Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2026:306
Date: 2026-04-16
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Procedure: Appeal;Staff cases;Action for damages

Appeal brought on 23 December 2024 by HG against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 16 October 2024 in Case T-494/23, HG v Commission (Case C-899/24 P) Language of the case: French Parties Appellant: HG (represented by: L. Levi, avocate) Other party to the proceedings: European Commission Form of order sought set aside the judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2024 in Case T-494/23 consequently, grant the appellant the relief sought at first instance and, accordingly, annul the compensation decisions dated 10 October 2022 (BUDG.C.4.001/AM/444), 13 October 2022 (BUDG.C.4.001/PRS/444), 11 November 2022 (BUDG.C.4.001/AM/444,3), 12 December 2022 (BUDG.C.4.001/AM/444,4), 9 January 2023 (BUDG.C.4.001/AM/444,5), 19 January 2023 (BUDG.C.4.001/PRS/444,6), 9 February 2023 (BUDG.C.4.001/PRS/444), 10 March 2023 (BUDG.C.4.001/LM/444) and 11 April 2023 (BUDG.C.4.001/PRS/444), all for an amount of EUR 3 350, with the exception of the decision of 13 October 2022 for an amount of EUR 274.59 and the decision of 19 January 2023 for an amount of EUR 368; in so far as necessary, annul the decision rejecting the appellant’s complaint, dated 5 May 2023; order the European Commission to reimburse the sums recovered in respect of the decisions adopted, that is, EUR 24 092.59, that amount to be increased by default interest calculated at the rate of the European Central Bank, plus two percentage points; order the European Commission to pay all of the costs at first instance and on appeal. Grounds of appeal and main arguments In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on the following ground: The judgment under appeal erred in law in the definition of the financial regulation constituting the legal basis and in finding that the application of that regulation to the asserted claim was not time-barred – infringement of Article 98 of the Financial Regulation of 2018 and infringement of the reasonable time limit. The judgment under appeal is vitiated by an infringement, by the General Court, of its obligation to state reasons, of the prohibition of ultra petita and infringement of the force of res judicata. ____________