This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CN0028
Case C-28/10 P: Appeal brought on 21 December 2009 by Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2009 in Case T-110/09: Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu v European Parliament, Council of the European Union
Case C-28/10 P: Appeal brought on 21 December 2009 by Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2009 in Case T-110/09: Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu v European Parliament, Council of the European Union
Case C-28/10 P: Appeal brought on 21 December 2009 by Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2009 in Case T-110/09: Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu v European Parliament, Council of the European Union
IO C 80, 27.3.2010, p. 16–16
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
27.3.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 80/16 |
Appeal brought on 21 December 2009 by Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2009 in Case T-110/09: Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu v European Parliament, Council of the European Union
(Case C-28/10 P)
2010/C 80/29
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant(s): Mehmet Salih Bayramoglu (represented by: A. Riza QC)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Parliament, Council of the European Union
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
Annul the Council Decision 2004/511/EC (1) on the ground that it is based on an unlawful failure to act to enable the Turkish Cypriot people to take part in European elections in violation of Article 189 of the EC Treaty read together with Articles 5 and 6 if the Treaty on European Union. |
|
— |
Declare that the six MEPs notified by the RoC after 6 June 2009 returned under the present electoral arrangements do not represent the Turkish Cypriot as required by law. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The appellant maintains that the Court of First Instance was wrong when it ruled that his action was lodged out of time. In support of this argument he submits that the case law relied upon by the CFI did not involve a failure to provide for the fundamental right of participating in elections of an entire people and did not concern a decision whose legal premise was a failure to act and make provisions for elections rather than to purport to postpone the right to hold such elections.
The appellant also submits that it was not the case that he did not invoke the existence of an excusable error or force majeure when lodging his application.
(1) 2004/511/EC:Council Decision of 10 June 2004 concerning the representation of the people of Cyprus in the European Parliament in case of a settlement of the Cyprus problem
OJ L 211, p. 22