62022TJ0442_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 28 February 2024 –PU v European Public Prosecutor’s Office
(Case T‑442/22) (
1
)
(Action for annulment and for damages – Institutional law – Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 – Appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Refusal to appoint one of the candidates nominated by [confidential] (
2
) – Time limit for bringing proceedings – Confirmatory measure – Lack of direct concern – Inadmissibility – Causal link)
1.
Action for annulment – Action brought against a decision confirming an earlier decision which was not contested within the time limits – Inadmissibility – Concept of confirmatory decision – Decision not altering the operative part of the earlier decision – Assessment by reference to the impact of the alteration on the substance of the decision in the act in question
(Art. 263 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 43, 44)
2.
Action for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Acts of direct and individual concern to them – Direct concern – Criteria – Decision concerning the appointment of European Delegated Prosecutors to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Action of an unsuccessful candidate who challenged out of time the rejection both of his application and of his complaint in respect of the position of European Delegated Prosecutor – Not directly concerned – Inadmissibility
(Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU; Council Regulation No 2017/1939, Art. 17)
(see paragraphs 52-56)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders PU to pay his own costs as well as those incurred by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
(
1
)	OJ C 380, 3.10.2022.
(
2
)	Confidential data removed.