This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020CA0351
Case C-351/20 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 January 2022 — Liviu Dragnea v European Commission (Appeal — Investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) — Investigation reports — Request for an investigation to be opened into the conduct of previous OLAF investigations — Request to access documents — Letter of refusal — Article 263 TFEU — Decision against which an action for annulment may be brought — Time limit for bringing proceedings — Action against a letter confirming OLAF’s investigation reports — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Article 6 and Article 7(2) — Obligation to inform the applicant of his or her right to make a confirmatory application)
Case C-351/20 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 January 2022 — Liviu Dragnea v European Commission (Appeal — Investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) — Investigation reports — Request for an investigation to be opened into the conduct of previous OLAF investigations — Request to access documents — Letter of refusal — Article 263 TFEU — Decision against which an action for annulment may be brought — Time limit for bringing proceedings — Action against a letter confirming OLAF’s investigation reports — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Article 6 and Article 7(2) — Obligation to inform the applicant of his or her right to make a confirmatory application)
Case C-351/20 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 January 2022 — Liviu Dragnea v European Commission (Appeal — Investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) — Investigation reports — Request for an investigation to be opened into the conduct of previous OLAF investigations — Request to access documents — Letter of refusal — Article 263 TFEU — Decision against which an action for annulment may be brought — Time limit for bringing proceedings — Action against a letter confirming OLAF’s investigation reports — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Article 6 and Article 7(2) — Obligation to inform the applicant of his or her right to make a confirmatory application)
OJ C 109, 7.3.2022, pp. 8–9
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
OJ C 109, 7.3.2022, p. 4–4
(GA)
|
7.3.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 109/8 |
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 13 January 2022 — Liviu Dragnea v European Commission
(Case C-351/20 P) (1)
(Appeal - Investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) - Investigation reports - Request for an investigation to be opened into the conduct of previous OLAF investigations - Request to access documents - Letter of refusal - Article 263 TFEU - Decision against which an action for annulment may be brought - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Action against a letter confirming OLAF’s investigation reports - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Article 6 and Article 7(2) - Obligation to inform the applicant of his or her right to make a confirmatory application)
(2022/C 109/11)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: Liviu Dragnea (represented by: C. Toby, O. Riffaud and B. Entringer, avocats)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne and J. Baquero Cruz, acting as Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court hereby:
|
1. |
Sets aside the order of the General Court of the European Union of 12 May 2020, Dragnea v Commission, (T-738/18, not published, EU:T:2020:208), to the extent that, by that order, the General Court dismissed as inadmissible the action brought by Mr Liviu Dragnea for annulment of the letter from the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 1 October 2018, in so far as, by that letter, OLAF refused to grant him access to the documents requested in his letter of 22 August 2018; |
|
2. |
Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for judgment on this head of the application for annulment; |
|
3. |
Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder; |
|
4. |
Orders Mr Liviu Dragnea and the European Commission to bear their own costs incurred in the context of the present appeal; |
|
5. |
Reserves the costs as to the remainder. |