Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 —

Mugraby v Council and Commission

(Case C-581/11 P)

‛Appeal — Action for a declaration of failure to act — Infringement of fundamental rights and of the Association Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Lebanon — Failure of the Council and of the Commission to take measures against the Republic of Lebanon — Action for damages — Appeal manifestly unfounded and manifestly inadmissible’

1. Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Application lodged without the assistance of a lawyer — Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 19, third para., and 21, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 37(1), first para., and 38(3)) (see para. 36)

2. Appeals — Grounds — Error of law relied on not identified — Manifest inadmissibility (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 112(1)(c) and 119) (see paras 42, 43, 54, 63, 72, 82)

3. International agreements — Agreements of the Union — Fulfilment by a third country of obligations undertaken — Monitoring by the Commission of the correct application of the agreement (Art. 17(1) TEU) (see para. 68)

4. Actions for failure to act — Jurisdiction of the Courts of the European Union — Directions issued to an institution — Not permissible (Art. 265 TFEU) (see para. 75)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 September 2011 in Case T-292/09 Mugraby v Council and Commission dismissing an action for failure to act seeking a declaration that the Council and the Commission unlawfully omitted to take a decision on the then applicant’s request concerning the adoption of measures against Lebanon on account of the alleged violation by the latter of the then applicant’s fundamental rights and of the Association Agreement between the Community and the Republic of Lebanon, and dismissing, moreover, an action seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the then applicant as a result of those Community institutions’ failure to act.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Mugraby is ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 —

Mugraby v Council and Commission

(Case C-581/11 P)

‛Appeal — Action for a declaration of failure to act — Infringement of fundamental rights and of the Association Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Lebanon — Failure of the Council and of the Commission to take measures against the Republic of Lebanon — Action for damages — Appeal manifestly unfounded and manifestly inadmissible’

1. Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Application lodged without the assistance of a lawyer — Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 19, third para., and 21, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 37(1), first para., and 38(3)) (see para. 36)

2. Appeals — Grounds — Error of law relied on not identified — Manifest inadmissibility (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 112(1)(c) and 119) (see paras 42, 43, 54, 63, 72, 82)

3. International agreements — Agreements of the Union — Fulfilment by a third country of obligations undertaken — Monitoring by the Commission of the correct application of the agreement (Art. 17(1) TEU) (see para. 68)

4. Actions for failure to act — Jurisdiction of the Courts of the European Union — Directions issued to an institution — Not permissible (Art. 265 TFEU) (see para. 75)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 September 2011 in Case T-292/09 Mugraby v Council and Commission dismissing an action for failure to act seeking a declaration that the Council and the Commission unlawfully omitted to take a decision on the then applicant’s request concerning the adoption of measures against Lebanon on account of the alleged violation by the latter of the then applicant’s fundamental rights and of the Association Agreement between the Community and the Republic of Lebanon, and dismissing, moreover, an action seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the then applicant as a result of those Community institutions’ failure to act.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.