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-519/11 P: Appeal brought on 29 September 2011 by Sandro Gozi against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 20 July 2011 in Case F-116/10 Gozi v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0519

62011TN0519

September 29, 2011
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

26.11.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/41

(Case T-519/11)

2011/C 347/73

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Sandro Gozi (Rome, Italy) (represented by G. Passalacqua and G. Calcerano, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant

Annul the measure taken by the Directorate General for Human Resources and Security — HR.D.2/MB/db Ares (2010) — Y96 985 of 6 August 2010.

Recognise and declare the right of Mr Gozi to reimbursement of legal costs and, consequently, order the payment of the sum of EUR 24 480 plus costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the decision by which the defendant refused reimbursement of the sum of EUR 24 480 for the legal costs incurred by the appellant in legal proceedings in Italy.

In support of his appeal, Mr Gozi relies on a sole ground of appeal alleging that the judgment under appeal in the present case seems to be wrong in law and marred in several places by reasoning which is clearly contradictory, since that judgment disregards the rationale and wording of Article 24 of the Staff Regulations of the Officials of the European Union, thereby running counter to the case-law referred to in the judgment itself and to the findings of fact in the proceedings before the Commission.

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