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-338/16 P: Appeal brought on 22 June 2016 by Richard Zink against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 11 April 2016 in Case F-77/15, Zink v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TN0338

62016TN0338

June 22, 2016
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

C 305/46

(Case T-338/16 P)

(2016/C 305/62)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Richard Zink (Bamako, Mali) (represented by N. de Montigny and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:

annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 11 April 2016 in Case F-77/15 (Zink v Commission);

annul the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) to limit the payment of the expatriation allowance, which had been wrongly omitted since 1 September 2007, to a period of five years;

order the Commission to pay to the applicant the expatriation allowances that he has been entitled to since 1 September 2007 plus default interest calculated at the rate laid down by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations, increased by two percentage points on the sums already paid to the applicant by way of arrears of remuneration (expatriation allowance) and on those sums still due, from their respective due date until full payment, subject to the deduction of the sums already paid;

order the European Commission to pay the costs of the two instances.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on four pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 62 of the Statute.

2.Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of the legality of acts of the Commission.

3.Third plea in law, alleging a breach of the limitation to five years of the arrears.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging an infringement of the obligation to state reasons.

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