CELEX: 62020CN0620
Language: en
Date: 2020-11-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-620/20 P: Appeal brought on 19 November 2020 by International Management Group (IMG) against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2020 in Case T-381/15 RENV, IMG v Commission

25.1.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 28/31
            
         
      Appeal brought on 19 November 2020 by International Management Group (IMG) against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2020 in Case T-381/15 RENV, IMG v Commission
      (Case C-620/20 P)
      (2021/C 28/51)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: International Management Group (IMG) (represented by: L. Levi and J.-Y. de Cara, avocats)
      
         Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  set aside the judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 in Case T-381/15/RENV;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  consequently, grant the appellant the relief sought at first instance as revised and, accordingly:
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay compensation for the material and non-material damage as amended in its observations after Case T-381/15 RENV was referred back to the General Court;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay all the costs.
               
            
         Grounds of appeal and main arguments
      
      In support of its appeal, the appellant relies on the following grounds of appeal:
      
                  a.
               
               
                  The unlawfulness of the Commission’s conduct
                  
                              1.
                           
                           
                              Failure to comply with the judgment of the Court of 31 January 2019, International Management Group v Commission (C-183/17 P and C-184/17 P);
                           
                        
                              2.
                           
                           
                              The judgment under appeal misconstrues the concept of international organisation laid down by the financial regulations: failure to respect international recognition; breach of the hierarchy of norms; failure to comply with the judgment of the Court of 31 January 2019, referred to above, and with the financial regulations;
                           
                        
                              3.
                           
                           
                              Breach of the principle of sound administration;
                           
                        
                              4.
                           
                           
                              The judgment under appeal misconstrued the concept of a sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals.
                           
                        
            
                  b.
               
               
                  The damage
                  
                              1.
                           
                           
                              As regards the claims in the first, second and third indents of paragraph 40 of the judgment under appeal: breach of the principle of compensation in kind; breach of the duty to state reasons incumbent on the General Court; failure to comply with the conditions governing admissibility; infringement of Article 76(e) and Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court;
                           
                        
                              2.
                           
                           
                              As regards the claims in the fourth indent of paragraph 40 of the judgment under appeal: breach of the obligation to state reasons incumbent on the General Court; infringement of Articles 76(e) and Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court;
                           
                        
                              3.
                           
                           
                              As regards non-material damage: breach of the principle of compensation in kind; breach of the duty to state reasons incumbent on the General Court; infringement of Article 76(e) and Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court; error in the exercise of the General Court’s unlimited jurisdiction.