- 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-728/21: Action brought on 5 November 2021 — LW v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0728
62021TN0728
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
10.1.2022
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 11/38
(Case T-728/21)
(2022/C 11/53)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: LW (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the defendant’s decision to move the applicant inside the same Unit to a different post;
—together with, and in so far as necessary, annul the defendant’s contested decision rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant against the reassignment decision;
—order the compensation of the non-material damages of the applicant and
—order the defendant to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging that the reassignment decision affected the applicant’s legal interests.
2.Second plea in law, alleging that the reassignment decision has not been taken by the competent appointing authority.
3.Third plea in law, alleging that the reassignment decision and the contested decision have been taken in violation of Article 7(1) of the Staff regulations.
4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the reassignment decision and the contested decision infringe the principle of duty of care.
5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the reassignment decision and the contested decision violated the duty to state reasons.
6.Sixth plea in law, alleging that a conflict of interest issue vitiates the reassignment decision and the contested decision.