- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-511/21: Order of the General Court of 22 December 2023 — TB v ENISA (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Reorganisation of ENISA — Decision to renew a fixed-term contract — Assignment to non-managerial duties — Partial annulment — Non-severability — No challengeable act — Inadmissibility)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TB0511
62021TB0511
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
Official Journal of the European Union
Series C
C/2024/2029
18.3.2024
(Case T-511/21) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Reorganisation of ENISA - Decision to renew a fixed-term contract - Assignment to non-managerial duties - Partial annulment - Non-severability - No challengeable act - Inadmissibility)
(C/2024/2029)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: TB (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) (represented by: I. Taurina, G. Pappa and C. Chalanouli, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)
Re:
By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in the first place, annulment of the decision of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) renewing her employment contract in so far as it reassigned her to a non-managerial post (‘the contested decision’), as formalised by the amendment to the contract received on 13 October 2020 and the signature of that amendment on 26 October 2020. In the second place, the applicant seeks annulment, in so far as necessary, of the decision of ENISA of 12 May 2021 by which the Management Board of ENISA rejected her complaint of 12 January 2021 against the contested decision. In the third place, the applicant seeks compensation for the material and non-material damage she claims to have suffered as a result of the adoption of those decisions.
Operative part of the order
1.The action is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.TB shall pay the costs.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2029/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)