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-228/11 P: Appeal on 26 April 2011 by Florence Barbin against the judgment of 15 February 2011 by the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-68/09 Barbin v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0228

62011TN0228

April 26, 2011
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

16.7.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/26

(Case T-228/11 P)

2011/C 211/56

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Florence Barbin (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal, and D. Abreu Caldas, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

Forms of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 15 February 2011 in Case F-68/09 Barbin v Parliament, dismissing the action by the appellant;

annul the decision of 10 November 2008 not to promote the appellant to Grade AD12 in the 2006 promotions year;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By this appeal, the appellant seeks the annulment of the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 15 February 2011 in Case F-68/09 Barbin v Parliament, in which the Civil Service Tribunal dismissed her action for the annulment of the European Parliament’s decision of 10 November 2008 not to promote her to Grade AD12 in the promotion year 2006.

In support of her appeal, the appellant makes two pleas in law, claiming:

error of law in that the Civil Service Tribunal wrongly took the view that the Parliament did not make a manifest error of assessment in deciding, first, that the latter was not required to comply with the internal rules on staff reports and promotions, and, second, that it could lawfully promote officials having fewer merit points than the appellant on the strength of grounds not taking account of the system for comparing the respective merits of officials eligible for promotion such as that established by the decisions of the Bureau and the Secretary General of the European Parliament;

infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the obligation of the Parliament to prove that the appellant suffered no discrimination on account of exercising her right to parental leave.

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