- 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-638/20: Action brought on 15 October 2020 — JP v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TN0638
62020TN0638
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
14.12.2020
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 433/62
(Case T-638/20)
(2020/C 433/77)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the decision of 17 July 2019 not placing the applicant on the reserve list of successful candidates of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 — Administrators (AD7), along with the decision of 10 December 2019 rejecting the Applicant’s request for review;
—annul the decision of 7 July 2020 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 5 March 2020;
—order the defendant to compensate the damages suffered by the applicant; and,
—order the defendant to pay all the costs.
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, firstly, an infringement of the principle according to which the members of the Selection Board shall have the necessary abilities to make an objective assessment of the performance and professional qualifications of the candidate during the field-related interview, secondly, a breach of the principle of equal treatment, and finally, a breach of the principle of legitimate expectations.
2.Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle according to which the composition of the selection board must be sufficiently stable.
3.Third plea in law, alleging several manifest errors of assessment.