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-211/19: Action brought on 5 April 2019 — Le Pen v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0211

62019TN0211

January 1, 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

3.6.2019

Official Journal of the European Union

C 187/84

(Case T-211/19)

(2019/C 187/90)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

Annul European Parliament Decision P8_TA-PROV(2019)0136 of 12 March 2019 on the request for waiver of the applicant’s immunity 2018/2247(IMM), which does indeed waive the applicant’s immunity;

Order the Parliament to pay the entirety of the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the privileges and immunities of the European Union (OJ 2010 C 83, p. 266), Article 5(1) and (5) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament (OJ 2005 L 44, p. 1), and Notices to Members Nos 11/2003 and 11/2016.

2.Second plea in law, alleging abuse of process. The applicant takes the view that in agreeing to the waiver of the applicant’s parliamentary immunity, the Parliament allows the French examining magistrate to replace the Secretary-General of the Parliament for the period 2009-2014, thus infringing Article 68(1) of the Implementing measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, which confers exclusive competence on the Secretary-General for deciding on sums unduly paid and ordering the issuance of an enforceable instrument against the Member concerned.

3.Third plea in law, alleging misuse of power, abuse of process and breach of the reasonable time period for instituting proceedings. The applicant claims that the Parliament committed an abuse of process, thereby affecting the applicant’s exercise of his rights of defence inasmuch as, after nearly three terms without any claim on the part of the Secretary-General, the applicant did not consider it necessary to keep evidence of the work done by his assistants, and is unable to answer the court.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 43 of Notice to Members No 11/2016, in so far as the underlying purpose of the proceedings is to make the activities of members of one of the main opposition parties in the Parliament more difficult.

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