Case C-183/17 P: Appeal brought on 11 April 2017 by International Management Group against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 2 February 2017 in Case T-29/15: International Management Group v European Commission
Date: 2017-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU financing, Myanmar/Burma, action programme, commitment of expenditure, development aid, financing of aid, general budget (EU), right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2017221EN.01000701.xml










10.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/7





Appeal brought on 11 April 2017 by International Management Group against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 2 February 2017 in Case T-29/15: International Management Group v European Commission
(Case C-183/17 P)
(2017/C 221/09)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: International Management Group (represented by: L. Levi, Avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


consequently,






—


annul the amended annex to the Commission Implementing Decision of 7.11.2013 on the Annual Action Programme 2013 in favour of Myanmar/Burma to be financed from the general budget of the European Union (1) adopted on 16 December 2014; and










—


order the European Commission to pay for the costs.














—


order the European Commission to pay all the costs of both the appeal and of the first instance.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on four pleas in law:






1)


Violation of the duty to state reasons — Violation of the duty to state reasons of the judge — Distortion of the file










2)


Violation of Financial Regulation of 2002 (2) and of Financial Regulation of 2012 (3) — Violation of the Commission Regulation (4) and of the Commission Delegated Regulation (5) — Violation of the duty of the judge state reasons — Distortion of the file










3)


Infringement of the principle of sound financial management — Infringement of the duty to state reasons — Infringement of the duty of the judge to state reasons — Infringement of the Financial Regulation of 2012 (articles 61(1) and 60(2))










4)


Infringement of the principle of good administration — Infringement of the right to be heard




The appellant also challenges the decision to reject the appellant's request for production of the OLAF report.


(1)  C(2013) 7682 final.

(2)  Council Regulation No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as amended (OJ 2002, L 248, p. 1).

(3)  Regulation No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012, L 298, p. 1).

(4)  Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as amended (OJ 2002, L 357, p. 1).

(5)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29 October 2012 on the rules of application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ 2012, L 362, p. 1).