Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 July 2012 —
Pigui v Commission

(Case T-382/11)

Action for failure to act — Position taken — Application for directions to be issued — Manifest inadmissibility

1.                     Actions for failure to act — Failure remedied before commencement of proceedings — Inadmissibility — Position taken not satisfying the applicant — Irrelevant (Art. 265 TFEU) (see para. 17)

2.                     Education, professional training, youth and sport — Action programme in the area of life-long education and training — Jean Monnet sub-programme — Grant of operating subsidies to designated establishments — Obligation of the Commission to ensure protection of financial interests of the Union — Scope — Limits (European Parliament and Council Decision 1720/2006, Arts 4, 6(1) and (3), and 15(1), and annex, Section 14, sixth and seventh para.) (see paras 21-24)

3.                     Actions for failure to act — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — Directions issued to an institution — Not permissible (Art. 265 TFEU) (see para. 29)

Re:

ACTION for failure to act, seeking a declaration that the European Commission unlawfully failed to define its position on the applicant’s request, first, to initiate, pursuant to Articles 4 and 15 of Decision No 1720/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an action programme in the field of lifelong learning (OJ 2006 L 327, p. 45), an investigation into the Online Master organised by the European Online Academy (EOA), founded by the Centre international de formation européenne (CIFE), in cooperation with the Jean Monnet Chair at the University of Cologne (Germany), and, second, to take all measures provided for by Article 6 of that decision in order to prevent further illegal conduct, to restore the situation ab initio of those persons affected by such illegal conduct or, at least, in so far as the applicant is concerned, and, lastly, to withdraw the funding for that Master if it fails to comply with key human rights principles, to which reference is made in Article 1(3)(i) of that decision, and relevant principles of European Union law.

Operative part

1. 1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

2. 2. Cristina Pigui is ordered to pay the costs.