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-217/18: Action brought on 28 March 2018 — DK v EEAS

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0217

62018TN0217

March 28, 2018
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

(Case T-217/18)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: DK (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service

Form of order sought

Declare and rule:

That the decision of 23 May 2017 imposing a disciplinary penalty on the applicant, by which the net amount of his old-age pension is reduced by 20 %, namely a retention of EUR 1015 per month, until 30 September 2025 under Article 9(2) of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations is annulled;

In the alternative, that the EEAS is ordered to pay the applicant a sum set ex aequo et bono to make good the loss suffered;

That, in any event, the EEAS is ordered to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging manifest errors of assessment vitiating the contested decision, in that, firstly, the Appointing Authority took account of damage to the integrity of the institutions caused by the applicant which had already been remedied and, secondly, the duration of the disciplinary penalty imposed is arbitrary as it has been set by reference to the legal retirement age of the applicant.

2.Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of proportionality vitiating the contested decision by reason of the unlawful failure to take account of the amount of time that has elapsed since the facts occurred, of the infringement of Article 25 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations during the criminal proceedings and of the applicant’s family situation.

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