62023TO0385_INF
Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 28 February 2024 –Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși v European Public Prosecutor’s Office
(Case T‑385/23) (
1
)
(Action for annulment – Decision of a Permanent Chamber of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to bring a case to judgment – Article 42(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 – Procedural act of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Lack of jurisdiction)
1.
Action for annulment – Jurisdiction of the EU judicature – Action brought against the decision of a Permanent Chamber of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to bring the case concerning the applicant to judgment – Procedural act of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Lack of jurisdiction
(Art. 19 TEU; Art. 263 TFEU; Council Regulation 2017/1939, Art. 42(1), (2), (3) and (8))
(see paragraphs 21-24, 27, 29, 32)
2.
EU law – Interpretation – Methods – Obligation to interpret secondary EU law in accordance with a rule of superior binding force – Limits – Interpretation contra legem – Not permissible
(see paragraphs 26, 28)
Operative part
1.
The action is dismissed.
2.
There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Council of the European Union, the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA).
3.
Mr Constantin Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși shall bear his own costs and pay those of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, with the exception of those relating to the applications for leave to intervene.
4.
Mr Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși, the Council, the Commission, the Parliament and ECBA shall bear their own costs relating to the applications for leave to intervene.
(
1
)	OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.