Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2018 — Staelen v Ombudsman
(Case C‑45/18 P) ( 1 )
(Appeal — Application for revision — Admissibility criteria)
1. |
Appeal — Grounds — Error of law relied on not identified — Ground lacking precision — Inadmissibility (Art. 256(1), second para., TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; European Data-protection Supervisor, Arts 168(1)(d) and 169(2)) (see paras 14, 15, 66) |
2. |
Judicial proceedings — Revision of a judgment — Grounds — Ground alleging the illegality of a provision of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Ground raised for the first time in revision proceedings — Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 44; European Data-protection Supervisor, Art. 159) (see paras 21-25) |
3. |
Judicial proceedings — Revision of a judgment — Conditions for the admissibility thereof — New fact — Definition — Judgment of the Court of Justice — Not included (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 44; European Data-protection Supervisor, Art. 159) (see paras 30-35) |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the appeal; |
2. |
Orders Ms Claire Staelen to pay the costs. |
( 1 ) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.