{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-614-24-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-614-24-p)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-11-02","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:f6410a","proof":"sha256:786fd685a695c0986241f8f9f5a4a6c41da76f87827f600e7bcd5e5a0c7c3b40","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-614-24-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","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","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"ORDER OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber)","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"13 February 2025 ( * )","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"( Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Civil service – Staff member of the European Investment Bank (EIB) – Non-conversion of a fixed-term contract into a contract of indefinite duration – Legitimate expectations – Action for annulment and for damages )","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"In Case C‑614/24 P,","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 20 September 2024,","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"RS, represented by B. Maréchal, avocat,","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"the other party to the proceedings being:","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"European Investment Bank (EIB),","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"defendant at first instance,","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"THE COURT (Eighth Chamber),","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"composed of S. Rodin, President of the Chamber, N. Piçarra and N. Fenger (Rapporteur), Judges,","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Advocate General: J. Kokott,","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to rule by reasoned order, pursuant to Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice,","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"makes the following","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"Order","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"1         By his appeal, RS seeks to have set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 10 July 2024, RS v EIB (T‑624/22, ‘the judgment under appeal’, EU:T:2024:461), by which the General Court dismissed his action for annulment of the decision of the European Investment Bank …","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"The appeal","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"2         Pursuant to Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, where the appeal is, in whole or in part, manifestly inadmissible or manifestly unfounded, the Court may at any time, acting on a proposal from the Judge-Rapporteur and after hearing the Advocate General, decide by reasoned order to dismiss that appeal in whole or in part.","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"3         That provision must be applied in the present case.","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"4         On 6 January 2025, the Advocate General took the following position:","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"‘Introductory remarks","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"1.      For the reasons set out below, I propose that the Court dismiss the appeal in the present proceedings as manifestly inadmissible, in accordance with Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure.","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"2.      In support of his appeal, the appellant puts forward three grounds of appeal, the first alleging infringement of the right to data protection, confidentiality and privacy, the second alleging a “serious” failure to state reasons and the disproportionate character of the non-conversion decisi …","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"The first ground of appeal, alleging infringement of the rights to data protection, confidentiality and privacy","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"3.      By his first ground of appeal, the appellant complains that the General Court wrongly rejected the first part of his second plea, raised at first instance, alleging infringement of the rights to data protection, confidentiality and privacy.","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"4.      In support of that first ground of appeal, the appellant claims, in essence, that the General Court failed to have regard to the fact that, during the procedure leading to the non-conversion decision, the EIB had infringed those rights by relying on “void and malicious” accusations made agai …","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"5.      According to settled case-law, an appeal must indicate precisely the contested elements of the judgment which the appellant seeks to have set aside, and also the legal arguments specifically advanced in support of the appeal. That requirement is not satisfied by an appeal that, without even …","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"6.      In support of the first ground of appeal, the appellant merely repeats, to a very large extent verbatim, the line of argument that he had already put forward before the General Court, without specifically calling into question the reasoning on the basis of which the General Court rejected it …","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"7.      Moreover, according to Article 170(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the subject matter of the proceedings before the General Court may not be changed in the appeal. In that regard, it is settled case-law that the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice in an appeal is confined to a review of the a …","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"8.      It is for the first time in the present appeal that the appellant raises the specific ground of appeal alleging infringement of Article 6 of Regulation 2018/1725. In paragraph 107 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court specifically found that the appellant had not explained which pr …","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"9.      Consequently, the first ground of appeal must be rejected as manifestly inadmissible in its entirety.","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"The second ground of appeal, alleging a failure to state “serious” reasons and the disproportionate character of the non-conversion decision","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"10.      By his second ground of appeal, which relates, in essence, to paragraphs 59, 65, 74 and 75 of the judgment under appeal, the appellant criticises the General Court for having rejected the first part of his first plea, raised at first instance and alleging several irregularities vitiating the non-conversion decision.","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"11.      