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-480/24: Action brought on 17 September 2024 – Le Pen v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0480

62024TN0480

September 17, 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

C series

C/2024/6446

(Case T-480/24)

(C/2024/6446)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-Marie Le Pen (Rueil-Malmaison, France) (represented by: F. Wagner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

hold that the decision of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament of 8 July 2024 was adopted in breach of the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations;

hold that the decision of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament of 8 July 2024 was adopted in breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights;

annul the decision of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament of 8 July 2024, notified to his representatives on 18 July 2024, making a claim for payment against the applicant for an amount of EUR 303 200,99 in respect of sums unduly paid in respect of budget line 400 and stating reasons for the recovery of those sums;

annul debit note No 7040001694 of 9 July 2024;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs in their entirety.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging breach of the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations. The applicant criticises the contested decision for not taking into account the decision on disjoinder issued on 3 July 2024 by the Paris Criminal Court having regard to the state of his health. In his view, the contested decision can be criticised in so far as it does not take into account the fact that the applicant will not be aware of the purpose, significance or scope of the proceedings brought before the General Court and will not be able to effectively prepare for or follow them.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to a fair trial.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6446/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