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 F-126/07: Action brought on 30 October 2007 — Van Beers v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007FN0126

62007FN0126

January 1, 2007
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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/57

(Case F-126/07)

(2008/C 22/110)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Isabelle Van Beers (Woluwe-St-Etienne, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Annul the decision of the appointing authority rejecting the applicant's application under the attestation procedure for 2006;

Declare Article 4(2) of the general implementing provisions (GIP) of Article 45a of the Staff Regulations unlawful, inasmuch as it has the effect either of excluding from consideration the true level of the tasks carried out by a candidate for attestation or of maintaining a distinction between the former grades C* and B* since 30 April 2006;

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a Commission official in grade AST 6, lodged an application under the attestation procedure for 2006. On 29 March 2007, the appointing authority definitively confirmed its decision of 22 February 2007, after an appeal by the applicant against that decision, not to admit her application under the attestation procedure for 2006.

In support of her action, the applicant claims, firstly, that there has been a manifest error of assessment.

She submits, furthermore, that Article 4(2) of the GIP of Article 45a of the Staff Regulations is unlawful.

In particular, the applicant alleges breach of the principles of equal treatment, of non-discrimination and of proportionality, breach of the principle of sound administration and the principle that recruited officials are entitled to reasonable career prospects, as well as the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.

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