- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-882/24 P: Appeal brought on 19 December 2024 by AL against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 April 2024 in Case T-50/22, AL v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0882
62024CN0882
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/2025/1631
(Case C-882/24 P)
(C/2025/1631)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: AL (represented by: R. Rata, avocată)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
—set aside the judgement under appeal;
—annul the decision of 22 October 2021 of the Director-General for Human Resources and Security of the Commission partially upholding, partially rejecting the appellant’s complaint of 22 June 2021 in what concerns the points for which that complaint was not upheld;
—allow the appellant to raise in the future new related pleas in law as soon as new matters of law or facts will become available to him;
—raise any motion of public interest as it considers fit;
—order the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the appellant.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The appellant relies on three grounds of appeal.
First, the General Court erred in law in relation to the first plea when it found that the Commission had correctly applied Articles 4, 5, 9 and 10 of the Council Decision of 29 April 2004 adopting the general implementing provisions concerning a person treated as a dependent child.
Second, the General Court erred in law by rejecting the appellant’s fourth plea as unfounded:
—The General Court failed to consider the existence of the judgment of the Bucharest Tribunal of 16 May 2022.
—The General Court it erred in concluding that the decision of the Romanian child protection authorities of 30 January 2013, which had put an end to the appellant’s foster family placement measures, had produced legal effects since January 2013.
—The General Court committed an error in law by failing to uphold the principle of the symmetry of forms.
Third, the General Court failed in its duty to guarantee the appellant’s right to an effective remedy under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as well as in its duty to conduct an impartial and effective judicial review.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1631/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—