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-627/18: Action brought on 19 October 2018 — ZK v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0627

62018TN0627

October 19, 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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/34

(Case T-627/18)

(2019/C 4/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZK (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Annul the confirmatory decision of the selection board of competition EPSO/AD/323/16 of 1 February 2018 not to list the applicant as a successful candidate;

In so far as necessary, annul the confirmed decision of the competition’s selection board of 12 December 2017;

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging, first, infringement of Article 30 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) and Article 3 of Annex III thereto and, second, infringement of the rules governing the organisation of the competition’s tests. In that regard, the applicant claims in particular that only two members of the selection board were present at her interviews, and not the selection board composed of the president and six members. Furthermore, she points out that the president took part in the proceedings of the selection board only as a mere observer, which also infringes the provisions of the Staff Regulations.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination which vitiate the contested decision in the present case, owing to the lack of stability of the selection board and reliance on back-up assessors who were not given any specific assessor training.

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