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-630/11 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Peter Strobl against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 September 2011 in Case F-56/05 Strobl v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0630

62011TN0630

December 6, 2011
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

18.2.2012

Official Journal of the European Union

C 49/28

(Case T-630/11 P)

2012/C 49/51

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Peter Strobl (Besozzo, Italy) (represented by H.-J. Rüber, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought by the appellant

Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 September 2011 in Strobl v Commission;

declare the defendant’s grading decision in [Mr Strobl’s] appointment of 7 October 2004 incorrect and annul it;

order the defendant to cease to discriminate against Mr Strobl and to compensate him for the disadvantage suffered;

order the defendant to pay the costs of the entire proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his appeal, the appellant relies on the following pleas in law.

1.Incorrect findings of fact by the Civil Service Tribunal with regard to the professional experience required for the appellant’s post.

2.Incorrect findings of fact by the Civil Service Tribunal and contradictory interpretation of the evidence with regard to the grading of the appellant and, to that extent, infringement of the obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based.

3.Infringement by the Civil Service Tribunal of the obligation to state reasons in relation to its rejection of a number of the appellant’s complaints.

4.Infringement by the Civil Service Tribunal of the obligation to state reasons with regard to the review of the appellant’s step in grade.

5.Failure on the part of the Civil Service Tribunal to state reasons with regard to the applicability of the relevant case-law.

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