# C_2019399EN.01008501.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/85 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/85

---

Action brought on 30 September 2019 — FF v Commission

(Case T-653/19)

(2019/C 399/104)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: FF (represented by: A. Fittante, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the European Commission’s decision of 31 July 2019 rejecting the applicant’s first application of 9 July 2019 seeking compensation; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the European Commission’s decision of 31 July 2019 rejecting the applicant’s first application of 9 July 2019 seeking compensation;

| — | annul the European Commission’s decision of 20 August 2019 rejecting the application of 23 July 2019 for access to the Commission’s documents in which the applicant asks to consult the original of a photograph of a man whose leg has been amputated which was used as a health warning on the packaging of tobacco products in accordance with Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the European Commission’s decision of 20 August 2019 rejecting the application of 23 July 2019 for access to the Commission’s documents in which the applicant asks to consult the original of a photograph of a man whose leg has been amputated which was used as a health warning on the packaging of tobacco products in accordance with Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014;

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs and the expenses relating to the proceedings, while noting that the applicant has sought legal aid. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs and the expenses relating to the proceedings, while noting that the applicant has sought legal aid.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements as the decisions at issue fail to comply with the obligation to state reasons and, therefore, do not allow the applicant to understand the scope of the decision taken against him and to ensure that his interests are defended and do not allow a court to verify whether that decision is lawful. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements as the decisions at issue fail to comply with the obligation to state reasons and, therefore, do not allow the applicant to understand the scope of the decision taken against him and to ensure that his interests are defended and do not allow a court to verify whether that decision is lawful.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the treaties and every rule of law concerning the application of the latter, that is to say the body of rules of the European Union, and, in particular, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the general principles, the observance of which the European Union is obliged to ensure and which protect the right to protect one’s personal image, the right to respect for private and family life and the right to dignity. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the treaties and every rule of law concerning the application of the latter, that is to say the body of rules of the European Union, and, in particular, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the general principles, the observance of which the European Union is obliged to ensure and which protect the right to protect one’s personal image, the right to respect for private and family life and the right to dignity.

---