Key facts of the case:
Appeal — Action for annulment — Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union — Representation of parties in direct actions before the Courts of the European Union — Lawyer representing the applicant as a third party — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Outcome of the case:
I suggest that the Court:
78) In the light of that outcome, I cannot but agree with both interveners who suggest that the resulting scenario is at odds with the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and the right of access to a court enshrined therein. I am therefore of the view that the approach to and the interpretation of the third paragraph of Article 19 of the Statute should be considerably revised.
151) Second, such interpretation and judicial practice are clearly not compliant, in my view, with the guarantees under the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter and, more specifically, access to justice and an effective judicial remedy. ( 65 )