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-11/23: Action brought on 24 April 2023 — XH v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0011

62023TN0011

April 24, 2023
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

26.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/29

(Case T-11/23)

(2023/C 223/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: XH (represented by: K. Górny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul decision N R/404/22 that upheld the note of 31 May 2022 on implementation of the judgment T-511/18 (1) concerning non-inclusion of the applicant’s name in the list of the promoted officials in 2017 as defined by the note of 13 November 2017 (IA n° 25-2017);

compensate the loss and damages of the applicant (EUR 25 000 for non-material loss and EUR 50 000 for material damage);

order the defendant to pay all the costs and expenses under Article 268 TFEU.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging error of law and the irregularity of the contested promotion procedure 2021: the violation of Decision C(2013) 8968 laying down general provisions implementing Article 45 of the Staff Regulations; the violation of Article 45(1) of the Staff Regulations in the light of Articles 7, 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and the absence of actual comparison of the merits.

2.Second plea in law, alleging the manifest error of assessment in applying the promotion criteria provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations, in the light of Articles 7, 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

3.Third plea in law, while alleging these reasons, the applicant asks for compensation for material and non-material loss which the applicant claims to have suffered following/as a result of the above-mentioned decisions, which resulted in delayed rectification of the applicant’s personal file taken into account in the promotion exercise; existence of irregular elements in the applicant’s promotion file and manifest errors of assessment during the promotion exercises resulted in an absence of consideration of comparative merits of the candidate and non-implementation of the Court judgment due to failure to repeat in its entirety the promotion exercise 2017, in a regular procedure, with a negative impact on the promotion exercise 2021.

(1) Judgment of 25 June 2020, XH v European Commission (Case T-511/18; EU:T:2020:291).

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