CELEX: 62021CN0755
Language: en
Date: 2021-12-08 00:00:00
Title: Case C-755/21 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2021: Marián Kočner against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Case T-528/20 Kočner v Europol

14.2.2022   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 73/18
            
         
      Appeal brought on 8 December 2021: Marián Kočner against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Case T-528/20 Kočner v Europol
      (Case C-755/21 P)
      (2022/C 73/23)
      Language of the case: Slovak
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: Marián Kočner (represented by: M. Mandzák, M. Para, advokáti)
      
         Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, Kingdom of Spain
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  set aside the judgment under appeal in full;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  refer the case back to the General Court;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  declare that the General Court is to decide on the costs of the proceedings.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      The appellant relies on two harmful events. The appeal is in total made up of six grounds. The General Court is alleged to have erred in the legal assessment of the case and to have incorrectly applied the substantive law, especially as regards the joint and several liability for damage of the defendant and the Member State, to have incorrectly interpreted the national law, to have incorrectly established that there was a lack of a causal link between the defendant’s conduct and the harmful event, to have stated insufficient reasons for the judgment under appeal and to have distorted the evidence.