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-848/19: Action brought on 4 June 2020 — HS v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0848

62019TN0848

January 1, 2019
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

17.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/39

(Case T-848/19)

(2020/C 271/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: HS (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of 12 March 2019 to dismiss the applicant at the end of the probationary period,

so far as necessary, annul the decision of 10 October 2019 rejecting the applicant’s complaint,

compensate for the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant which can be evaluated, ex aequo et bono, to 15 000 Euros,

order the defendant to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of non-discrimination on ground of disability and of the duty to provide reasonable accommodation, violation of Article 21 of the Charter, of the United Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and of Article 1(d) of the Staff Regulations and, violation of the duty of care.

2.Second plea in law, alleging violation of Article 34 of the Staff Regulations: breach of the probationary period proper conditions, lack of guidance and lack and uncertainty of objectives, breach of the right to be heard and, manifest errors of assessment.

3.On the request for compensation, the applicant exposes the fault committed by the defendant, the damage suffered and the link between the fault and the damage.

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