Mr Le Pen, a former MEP who founded and led France’s far-right Front National until 2011, brought the legal proceedings in 2024, seeking annulment of the decision of the parliament’s secretary-general.

According to the European Parliament, Mr Le Pen improperly invoiced personal expenses under a budget intended for MEPs’ parliamentary expenses, wrongly receiving a total of €303,200.99.

In his action, Mr Le Pen claimed infringement of the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations and infringement of his right to a fair trial.

He also sought annulment of the debit note issued against him and an order that the European Parliament pay the costs.

Following his death in January, Mr Le Pen’s daughters Marion Le Pen, Yann Maréchal and Marie-Caroline Olivier, as his heirs, pursued the pending proceedings.

Marion, better known as Marine Le Pen, is one of the most prominent leaders of her late father’s party, now rebranded as Rassemblement National.

The EU General Court yesterday dismissed the action brought by Mr Le Pen and his heirs.

In its judgment, currently available only in French, the court held that the procedure which led the European Parliament to adopt the recovery decision and to issue the debit note is not contrary to the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations.

It noted that, as early as 23 January 2024, the secretary-general of the European Parliament had informed Mr Le Pen of the irregularities of which he was accused and had invited him to submit any observations within two months.

Moreover, the court observed that the recovery decision whose annulment was sought contained a detailed account of the factual and legal context relating to the irregularities alleged against Mr Le Pen.

In that decision, the secretary-general invited Mr Le Pen to submit his observations on those irregularities, cited, inter alia, the essential points of the response to that invitation provided by Mrs Maréchal in March 2024 and noted that no evidence that the appropriations had been used in accordance with the applicable rules had been produced.

The court also found that the right to a fair trial has not been infringed.

The court recalled that the right to a fair trial, according to the case law, relates only to judicial proceedings before a ‘tribunal’.

It added that, in the course of its investigation, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) informed Mr Le Pen of all the facts alleged against him and invited him to submit his observations, which Mr Le Pen did.

Moreover, during the administrative procedure initiated by the European Parliament further to OLAF’s final investigation report, Mr Le Pen was again invited to submit his observations. His daughters responded to that invitation in their capacity as representatives.