# C_2017402EN.01004802.xml

| 27.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/48 |
| ---------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | -------- |

---

Action brought on 21 September 2017 — Stichting Against Child Trafficking v OLAF

(Case T-658/17)

(2017/C 402/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stichting Against Child Trafficking (Nijmegen, Netherlands) (represented by: E. Agstner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Anti-Fraud Office

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul decision of 3 August 2017, in Case OC/2017/0451, of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) not to open an administrative investigation; |
| - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

| — | instruct OLAF to open an administrative investigation and depending of its findings pass the matter to national law enforcement for criminal proceedings, and/or to European Institutions for administrative proceedings |
| - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |

| — | order OLAF to pay the costs of these proceedings. |
| - | ------------------------------------------------- |

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringements of EU law and manifest errors of assessment committed by OLAF
—
The contested decision does not comply with the fundamental values of the European Union, the acquis communautaire and the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, and is based on a manifestly erroneous reading of the documents in the case-file. | — | The contested decision does not comply with the fundamental values of the European Union, the acquis communautaire and the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, and is based on a manifestly erroneous reading of the documents in the case-file. |
| -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| — | The contested decision does not comply with the fundamental values of the European Union, the acquis communautaire and the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, and is based on a manifestly erroneous reading of the documents in the case-file. | | |

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging a failure to act and open investigation
—
OLAF ignores the link between the previous and current effects of EU fundings being spent on organisations and policies contrary to EU law and values. | — | OLAF ignores the link between the previous and current effects of EU fundings being spent on organisations and policies contrary to EU law and values. |
| -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| — | OLAF ignores the link between the previous and current effects of EU fundings being spent on organisations and policies contrary to EU law and values. | | |

| 3. | Third plea in law, based on the right to be heard
—
OLAF manifestly did not show any interest in truth-finding by refusing to call in witnesses and to meet with the applicant. | — | OLAF manifestly did not show any interest in truth-finding by refusing to call in witnesses and to meet with the applicant. |
| -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | OLAF manifestly did not show any interest in truth-finding by refusing to call in witnesses and to meet with the applicant. | | |

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging infringements of procedures
—
No transcript was established with regard to the meeting of 10 September 2014 during which the applicant and two civil servants of the European Commission brought statements and supporting facts. | — | No transcript was established with regard to the meeting of 10 September 2014 during which the applicant and two civil servants of the European Commission brought statements and supporting facts. |
| -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | No transcript was established with regard to the meeting of 10 September 2014 during which the applicant and two civil servants of the European Commission brought statements and supporting facts. | | |

---