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-452/15: Action brought on 10 August 2015 — Petrov and Others v European Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015TN0452

62015TN0452

January 1, 2015
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

3.11.2015

Official Journal of the European Union

C 363/39

(Case T-452/15)

(2015/C 363/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Andrei Petrov (St. Petersburg, Russia), Fedor Biryukov (Moscow, Russia), Alexander Sotnichenko (St. Petersburg, Russia) (represented by: P. Richter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the ban on entering the premises of the European Parliament made by the President of the European Parliament against the applicants on 16 June 2015;

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

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 infringement of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

The applicants claim that they were discriminated against solely because of their nationality and in contravention of the prohibition under Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, since there appear to be no substantive grounds for the ban pronounced. Moreover, in the view of the applicants, their presence on the premises of the European Parliament did not pose a risk to security and could not adversely affect the Parliament’s functioning.

2.Second plea in law, alleging misuse of power

The applicants claim that the actions of the President of the European Parliament were manifestly purely arbitrary and are diametrically opposed to the prohibition of discrimination in the Treaties.

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