{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-122-26-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-122-26-p)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-23","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:b67bfc","proof":"sha256:9bf365d49361be77091fd0c48faf4d4854b47866a11abb1ee0a1cee520759cf0","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"eu:c-122-26-p","jurisdiction":"eu","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33"],"kind":"front_matter"},{"title":"Findings of the Court","paragraphs":["para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54"],"kind":"assessment"},{"title":"Costs","paragraphs":["para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69"],"kind":"costs"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"ORDER OF THE COURT (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed)","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"6 October 2026 ( * )","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"( Appeal – Arbitration clause – Determination as to whether appeals should be allowed to proceed – Article 170b of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request demonstrating that an issue is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law – Appeal allowed to proceed in part )","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"In Case C‑122/26 P,","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 24 February 2026,","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"DT, represented by A. Kunst, Rechtsanwältin,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"the other party to the proceedings being:","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Eulex Kosovo, established in Pristina (Kosovo),","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"defendant at first instance,","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"THE COURT (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed),","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"composed of T. von Danwitz, Vice-President of the Court, M. Condinanzi and R. Frendo (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"having regard to the proposal from the Judge-Rapporteur and after hearing the Advocate General, J. Kokott,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"makes the following","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"Order","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"1         By his appeal, DT seeks to have set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 21 January 2026, DT v Eulex Kosovo (T‑218/24, ‘the contested judgment’, EU:T:2026:34), by which that court dismissed his action seeking, primarily, on the basis of Article 272 TFEU, a decla …","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"The request that the appeal be allowed to proceed","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"2         Under point (b) of the second paragraph of Article 58a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, an appeal brought against a decision of the General Court relating to the performance of a contract containing an arbitration clause, within the meaning of Article 272 TFEU, is not to proceed unless the Court of Justice first decides that it should be allowed to do so.","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"3         In accordance with the third paragraph of Article 58a of that statute, an appeal is to be allowed to proceed, wholly or in part, in accordance with the detailed rules set out in the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, where it raises an issue that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law.","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"4         Under Article 170a(1) of the Rules of Procedure, in the situations referred to in the second paragraph of Article 58a of that statute, the appellant is to annex to the appeal a request that the appeal be allowed to proceed, setting out the issue raised by the appeal that is significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law and containing all the information necessary to enable the Court of Justice to rule on that request.","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"5         In accordance with Article 170b(1) and (3) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court’s decision on the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed is to be taken as soon as possible in the form of a reasoned order.","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Arguments of the appellant","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"6         In support of his request that the appeal be allowed to proceed, the appellant submits that the three grounds of his appeal raise issues that are significant with respect to the unity, consistency and development of EU law.","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"7         The first ground of appeal, which is comprised of two parts, concerns errors of law allegedly committed by the General Court inasmuch as, first, it incorrectly declared that it lacked jurisdiction to examine the abolition of the appellant’s post and, secondly, it therefore declared all the …","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"8         By the first part of his first ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law in holding, in paragraphs 37 to 43, 68, 119, 147, 170 and 185 of the contested judgment, that it lacked jurisdiction to examine the decision, provided for under the revised deployment …","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"9         By the second part of the first ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law in holding, in paragraphs 35, 36, 68, 119 and 148 of the contested judgment, that the pleas directed against the decision to abolish his post under the revised deployment plan were in …","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"10       According to the appellant, the first ground of appeal raises, first, the issue of the scope of jurisdiction of the EU judicature under the CFSP and, specifically, that of whether decisions on reorganisation and abolition of posts taken under that policy are excluded from judicial review. T …","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"11       Secondly, that ground concerns the scope of