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-452/02 P: Appeal brought on 11 November 2009 by Eckehard Rosenbaum against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 10 September 2009 in Case F-9/08 Rosenbaum v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009TN0452

62009TN0452

January 1, 2009
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

16.1.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/35

(Case T-452/02 P)

2010/C 11/65

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Eckehard Rosenbaum (Bonn, Germany) (represented by H.-J. Rüber, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities and Council of the European Union

Form of order sought by the appellant

set aside the judgment delivered on 10 September 2009 by the Civil Service Tribunal in the case of Rosenbaum v Commission;

set aside the Commission’s grading decision of 13 February 2007;

require the Commission to grade the appellant in a manner which is non-discriminatory and consistent with his professional experience, and to take all further necessary measures resulting from the judgment;

order the Commission to pay all costs relating to the dispute.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal has been brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 10 September 2009 in Case F-9/08 Rosenbaum v Commission, by which the action brought by the present appellant was dismissed.

In support of his appeal, the appellant first of all submits that the Civil Service Tribunal conducted an incomplete examination of the first plea in law. The Civil Service Tribunal, the appellant continues, also erred in law in rejecting the other three pleas as these, in contrast to the view taken by the Tribunal, were appropriate for the purpose of setting aside the contested measure. In conclusion, the appellant expresses the view that the lack of higher-quality selection procedures has a bearing on the issue of the legality of the contested decision and that the rejection of the evidence adduced in this connection is for that reason unlawful.

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