- 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-48/24: Action brought on 30 January 2024 — CE v EIB
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0048
62024TN0048
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
EN
C series
C/2024/2318
(Case T-48/24)
(C/2024/2318)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: CE (represented by: D. Giabbani, lawyer)
Defendant: European Investment Bank
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—admit this action as procedurally valid;
—declare the action well-founded;
—annul the decision of the President of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 30 October 2023;
—order the EIB to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action against the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 30 October 2023, finding that the applicant’s complaint of psychological harassment was unfounded and constituted an abusive use of the Procedures within the meaning of Article 7 of the EIB’s Dignity at Work Policy, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of the rights of the defence.
2.Second plea in law, alleging manifest errors of interpretation made by the Dignity at Work Panel (‘the Panel’).
3.Third plea in law, alleging inconsistencies between the findings made in the Panel’s final report and the objective reality of the facts.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2318/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)