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-322/25: Action brought on 22 May 2025 – Varaut v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62025TN0322

62025TN0322

May 22, 2025
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 series

C/2025/3913

21.7.2025

(Case T-322/25)

(C/2025/3913)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alexandre Varaut (Paris, France) (represented by: D. Dassa-Le Deist, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of 31 March 2025 of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament;

order the assumption of the contract of [confidential] (1) as of 2 September 2024 as signed and presented;

consequently, order that the applicant be reimbursed for the sums which he had to pay in place of the Parliament for the contract of [confidential] from 2 September 2024 until 31 March 2025 as a result of the contested decision, namely a total amount of EUR 18 408,28;

order the European Parliament to pay the applicant the sum of EUR 10 000 in respect of the non-recoverable costs he has incurred;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the Parliament’s decision refusing to assume a local parliamentary assistant’s contract, the applicant puts forward three pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in that the Parliament relies on a risk of conflict of interest. The definition of a conflict of interest bears no relation to the factual situation.

Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in that the Parliament relies on a risk that the time financed for that assistant will be used for personal purposes, which constitutes, a priori, a completely unjustified suspicion.

Third plea in law, alleging that it is not for the Secretary-General of the Parliament to the change the measures implementing the Statute for Members of the Parliament and to create legal uncertainty. In support of that plea, the applicant maintains that his assistant’s work is organised into two distinct periods of time which are easy to monitor. Moreover, he claims that the same situation has existed in the past without posing any problems.

(1) Confidential information omitted.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3913/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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