- 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-580/17: Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2019 — Karp v Parliament (Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Classification — Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations — Premature complaint — Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility — Autonomy of remedies — Non-renewal of a contract as a member of the auxiliary contract staff covering maternity leave — Obligation to state reasons — Successive fixed-term contracts — Abuse of rights — Right to be heard — Liability)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017TA0580
62017TA0580
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
18.3.2019
Official Journal of the European Union
C 103/31
(Case T-580/17) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Classification - Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations - Premature complaint - Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure - Inadmissibility - Autonomy of remedies - Non-renewal of a contract as a member of the auxiliary contract staff covering maternity leave - Obligation to state reasons - Successive fixed-term contracts - Abuse of rights - Right to be heard - Liability))
(2019/C 103/40)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Kevin Karp (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: N. Lambers and R. Ben Ammar, lawyers)
Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: Í. Ní Riagáin Düro and M. Windisch, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the European Parliament’s decision classifying the applicant in function group II, at grade 4, step 1, under the contract as a member of the contract staff signed on 12 May 2016 and which expired on 11 November 2016 and, secondly, compensation in respect of the material and non-material harm which the applicant has allegedly suffered on account of his classification and the non-renewal of his contract.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Mr Kevin Karp to pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 412, 4.12.2017.