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-221/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – WS v EUIPO (Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Recruitment – Selection procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst – Decision not to admit the applicant to the next stage of the procedure – Action for annulment – Rule of correspondence – Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations – Admissibility – Manifest error of assessment – Liability)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TA0221

62023TA0221

November 13, 2024
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/2025/265

(Case T-221/23)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Recruitment - Selection procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst - Decision not to admit the applicant to the next stage of the procedure - Action for annulment - Rule of correspondence - Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations - Admissibility - Manifest error of assessment - Liability)

(C/2025/265)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: WS (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė and E. Lekan, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the Selection Committee of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 June 2022, taken in the context of procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst, not to admit him to the next stage of that procedure and, secondly, compensation in respect of the moral and immaterial damage he claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.Dismisses the action;

2.Orders WS to pay the costs.

Language of the case: English.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/265/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

* * *

(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 261, 24.7.2023.

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