# C_2019016EN.01004602.xml

| 14.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/46

---

Action brought on 10 October 2018 — FT v ESMA

(Case T-625/18)

(2019/C 16/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: FT (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul decision ESMA41-137-1154 of the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of 9 August 2018 with which ESMA requests the recovery of the amount of EUR 12 000, in relation to the costs incurred by ESMA in Case F-39/14; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul decision ESMA41-137-1154 of the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of 9 August 2018 with which ESMA requests the recovery of the amount of EUR 12 000, in relation to the costs incurred by ESMA in Case F-39/14;

| — | annul the related debit note No 4440180170 of 10 August 2018 issued by ESMA; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the related debit note No 4440180170 of 10 August 2018 issued by ESMA;

| — | order ESMA to bear its own costs and those of the applicant in the current proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order ESMA to bear its own costs and those of the applicant in the current proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging violation of Article 98 of the Financial Regulation, (1) Article 60 of the ESMA Financial Regulation, (2) Article 170 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, as well as the principle of equality of arms of the parties of a dispute, as the amount allegedly owed by the applicant and stipulated in the contested acts had not been determined in accordance with the said Article 170 by the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging violation of Article 98 of the Financial Regulation, (1) Article 60 of the ESMA Financial Regulation, (2) Article 170 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, as well as the principle of equality of arms of the parties of a dispute, as the amount allegedly owed by the applicant and stipulated in the contested acts had not been determined in accordance with the said Article 170 by the General Court.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the costs claimed by the defendant are non-recoverable, as it exceeded the reasonable time for making such requests. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the costs claimed by the defendant are non-recoverable, as it exceeded the reasonable time for making such requests.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging manifest error of appreciation by the defendant of the debt owed by the applicant, as the amount claimed of EUR 12 000 is exorbitant. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging manifest error of appreciation by the defendant of the debt owed by the applicant, as the amount claimed of EUR 12 000 is exorbitant.

---

(1)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ 2018 L 193, p. 1).

(2)  Decision of the Management Board on the Financial Regulation of the European Securities and Markets

Authority ESMA/2014/MB/38.

---