effective judicial protection under Article 47 of the Charter for staff of CFSP missions and, in particular, the issue, significant with respect to the unity, consistency and development of EU law, of whether the decision abolishing a post must be …","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"12       By the first part of his second ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court erred in law in holding that Eulex Kosovo had not failed to comply with its duty of care. He argues that, in paragraphs 179 to 181 of the contested judgment, the General Court incorrectly held that …","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"13       According to the appellant, the first part of the second ground of appeal raises the issue of the scope of the duty of care in CFSP missions and, specifically, that of whether the General Court may exclude any reassignment obligation solely due to a mission’s ‘temporary nature’. That issue …","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"14       By the second part of the second ground of appeal, the appellant submits that the General Court, in paragraphs 200 to 202 of the contested judgment, breached the principle of protection of legitimate expectations by holding that the existence of a contractual termination clause precluded th …","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"15       By his third ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court, by subjecting him, as a member of staff of a CFSP mission, to less favourable treatment than that reserved to officials and other staff of the European Union, failed to comply with the principle of equal treatment l …","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"Findings of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"16       As a preliminary point, it must be recalled that it is for the appellant to demonstrate that the issues raised by his or her appeal are significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law (order of 29 April 2025, SC v Eulex Kosovo , C‑881/24 P, EU:C:2025:313, paragraph 14 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"17       Furthermore, as is apparent from the third paragraph of Article 58a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, read together with Article 170a(1) and Article 170b(4) of the Rules of Procedure, the request that an appeal be allowed to proceed must contain all the informati …","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"18       Accordingly, a request that an appeal be allowed to proceed must, in any event, set out clearly and in detail the grounds on which the appeal is based, identify with equal clarity and detail the issue of law raised by each ground of appeal, specify whether that issue is significant with res …","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"19       In accordance with the principle that the burden of proof lies with the appellant requesting that an appeal be allowed to proceed, the appellant must demonstrate that, independently of the issues of law invoked in his or her appeal, the appeal raises one or more issues that are significant …","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"20       In order to demonstrate that that is the case, it is necessary to establish both the existence and the significance of such issues by means of concrete evidence specific to the particular case, and not simply an analysis of a general nature (order of 29 April 2025, SC v Eulex Kosovo , C‑881/24 P, EU:C:2025:313, paragraph 18 and the case-law cited).","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"21       In the present case, it should be noted, in the first place, that the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed states clearly and in detail the three grounds relied on in the appeal, claiming, as regards the first, errors of law allegedly committed by the General Court in declaring its …","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"22       In the second place, it must be held that the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed sets out, to the requisite standard, the nature of the alleged errors of law the General Court is to have committed and the extent to which those alleged errors affected the outcome of the contested …","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"23       First, as it was observed in paragraph 8 above, it is apparent from that request that the appeal be allowed to proceed that the error of law alleged in the first part of the first ground of appeal consists in the fact that, in paragraphs 37 to 43, 68, 119, 147, 170 and 185 of the contested …","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"24       Moreover, by maintaining that the issue of the scope of the jurisdiction of the EU judicature to hear and determine disputes concerning decisions on reorganisation and the abolition of staff posts adopted under the CFSP is liable to concern many staff of CFSP missions or EU agencies acting …","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"25       In so doing, the appellant sets out the specific reasons why that issue is significant with respect to the unity and the consistency of EU law.","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"26       Secondly, as was observed in paragraph 9 above, it is apparent from the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed that the error of law alleged in the second part of the first ground of appeal relates, in essence, to the fact that the General Court purportedly held, in paragraphs 35, 36 …","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"27       Thus, it must be found, first, that that alleged error could have had an impact on the outcome of the contested judgment, inasmuch as, were the Court of Justice to hold that such an error had been committed, the pleas in law raised by the appellant and relating to that plan might be declare …","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"28       Thirdly, it is apparent from paragraph 12 above that the first part of the second ground of appeal concerns the error of law allegedly committed by the General Court, in paragraphs 179 to 181 of the contested judgment, in holding that Eulex Kosovo had not failed to comply with its duty of c …","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"29       