Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(Appeal — Development cooperation — EU budget implementation by indirect management — Budget implementation task entrusted to an entity — Replacement by another entity of the entity chosen — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Challengeable acts — Doubts regarding the status as an international organisation of the entity which had been initially chosen — Exercise of the rights of defence before the adoption of the acts adversely affecting the person concerned — Confidentiality of OLAF investigations)
Joined Cases C‑183/17 P and C‑184/17 P concern the appeals brought by International Management Group (‘IMG’) against the judgments of the General Court of the European Union of 2 February 2017, International Management Group v Commission (T‑29/15) ( 2 ) and IMG v Commission (T‑381/15) ( 3 ) respectively.
Those two cases fall within the same factual context, that is to say the amendment of the Annual Action Programme in favour of Myanmar/Burma which removed IMG from the implementation of that programme by indirect management because of doubts regarding its status as an international organisation following an investigation conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF).
Moreover, the present cases concern the cross-appeals brought by the Commission seeking, in particular, the setting aside of the aforementioned judgments, in so far as the General Court, wrongly according to the Commission, found the actions brought at first instance by IMG to be admissible.
In accordance with the Court’s request, this Opinion will be limited to an analysis of the principal new points of law raised in the present case, namely those raised, in particular, by the cross-appeals, by the second grounds of appeal raised in the present cases, and by the fourth ground of appeal raised in Case C‑183/17 P and the third ground of appeal raised in Case C‑184/17 P.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.