15.5.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 173/33
6.
Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 11 TEU — No consultations were carried out with higher-education establishments maintained by public-interest trusts, nor with their students, teaching staff, researchers or partners. 7.
Seventh plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 2 TFEU — The FEU Treaty did not confer on the European Union, in the area of policy relating to education and scientific research, the powers that were exercised in the implementing decision. 8.
Eighth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 9 TFEU — The implementing decision does not contribute to a high level of education and training; furthermore, it leads to long-term negative effects on the academic, scientific and training levels for students, teaching staff and researchers at Hungarian higher-education establishments maintained by foundations. 9.
Ninth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 56 TFEU — The implementing decision limits the rights of EU citizens who are not Hungarian nationals (students, teaching staff, researchers) who carry on their activity in Hungarian educational establishments maintained by public-interest trusts. 10.
Tenth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 67 TFEU — By withdrawing funding, the implementing decision makes it impossible for establishments maintained by public-interest funds to function and represents an attack on the legal framework in which those establishments operate, that is to say, an indirect attack on the (different) autonomous Hungarian legal system and traditions particular to Hungary. 11.
Eleventh plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 120 TFEU — The discriminatory and disproportionate effects of the measure are manifest and also create an unjustified competitive disadvantage for higher-education establishments maintained by public-interest trusts. 12.
Twelfth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 124 TFEU — The implementing decision suspended funding to various recipients and, at the same time, distributed those funds to other entities. 13.
Thirteenth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 165 TFEU — The implementing decision does not contribute to the development of quality education but, in reality, seriously harms it and stands in its way. 14.
Fourteenth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 179 TFEU — The withdrawal of funding from the Erasmus+ programme for cooperation and educational exchange and from the Horizon Europe framework programme for research and innovation is a clear obstacle to the free movement of researchers, scientific knowledge and technology, and to the development of its competitivity. 15.
Fifteenth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) — An obvious effect of the implementing decision is the change in how Hungarian higher-education establishments operating under the new model function. 16.
Sixteenth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 2 TEU — In the defendant’s view, the conflict of interests that provides the basis and reasons for the implementing decision does not exist.