EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-286/24: Action brought on 24 May 2024 – Ducrotté v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0286

62024TN0286

May 24, 2024
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2024/4602

29.7.2024

(Case T-286/24)

(C/2024/4602)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: François Ducrotté (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the Commission’s decision of 6 March 2023 not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list of successful candidates of the open competition EPSO/AD/382/20 (AD5/AD7) in the field of External Relations;

annul, in as far as necessary, the Commission’s decision of 11 August 2023 rejecting the request for review filed by the applicant and the implicit decision of the Commission dated 6 March 2024 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;

order the Commission to compensate the material damage suffered by the applicant resulting from the loss of the opportunity to be put in the reserve list and to be recruited (to be determined under the supervision of the Court), as well as the moral damage suffered, estimated at 5 000 euros; and,

order the Commission to pay all the costs incurred by the applicant for the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging a non-compliance, by the selection board, with the notice of competition.

2.Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment by the panel which interviewed the applicant.

3.Third plea in law, alleging a breach of the principle of equal treatment.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging the instability of the composition of the selection board and lack of coordination in carrying out its proceedings.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging a breach of the duty to give reasons with regard to the implicit decision of the Commission dated 6 March 2024 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations.

6.Sixth plea in law, alleging a breach of the principle of good administration and of the duty of care.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4602/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia