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 F-42/07: Action brought on 10 May 2007 — Prieto v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007FN0042

62007FN0042

May 10, 2007
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

23.6.2007

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/47

(Case F-42/07)

(2007/C 140/75)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Antonio Prieto (Bousval, Belgium) (represented by: E. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

annul the European Parliament's decision of 9 June 2006 to appoint the applicant as a probationary official in step 3 of Grade AST 2;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a successful candidate in internal competition C/348 for Grades C5-4, was a member of the Commission's temporary staff in Grade AST 3 (formerly Grade C4) when he was appointed as a probationary official in Grade AST 2.

In support of his action, the applicant claims, first, that the decision to appoint him as an official in a grade and step lower than that which was his when he was a member of the temporary staff infringes Article 5(4) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’).

The applicant also pleads breach of the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination, on the ground that only the successful candidates in the competition in question who were previously, as members of the temporary staff, in category D were able to retain their former more advantageous grade and step when they were appointed as officials.

The applicant claims, finally, that the contested decision also infringes the principles of legal certainty, the protection of legitimate expectations, proper administration and of sound management.

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