- 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-525/16: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2018 — GQ and Others v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Reform of the Staff Regulations — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 — Types of posts — Transitional rules on grading in the types of posts — Article 31 of Annexe XIII to the Staff Regulations — Assistants in transition — Promotion under Article 45 of the Staff Regulations only allowed within the career streams corresponding to the type of post occupied — Access to the ‘senior assistant’ (AST 10) type of post exclusively in accordance with the procedure under Article 4 and Article 29(1) of the Staff Regulations — Equal treatment — Loss of eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade — Legitimate expectations)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TA0525
62016TA0525
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
11.3.2019
Official Journal of the European Union
C 93/43
(Case T-525/16) (*)
((Civil service - Officials - Reform of the Staff Regulations - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Types of posts - Transitional rules on grading in the types of posts - Article 31 of Annexe XIII to the Staff Regulations - Assistants in transition - Promotion under Article 45 of the Staff Regulations only allowed within the career streams corresponding to the type of post occupied - Access to the ‘senior assistant’ (AST 10) type of post exclusively in accordance with the procedure under Article 4 and Article 29(1) of the Staff Regulations - Equal treatment - Loss of eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade - Legitimate expectations))
(2019/C 93/53)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicants: GQ and the 7 other applicants whose names appear in the annex to the judgment (represented by T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J. Currall and G. Gattinara, subsequently by G. Gattinara and C. Berardis-Kayser and finally by G. Gattinara and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by M. Dean and N. Chemaï, subsequently by J. Steele, L. Deneys and J. Van Pottelberge, acting as Agents); and the Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Bauer and E Rebasti and subsequently by M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking annulment of the Commission’s decisions by which the appointing authority of that institution classified the applicants in the ‘senior assistant’ type of post, with the consequence that, with effect from 1 January 2014, they were no longer eligible for promotion to the next higher grade, as confirmed by the decisions of that authority of 3 July 2014 rejecting the complaints lodged by the applicants between 11 and 28 March 2014.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders GQ and the other officials of the European Commission whose names are listed in the annex to pay the costs;
3.Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.
(*) Language of the case: French.
(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-111/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).