In support of that second ground of appeal, the appellant submits, in essence, that both the EIB, in the non-conversion decision, and the General Court did not take account of all the relevant facts and evidence or of the fact that the accusations made against him were dismissed. In paragra …","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"12.      It is apparent from Article 256(1) TFEU and the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union that an appeal is to be limited to points of law and that the General Court therefore has exclusive jurisdiction to find and appraise the relevant facts …","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"13.      Moreover, a distortion of the facts or evidence must be obvious from the documents on the Court’s file, without there being any need to carry out a new assessment of the facts and the evidence. In the light of the exceptional nature of a ground of appeal alleging distortion of the facts and …","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"14.      In that regard, it must be stated that, in the context of the second ground of appeal, contrary to the requirements set out in paragraph 5 above, the appellant confines himself, in part, to repeating verbatim the arguments relied on at first instance. Furthermore, in so far as he complains …","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"15.      Accordingly, the second ground of appeal must also be rejected as manifestly inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"The third ground of appeal: breach of the principle of good administration","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"16.      By his third ground of appeal, the appellant complains that the General Court rejected the third plea raised at first instance, alleging infringement of the principle of good administration and of his legitimate expectations, as assessed in paragraph 133 et seq. of the judgment under appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"17.      In the light of the case-law referred to in paragraph 5 above, it must be held that, in the context of the third ground of appeal, the appellant not only fails to identify the error of law allegedly vitiating the General Court’s reasoning, but also merely reproduces verbatim, to a very large extent, the claims that he made at first instance.","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"18.      It follows that the third ground of appeal constitutes, in essence, a request for a re-examination of the complaints and arguments submitted for examination by the General Court in the context of the third plea raised at first instance, with the result that it must also be rejected as manifestly inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"Conclusion","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"19.      In the light of all of the foregoing considerations, the appeal must be dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.’","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"5         For the same reasons as those given by the Advocate General, the appeal must be dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"Costs","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"6         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 order that closes the proceedings. In this case, since the present order is adopted before the appeal is served on the other parties to the proceedings and, therefore, before they could have incurred costs, it is appropriate to decide that the appellant is to bear his own costs.","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"On those grounds, the Court (Eighth Chamber) hereby orders:","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"1.       The appeal is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"2.       RS shall bear his own costs.","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"Luxembourg, 13 February 2025.","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"A. Calot Escobar","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"S. Rodin","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"Registrar","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"President of the Chamber","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"*       Language of the case: English.","paragraph_id":"para_58"}],"word_count":2275,"cites":["C-614/24","T-624/22","C-534/22","C-309/23","C-193/21","C-537/21","C-95/23","C-127/23","C-638/19","C-541/22","C-142/19","C-382/19"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"eec7c3c18b918d472592bbd075dd013165d7ad1d1c9709109b5eb7adac045d0c","source_url":"https://publications.europa.eu/resource/celex/62024CO0614","fetched_at":"2026-09-30T07:53:16.145+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/eu/c-614-24-p","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-614-24-p","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-614-24-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-614-24-p","verification":{"stored_sha256":"eec7c3c18b918d472592bbd075dd013165d7ad1d1c9709109b5eb7adac045d0c","recomputed_sha256":"eec7c3c18b918d472592bbd075dd013165d7ad1d1c9709109b5eb7adac045d0c","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-11-03T05:54:08.828Z"},"verification_scope":{"stored_hash_is_source_verification":false,"official_source_comparison":"not_performed","legal_review":"not_assessed"},"decision_object":{"schema_version":"1","object_id":"decision:eu:c-614-24-p","judgment_class":"C","operative_part":"not_in_register","cites_count":12,"word_count":2275,"decision_url":null},"agent_links":{"agent_root":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/agent.json","agent_overview":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/rapid/agent/overview"}},"hash":"sha256:786fd685a695c0986241f8f9f5a4a6c41da76f87827f600e7bcd5e5a0c7c3b40","version":"legal-2026-11-02","expires":"2026-11-04T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-11-02+legal-2026-11-02+2026-11-02T16:22:18","content_hash":"sha256:786fd685a695c0986241f8f9f5a4a6c41da76f87827f600e7bcd5e5a0c7c3b40","revalidate_after":"2026-11-03T06:54:09.470Z","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-614-24-p","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu:c-614-24-p"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu:c-614-24-p"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/eu-praxis/agent?id=eu:c-614-24-p"},{"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-614-24-p","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-c1cdbdfa833d91fec57572c145845173","response_hash":"sha256:786fd685a695c0986241f8f9f5a4a6c41da76f87827f600e7bcd5e5a0c7c3b40"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T05:54:09.693Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu%3Ac-614-24-p&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":4937}}