Petraitis v Commission (Order) [2016] EUECJ C-137/16_CO (24 November 2016)

Petraitis v Commission (Order) [2016] EUECJ C-137/16_CO (24 November 2016)

The appeal is manifestly inadmissible and/or unfounded because individuals have no standing to challenge the Commission's refusal to initiate infringement proceedings against a Member State, such refusal is not an actionable measure, and the Tribunal correctly applied settled case law. The Tribunal and Court lack...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EUECJ C-137/16_CO
Parties
Applicant: Juozas Edvardas Petraitis; Respondent: Commission européenne
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
24 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Order on Admissibility and Merits
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as manifestly inadmissible and/or unfounded; legal aid request rejected; applicant to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Recourse for Failure to Act, Commission Discretion Under Article 258 TFEU, Admissibility of Actions, Judicial Protection, Legal Remedies in EU Law
European Union Law Administrative Law Recourse for Failure to Act Commission Discretion Under Article 258 TFEU Admissibility of Actions Judicial Protection Legal Remedies in EU Law

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 30 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juozas Edvardas Petraitis

Applicant

Commission européenne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Order on Admissibility and Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an individual can challenge the Commission's refusal to initiate infringement proceedings against a Member State under Article 258 TFEU
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in law or procedure in declaring the action inadmissible and rejecting requests for injunctions and legal aid

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is manifestly inadmissible and/or unfounded because individuals have no standing to challenge the Commission's refusal to initiate infringement proceedings against a Member State, such refusal is not an actionable measure, and the Tribunal correctly applied settled case law. The Tribunal and Court lack competence to issue injunctions against EU institutions. No procedural error occurred regarding publication or handling of the case.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as manifestly inadmissible and/or unfounded; legal aid request rejected; applicant to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is rejected.
  • The request for legal aid is rejected.