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-232/23: Action brought on 3 May 2023 — LW v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0232

62023TN0232

May 3, 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

24.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/37

(Case T-232/23)

(2023/C 261/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LW (represented by: S. Birenbaum-De Guchteneere and M. Tournay, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the appraisal report for the year 2020;

in so far as necessary, annul the decision of the appeal assessor dated 13 July 2022 that confirmed the appraisal report for the year 2020 and rejected the appeal of 11 March 2022 (registered under No 507857);

in so far as necessary, annul the decision of the appointing authority dated 24 January 2023 that rejected the complaint filed by a note dated 7 September 2022 (registered under No. R/422/22);

order compensation for the non-material damage suffered;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 43 of the Staff Regulations and the breach of Article 2(3) of Commission Decision C(2013) 8985 of 16 December 2013 laying down general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations and implementing the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Staff Regulations (the ‘GIP’), Article 5, 6 and 7 of the GIP, manifest error of assessment, misuse of power and breach of the principle of good administration.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 296 TFEU, Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and Article 25 of the Staff Regulations, breach of the duty to state reasons, manifest error and breach of the principle of good administration.

3.Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 21(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and of Article 1d(1) of the Staff Regulations, and breach of the duty to have regard to the welfare of officials.

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