Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62018CN0794

    Case C-794/18 P: Appeal brought on 17 December 2018 by Pracsis SPRL, Conceptexpo Project against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 3 October 2018 in Case T-33/18, Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA

    OJ C 182, 27.5.2019, p. 3–3 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    17/12/2018
    Date lodged:
    17/12/2018
    Author:
    Court of Justice
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    French
    Type of procedure:
    Action for damages, Action for annulment, Appeal - unfounded, Appeal - inadmissible
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    27.5.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 182/3

    Appeal brought on 17 December 2018 by Pracsis SPRL, Conceptexpo Project against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 3 October 2018 in Case T-33/18, Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA

    (Case C-794/18 P)

    (2019/C 182/04)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Appellants: Pracsis SPRL, Conceptexpo Project (represented by: J.-N. Louis, avocat)

    Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA)

    By order of 11 April 2019, the Court (Seventh Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.

    Top