- 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-619/19: Order of the General Court of 10 July 2020 — KF v SatCen (Action for annulment and for damages — Staff of SatCen — Members of the contract staff — Jurisdiction of the EU Courts — Common foreign and security policy — Decision to launch administrative investigations in respect of the applicant pursuant to a judgment of the General Court — Acts adversely affecting an official — Claim for interest on a sum awarded by the General Court as compensation for the harm suffered — Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure — Action manifestly inadmissible)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TB0619(01)
62019TB0619(01)
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 348/15
(Case T-619/19) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Action for annulment and for damages - Staff of SatCen - Members of the contract staff - Jurisdiction of the EU Courts - Common foreign and security policy - Decision to launch administrative investigations in respect of the applicant pursuant to a judgment of the General Court - Acts adversely affecting an official - Claim for interest on a sum awarded by the General Court as compensation for the harm suffered - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Action manifestly inadmissible)
(2020/C 348/21)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: KF (represented by: N. Macaulay, Barrister)
Defendant: European Union Satellite Centre (represented by: A. Guillerme, lawyer)
Re:
Application, first, based on Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of the decision of the Director of SatCen of 3 July 2019 to launch investigations concerning the applicant and, second, based on Article 268 TFEU for compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant, in particular as a result of that decision.
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed.
2.KF shall pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.
3.There is no need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene made by the Council of the European Union.
4.Each party shall bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.