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-342/22: Order of the General Court of 29 March 2023 — Oxyzoglou v Commission (Civil service — Contract staff — Retirement pensions — Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the EU — Transfer to the EU scheme — Additional years of pensionable service — Action for annulment — Claim for repayment of part of the capital transferred — Unjust enrichment — Time limit for complaints — Manifest inadmissibility — Application for an order — Manifest lack of jurisdiction)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022TB0342

62022TB0342

March 29, 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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/46

(Case T-342/22) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)

(Civil service - Contract staff - Retirement pensions - Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the EU - Transfer to the EU scheme - Additional years of pensionable service - Action for annulment - Claim for repayment of part of the capital transferred - Unjust enrichment - Time limit for complaints - Manifest inadmissibility - Application for an order - Manifest lack of jurisdiction)

(2023/C 179/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Despina Oxyzoglou (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Grisay and A. Ansay, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Brauhoff and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Interveners, in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Van Pottelberge and M. Windisch, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and X. Chamodraka, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, principally, (i) to have set aside the decision of the European Commission of 11 March 2022 rejecting her complaint which sought annulment of the opinion of 21 April 2020 determining her rights to a retirement pension, and (ii) to have her file referred to the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment in order to determine the amount to be returned to her, and in the alternative, to have the Commission be ordered to pay the sum of EUR 30 439,50, in respect of unjust enrichment, and, in the further alternative, to request the Commission to clarify its calculation method and to apply it in the present case.

Operative part of the order

1.The action is dismissed.

2.Ms. Despina Oxyzoglou shall bear her own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

3.The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union shall each bear their own costs.

(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 284, 25.7.2022.

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