BP v FRA (Civil service - Order) [2020] EUECJ C-682/19P_CO (19 March 2020)

BP v FRA (Civil service - Order) [2020] EUECJ C-682/19P_CO (19 March 2020)

The appeal was dismissed because the application for revision was inadmissible regarding paragraphs already annulled, the evidence offered did not relate to any paragraph other than those annulled, and no error of law or procedural irregularity was established. The grounds raised were manifestly unfounded or inadmissible.

Citation
[2020] EUECJ C-682/19P_CO
Parties
Appellant: BP; Defendant at First Instance: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
19 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union / Order on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.
Legal Topics
Revision of Judgment, Admissibility, Rights of Defence, Costs
Civil Service EU Administrative Law Revision of Judgment Admissibility Rights of Defence Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BP

Appellant

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)

Defendant at First Instance

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union / Order on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Court erred in dismissing the application for revision as inadmissible
  2. 2 Whether the General Court failed to examine evidence and heads of claim
  3. 3 Whether the General Court infringed procedural rules regarding costs

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the application for revision was inadmissible regarding paragraphs already annulled, the evidence offered did not relate to any paragraph other than those annulled, and no error of law or procedural irregularity was established. The grounds raised were manifestly unfounded or inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.
  • BP shall bear her own costs.