Parliament and Council (Action for annulment – Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 – Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing – Lack of individual concern – Inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TB0451
62024TB0451
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/2025/3058
10.6.2025
(Case T-451/24)
(Action for annulment - Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 - Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)
(C/2025/3058)
Language of the proceedings: Dutch
Parties
Applicants: Robin Messiaen, Ferenc Ballegeer (represented by: P. Verhaeghe, lawyer)
Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: I. Terwinghe, E. Paladini and C. Burgos, agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: I. Gurov, K. Pleśniak and S. Emmerechts, acting as Agents)
Re:
By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the annulment of Article 3(3)(a) and (b), Article 19(6)(b), Article 20(1) and (2), Article 21(2) and (3), Article 24(4) and Article 70(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2024 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing (OJ L, 2024/1624) and, as a result, the inapplicability of the obligations on lawyers established by Articles 21, 24 and Article 69(1) and (2) of the contested regulation.
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.
2.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application to intervene by the European Commission.
4.The European Commission is to bear its own costs relating to the qpplication to intervene.
—
(1)
OJ C C/2024/6442, 4.11.2024.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3058/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—