In so doing, the appellant sets out the specific reasons why the issue of law he raises by the first part of the second ground of appeal goes beyond his appeal and is significant with respect to the unity and the consistency of EU law. The response to that issue is likely to have consequenc …","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"30       Fourthly, as regards the third ground of appeal, alleging failure to comply with the principle of equal treatment and with the right to effective judicial protection, the applicant relies on the judgment of 17 July 2024, Montanari v EUCAP Sahel Niger (T‑371/22, EU:T:2024:494, paragraph 224) …","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"31       In so doing, the appellant sets out the specific reasons why the issue of equal treatment raised in the third ground of appeal goes beyond his appeal and is significant with respect to the unity, consistency and development of EU law.","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"32       By contrast, as regards the second part of the second ground of appeal, alleging breach of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations, the appellant takes issue with the General Court for failing to apply the case-law following from the judgment of 11 April 2016, FN and Others v …","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"33       Therefore, it must be held that, as regards the second part of the second ground of appeal, the appellant did not comply with all the requirements referred to in paragraph 18 above.","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"34       In the light of the matters set out by the appellant, it must be held that the present request that the appeal be allowed to proceed demonstrates to the requisite legal standard that the first ground of appeal, the first part of the second ground of appeal and the third ground of appeal raise issues that are significant with respect to the unity, consistency or development of EU law.","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"35       Having regard to the foregoing considerations, it is appropriate to allow the appeal to proceed in part, restricting the examination of that appeal to the first ground, the first part of the second ground and the third ground, to which the response must relate, and not to allow it to proceed as to the remainder.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"Costs","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"36       Under Article 170b(4) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, where an appeal is allowed to proceed, wholly or in part, having regard to the criteria set out in the third paragraph of Article 58a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the proceedings are to continue in accordance with Articles 171 to 190a of those rules.","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"37       Under Article 137 of the Rules of Procedure, applicable to proceedings on appeal pursuant to Article 184(1) of those rules, a decision as to costs is to be given in the judgment or order which closes the proceedings.","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"38       Accordingly, since the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed must be granted in part, the costs must be reserved.","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"On those grounds, the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) hereby orders:","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"1.       The appeal is allowed to proceed so far as concerns the first ground, the first part of the second ground and the third ground, and the response must relate to those grounds exclusively.","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"2.       The appeal is not allowed to proceed as to the remainder.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"3.       The costs are reserved.","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"Luxembourg, 6 October 2026.","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"A. Calot Escobar","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"T. von Danwitz","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"Registrar","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"President of the Chamber determining","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"whether appeals may proceed","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"*       Language of the case: English.","paragraph_id":"para_69"}],"word_count":4513,"cites":["C-122/26","T-218/24","C-455/14","C-29/22","C-44/22","T-444/13","T-584/16","F-41/15","T-371/22","C-881/24"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"1d5417c43c60be1c2e89192495e983fb3ec6ee9cee816392bb057c38a9d073cf","source_url":"https://publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/62026CO0122","fetched_at":"2026-10-14T20:21:50.085+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/eu/c-122-26-p","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-122-26-p","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-122-26-p","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-122-26-p"},"hash":"sha256:9bf365d49361be77091fd0c48faf4d4854b47866a11abb1ee0a1cee520759cf0","version":"legal-2026-10-23","expires":"2026-10-25T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-23+legal-2026-10-23+2026-10-23T14:34:08","content_hash":"sha256:9bf365d49361be77091fd0c48faf4d4854b47866a11abb1ee0a1cee520759cf0","revalidate_after":"2026-10-24T15:47:25.253Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-122-26-p","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-122-26-p"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-122-26-p"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-122-26-p"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=eu"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-122-26-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-c496b98b533993e9b3870d3afc91003a","response_hash":"sha256:9bf365d49361be77091fd0c48faf4d4854b47866a11abb1ee0a1cee520759cf0"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"stable","as_of":"2026-11-03T06:22:10.186Z","valid_for":604800,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu%3Ac-122-26-p&view=full","note":"Oföränderligt objekt med hash. Får cachas länge.","tokens":6261}}