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-479/13: Action brought on 3 September 2013 — Marchiani v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0479

62013TN0479

September 3, 2013
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

16.11.2013

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/26

(Case T-479/13)

2013/C 336/56

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-Charles Marchiani (Toulon, France) (represented by: C.-S. Marchiani, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the Secretary General of 4 July 2013;

annul the debit note of 5 July 2013;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant contests the decision of the European Parliament to recover the sums received between 2001 and 2004 by the applicant as Parliamentary assistance expenses.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging an irregularity in procedure, in so far as the decision of the of the Secretary General of the Parliament of 4 July 2013 is in violation of the decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 19 May and 9 July 2008 concerning Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, of the adversarial principle and of the rights of defence.

2.Second plea in law, alleging an incorrect application of the regulation concerning fees and expenses of Members of the Parliament (the FEM regulation).

3.Third plea in law, alleging an error of assessment of the documents on the file.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging a lack of impartiality on the part of the Secretary General of the European Parliament when adopting the decision dated 4 July 2013.

5.Fifth and Sixth pleas in law, alleging that the recovery of the sums in question is time-barred.

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