Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/82

(Case T-496/24)

(C/2025/82)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Kinga Gál and 15 other applicants (represented by: A. Fulmini, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

—declare the present application admissible;

—declare that the European Parliament is answerable for all decisions taken by its bodies;

—declare all decisions concerning the adoption and implementation of the so-called ‘cordon sanitaire’ to be contrary to the standards of the European Union;

—annul, and deprive of all legal effect ex tunc, all decisions of the Parliamentary Committees of the European Parliament taken on the occasion of the inaugural sessions of the opening of the Tenth Legislature (2024-2029), on 23 July 2024 and thereafter, which elected the bureau of each committee by various voting systems, involving unlawful prior acts and an unlawful, non-transparent procedure not provided for by the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, automatically excluding any candidate of the Patriots for Europe Group (Patriots), 3rd Group of the European Parliament, (in particular in the Committees AFET, DEVE, BUDG, CONT, ECON, ENVI, ITRE, TRAN, AGRI, PECH, CULT, JURI, LIBE, REGI), notwithstanding the agreements reached at the Political Group Coordination meetings on 8 and 9 July 2024, and in breach of Articles 2, 5, 6, Article 10(1), (2) and (4), Article 13(2), and Article 14(1) and (2) TEU, Article 12(2), and Articles 21 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 2 of the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, Article 6 of the Act concerning the election of representatives of the Assembly by direct universal suffrage of 20 September 1976, Article 2, Article 10(1) and (9), Article 22(1),(2) and (4), Article 26(3), Article 27(1),(2) and (7), Article 34(2), Article 40(1), Article 124, Article 216(1), (2) and (3), and Article 219(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, and Article 1 of the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament;

—deprive the contested decisions of all legal effect ex tunc;

—and order the European Parliament to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 219 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament and of Article 10(1) TEU.

2.Second plea in law, alleging breach of the best endeavours obligation incumbent on the Presidency of Parliament and the Conference of Group Presidents.

3.Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the prohibition of all discrimination based on the political opinion of a member or group of members of the European Parliament.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the prerogatives and privileges which are essential and constitutive elements of the status of Member of the European Parliament.

—

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/82/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—