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-778/21: Action brought on 15 December 2021 — Folkertsma v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0778

62021TN0778

December 15, 2021
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 84/42

(Case T-778/21)

(2022/C 84/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rommert Folkertsma (Zierikzee, Netherlands) (represented by: L. Levi and P. Baudoux, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

recognise the non-contractual liability of the defendant;

grant a compensation for the material and moral prejudice suffered by the applicant due to the defendant’s unlawful conduct;

if need be, annul the decision of the defendant dated 5 October 2021, rejecting its liability in the applicant’s removal from the SUBRATA Project in the Philippines; and,

order the defendant to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies, as to the unlawful conduct of the defendant, on three pleas in law:

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s right to be heard.

2.Second plea in law, alleging the breach of the defendant’s duty to give reasons.

3.Third plea in law, alleging the infringement of the defendant’s duty of diligence.

The damage suffered by the applicant is actual, certain and quantifiable. It consists in the loss of income for the duration of the service contract that the applicant had, then in the loss of a serious chance to have the contract renewed for another two years at its initial term and thirdly, to the breach to the applicant’s good name. The applicant searches the compensation of his material prejudice and of his moral prejudice.

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