62024TO0484_INF
Order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 June 2025 –FF v Eurojust and Europol (Sky ECC III)
(Case T‑484/24)
(Non-contractual liability – Cooperation of the police authorities and other law enforcement agencies of the Member States – Alleged unlawful processing of personal data – Failure to comply with procedural requirements – Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure – No non-material damage suffered as a result of acts of Europol – Action in part brought before a court manifestly lacking jurisdiction to hear and determine it, in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
1.
Procedure – Action brought by a natural or legal person seeking a declaration that a measure adopted by a national authority is inadmissible – Lack of jurisdiction of the EU judicature – Inadmissibility
(Art. 277 TFEU)
(see paragraph 20)
2.
Procedure – Action brought by a natural or legal person seeking a declaration that a measure adopted by a national authority is unlawful – Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the EU judicature – Inadmissibility
(Art. 277 TFEU)
(see paragraph 21)
3.
Judicial proceedings – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Identification of the subject matter of the dispute – Summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based – Action seeking compensation for loss caused by an EU institution – No indications as to the allegedly wrongful act – Inadmissibility
(Arts 268 and 340 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d); European Parliament and Council Regulation 2018/1727, Art. 46(1))
(see paragraphs 31, 32, 45)
4.
Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Unlawfulness – Damage – Causal link – Actual and certain damage – Burden of proof – Action which does not contain elements capable of demonstrating the existence and extent of non-material damage – No obligation on the General Court to supplement the line of argument by searching for and identifying such elements in the annexes to the applicant’s pleadings or by ordering the production of documents – Action dismissed in its entirety
(Art. 340 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 85(1) and (2); European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/794, Art. 50(1))
(see paragraphs 55, 57, 58, 67, 71, 74, 78, 85, 87)
5.
Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Regulation 2016/794 – Liability for the unlawful processing of personal data – Nature of that liability – Joint and several liability of Europol and the Member State concerned
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/794, recital 57 and Art. 50(1))
(see paragraphs 83, 84)
Operative part
1.
The action is dismissed as being brought before a court that manifestly lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the action in so far as the latter seeks a declaration that the agreement establishing a joint investigation team relating to the ‘Sky ECC’ encrypted communication service is ‘inadmissible’.
2.
The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible in so far it is directed against the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and seeks compensation for the non-material damage attributed to Eurojust.
3.
The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law in so far it is directed against the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and seeks compensation for the non-material damage attributed to Europol.
4.
FF shall bear his own costs and shall pay those incurred by Eurojust and Europol.
5.
The Kingdom of Spain and the Kingdom of the Netherlands shall bear their own costs.