- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-171/24: Action brought on 29 March 2024 – DH v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0171
62024TN0171
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/2024/3178
21.5.2024
(Case T-171/24)
(C/2024/3178)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: DH (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—declare the present action admissible and well founded;
—annul the Commission’s decision of 15 February 2023, refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the applicant's invalidity;
—annul the decision of 20 December 2023, communicated by email of 20 December 2023, rejecting the applicant's complaint of 15 May 2023;
—order the defendant to pay all the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging a failure to comply with the obligation to state reasons.
2.Second plea in law, alleging the existence of a flawed opinion of the Invalidity Committee and of a manifest error of assessment.