- 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 F-63/11 RENV: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 December 2014 — Luigi Macchia v Commission (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Referral back to the Tribunal after setting aside — Non-renewal of a contract for a fixed period — Discretionary power of the administration — Manifest error of assessment — Action manifestly inadmissible and manifestly unfounded)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011FB0063
62011FB0063
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 34/49
(Case F-63/11 RENV) (<span class="super">1</span>)
((Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Referral back to the Tribunal after setting aside - Non-renewal of a contract for a fixed period - Discretionary power of the administration - Manifest error of assessment - Action manifestly inadmissible and manifestly unfounded))
(2015/C 034/58)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: Luigi Macchia (Woluwé-Saint-Lambert, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, acting as Agents)
Re:
Annulment of the implied decision not to renew the applicant’s temporary staff contract under Article 2(a) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.
Operative part of the order
1)The action is dismissed as in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.
2)Mr Macchia is to bear his own costs incurred in Cases F-63/11, T-368/12 P and F-63/11 RENV respectively and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in Cases F-63/11 and F-63/11 RENV.
3)The European Commission is to bear its own costs incurred in Case T-368/12 P.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 226, 30.7.2011, p. 32.