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-52/20) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Removal from post - Reinstatement decision - Application for annulment - No need to adjudicate - Claim for compensation - Loss of opportunity for promotion - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2023/C 63/58)
Language of the case: French
Applicant: CX (represented by: É. Boigelot, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Vernier, L. Radu Bouyon and T. Bohr, acting as Agents)
By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of, first, the decision of the European Commission to reinstate him at grade AD8, step 5, complying with the judgment of 13 December 2018, CX v Commission (T-743/16 RENV, not published, EU:T:2018:937), which he claims becoming aware of in the note of 21 March 2019 as well as, when necessary, the decision of 21 October 2019 rejecting his complaint and, secondly, compensation for the damage he claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.
1.There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the claim for annulment.
2.The action is dismissed as to the remainder as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.
3.CX and the Commission shall bear their own costs.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 95, 23.3.2020.