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-258/18: Order of the General Court of 14 February 2019 — Brunke v Commission (Action for failure to act — Deadline for bringing an action — Starting point — No invitation to act — Second invitation to act — Manifest inadmissibility — Application of a declaratory nature — Application for interim measures — Manifest lack of jurisdiction)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TB0258

62018TB0258

February 14, 2019
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

C 131/50

(Case T-258/18) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)

(Action for failure to act - Deadline for bringing an action - Starting point - No invitation to act - Second invitation to act - Manifest inadmissibility - Application of a declaratory nature - Application for interim measures - Manifest lack of jurisdiction)

(2019/C 131/58)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Lothar Brunke (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Schniebel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Re:

Principally, an application for a declaration establishing ‘the discriminatory effect’ of Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22) and, in the alternative, first, an application, in essence, for an interim measure to be directed against the Commission and, secondly, an application under Article 265 TFEU for a declaration that the Commission unlawfully failed to follow up on the applicant’s letters of 6 June and 27 December 2017.

Operative part of the order

1.The action is dismissed in part due to the Court’s manifest lack of jurisdiction to hear the action and in part because it is manifestly inadmissible.

2.There is no longer any need to rule on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament.

3.Mr Lothar Brunke shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

4.The Council shall bear its own costs relating to its application to intervene.

5.The Parliament shall bear its own costs relating to its application to intervene.

(<span class="note"> <a id="ntr1-C_2019131EN.01005001-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2019131EN.01005001-E0001">*1</a> </span>) OJ CC 276, 6.8.2018.

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