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-788/16: Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2018 — De Geoffroy and Others v Parliament. (Civil service — Officials — Leave — Adoption of the Parliament’s new Guidelines on leave management — Individual decisions taken under the new guidelines in the interpretation services — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Interests of the service — Plea of illegality)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TA0788

62016TA0788

September 12, 2018
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

22.10.2018

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/21

(Case T-788/16) (*)

((Civil service - Officials - Leave - Adoption of the Parliament’s new Guidelines on leave management - Individual decisions taken under the new guidelines in the interpretation services - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Interests of the service - Plea of illegality))

(2018/C 381/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Dominique De Geoffroy (Brussels, Belgium) and the 14 other applicants whose names are annexed to the judgment (represented initially by N. de Montigny and J.-N. Louis, and subsequently by N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and L. Deneys, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment, first, of Parliament’s guidelines of 21 March 2016 on the implementation, for interpretation services, of Article 4(5) of the internal rules on leave management; secondly, of Parliament’s decision of 12 April 2016 accepting Ms Françoise Joostens’ application for leave, but including the requested days of leave within a quota of three and a half days; thirdly, of Parliament’s decision of 2 June 2016 refusing to grant leave applied for by Mrs Joostens and, fourthly, of the Parliament’s decision of 13 June 2016 refusing to grant leave applied for by Mr Stéphane Grosjean.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 13 June 2016 refusing to grant leave applied for by Mr Stéphane Grosjean.

2.Dismisses the remainder of the action.

3.Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(*)

Language of the case: French

ECLI:EU:C:2018:140

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