62021TO0442_INF
Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 February 2022 –Thomas and Julien v Council
(Case T‑442/21)
(Action for annulment – Area of freedom, security and justice – Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and Euratom, of the one part, and the United Kingdom, of the other part – Council decision on the conclusion of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement – Act not of individual concern – Non-regulatory act – Inadmissibility)
1.
European Union – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – International agreements – Actionable measures – Decision of the European Union concluding an international agreement – Review of the validity of a decision to conclude such an agreement – Consideration of the actual content of the agreement
(see paras 18, 19)
2.
Action for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them – Possibility of being individually concerned by a general decision – Conditions – Council Decision approving the conclusion of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union – Action brought by UK nationals with family and property interests in the European Union – Not individually concerned – Inadmissibility
(Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU; Council Decision 2021/689)
(see paras 29-32, 35-37)
3.
Action for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Concept of ‘regulatory act’ within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Council Decision approving the conclusion of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the United Kingdom and the Union – Not included
(Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU; Council Decision 2021/689)
(see paras 40, 44-46)
4.
Acts of the institutions – Legal nature – Legislative act – Concept – Council Decision approving the conclusion of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the United Kingdom and the Union – Not included
(Arts 217 and 218(6) and (8) TFEU; Council Decision 2021/689)
(see para. 43)
Operative part
1.
Dismisses the action as inadmissible.
2.
Declares that there is no longer any need to rule on the application to intervene of the European Commission.
3.
Orders Ms Rhiannon Thomas and Mr Michaël Julien to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union, with the exception of those relating to the application to intervene.
4.
Orders Ms Thomas, Mr Julien, the Council and the Commission each to bear their own costs relating to the application to intervene.