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-271/20: Action brought on 8 May 2020 — JS v SRB

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TN0271

62020TN0271

May 8, 2020
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 247/20

(Case T-271/20)

(2020/C 247/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: JS (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of 14 June 2019 decision communicated to the applicant on 17 June 2019 and rejecting his request for assistance of 2 May 2019;

annul in addition, and so far as necessary, the decision communicated to the applicant on 29 January 2020 rejecting his complaint of 14 September 2019;

order compensation of the non-material prejudice suffered by the applicant which can be evaluated, ex aequo et bono, at EUR 20 000;

order furthermore compensation of his quantified and evidenced material prejudice evaluated at EUR 77 408;

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 a breach of Article 12a(3) of the Staff Regulations and of Article 2.1 of the SRB policy adopted by decision of the plenary session of the SRB of 29 November 2017. (1)

2.Second plea in law, alleging a breach of Article 24 of the Staff Regulations and of Article 7.3 of the said SRB policy.

3.Third plea in law, alleging a breach of the duty of care. With regard to the request for compensation, the applicant relies on the fault committed by the defendant, the damage he suffered and the link between the fault and the damage.

Policy on protecting the dignity of the person and preventing psychological harassment and sexual harassment.

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