ORDER OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber)

9 April 2024 (*)

(Rectification order)

In Case C‑522/23 P‑REC,

APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 10 August 2023,

NO, represented by E. Smartt, Solicitor,

appellant,

the other party to the proceedings being:

European Commission, represented by I. Barcew and L. Nicolae, acting as Agents,

defendant at first instance,

THE COURT (Eighth Chamber),

composed of N. Piçarra, President of the Chamber, N. Jääskinen (Rapporteur) and M. Gavalec, Judges,

Advocate General: L. Medina,

Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,

after hearing the Advocate General,

makes the following

Order

1        On 30 January 2024, the Court (Eighth Chamber) made the order in NO v Commission (C‑522/23 P, ‘the order at issue’, EU:C:2024:108).

2        By document lodged at the Registry of the Court on 9 February 2024, the European Commission made, pursuant to Article 154 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, which is applicable to the procedure on appeal pursuant to Article 190(1) of those rules, a request for rectification of paragraph 37 of the order at issue.

3        As matters stand, that paragraph is worded as follows:

‘In the present case, the Commission’s defence was lodged on 4 April 2023, that is, two months and 15 days after service on that institution, on 19 January 2023, of the application in proper form. Therefore, the Commission failed to respond to that application within the time limit of two months prescribed by Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, extended on account of distance by a period of 10 days.’

4        In its request for rectification of that paragraph, the Commission states, with supporting evidence, that the application in proper form was not served on it until 26 January 2023, the date on which it requested access to that application, in accordance with Article 6 of the Decision of the General Court of 11 July 2018 on the lodging and service of procedural documents by means of e-Curia (OJ 2018 L 240, p. 72).

5        It is therefore established that paragraph 37 contains an obvious inaccuracy which must be rectified, in accordance with Article 154 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, as follows:

‘In the present case, it should, however, be noted that, pursuant to Article 6 of the Decision of the General Court of 11 July 2018 on the lodging and service of procedural documents by means of e-Curia (OJ 2018 L 240, p. 72), the application in proper form was not served on the Commission until 26 January 2023, the date on which it requested access to that application. By lodging its defence on 4 April 2023, the Commission therefore responded to that application within the time limit of two months prescribed by Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, extended on account of distance by a period of 10 days.’

6        As a result of the new wording of paragraph 37 of the order at issue as rectified, paragraph 38 of that order should begin with ‘In any event’ instead of ‘However’:

‘In any event, it is apparent from Article 123(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court that that court is to give judgment in favour of the applicant unless, inter alia, the action is manifestly inadmissible or manifestly lacking any foundation in law.’

On those grounds, the Court (Eighth Chamber) hereby orders:

1.      Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the order of 30 January 2024, NO v Commission (C‑522/23 P, EU:C:2024:108), must be rectified as follows:

‘37      In the present case, it should, however, be noted that, pursuant to Article 6 of the Decision of the General Court of 11 July 2018 on the lodging and service of procedural documents by means of e-Curia (OJ 2018 L 240, p. 72), the application in proper form was not served on the Commission until 26 January 2023, the date on which it requested access to that application. By lodging its defence on 4 April 2023, the Commission therefore responded to that application within the time limit of two months prescribed by Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, extended on account of distance by a period of 10 days.

38      In any event, it is apparent from Article 123(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court that that court is to give judgment in favour of the applicant unless, inter alia, the action is manifestly inadmissible or manifestly lacking any foundation in law.’

2.      The original of this order shall be annexed to the original of the rectified order. A note of this order shall be made in the margin of the original of the rectified order.

Luxembourg, 9 April 2024.

*      Language of the case: English.