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-545/18: Action brought on 11 September 2018 — YL v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0545

62018TN0545

September 11, 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

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/83

(Case T-545/18)

(2018/C 427/110)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: YL (represented by: P. Yon, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul his removal from the 2017 promotions list;

order his retroactive promotion as from 1 January 2017;

award him compensation for the damage — estimated in the amount of EUR 100 000 — suffered as a result of the contested measures: the number of days and amount of energy expended in respect of the present action and preparation thereof, overcoming the feeling of being rejected, ostracised and persecuted by an authority supposedly required to have regard to the welfare of its members of staff and have, if not a benevolent attitude towards them, then at least a neutral one;

order the reimbursement of his lawyer’s and legal fees in the amount of EUR 10 000, and

order the Commission to bear all 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 infringement of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) by the appointing authority when it based its refusal to promote the applicant on a previously imposed penalty, when that penalty had already affected the applicant’s career by a relegation in step. Moreover, the contested decision was allegedly adopted on the ground that the penalty was related to the applicant’s conduct while on active duty, whereas the decision to impose a penalty of 2016 indicated that the acts in question were totally unconnected to the applicant’s duties and responsibilities.

2.Second plea in law, alleging abuse of powers and process by the appointing authority when it used its power of promotion to increase the penalty imposed in 2016 and used the promotion procedure to circumvent the limits provided for in the Staff Regulations in the event of deferment of advancement.

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