CELEX: 62019CN0014
Language: en
Date: 2019-01-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-14/19 P: Appeal brought on 10 January 2019 by the European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 25 October 2018 in Case T-286/15: KF v SatCen

13.5.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 164/8
            
         
      Appeal brought on 10 January 2019 by the European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 25 October 2018 in Case T-286/15: KF v SatCen
      (Case C-14/19 P)
      (2019/C 164/09)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) (represented by: A. Guillerme, avocate)
      
         Other parties to the proceedings: KF, Council of the European Union
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the judgment under appeal;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the applicant in first instance to bear all the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In its appeal, SatCen relies on the following grounds:
      
                  —
               
               
                  the General Court erred in law in the finding that it has jurisdiction to rule on the heads of claim submitted by the applicant, as it (i) did not assess if the factors forming the basis of the Court’s jurisdiction were met and it (ii) erroneously interpreted the principle of equal treatment.
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  the General Court erred in law in the finding that the General Court’s jurisdiction to rule on this dispute is based on article 263 and 268 TFEU;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  the General court distorted the facts in examining KF’s claims as regards the conduct of the administrative inquiry;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  the General Court erred in law interpreting article 1, annex IX of the SatCen’s Staff Regulations and the concept of the rights of the defence.