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-671/16: Action brought on 20 September 2016 — Vincent Villeneuve v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TN0671

62016TN0671

September 20, 2016
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

14.11.2016

Official Journal of the European Union

C 419/52

(Case T-671/16)

(2016/C 419/69)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Vincent Villeneuve (Montpellier, France) (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the selection board for Open Competition EPSO/AD/303/15 (AD 7) of 5 November 2015 concerning the applicant;

order the defendant to pay the costs of the present proceedings pursuant to Article 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons, in that the contested decision does not explain the reasons why the applicant does not have sufficient professional experience in the field of the competition for his application to be admitted to the next stage of that competition.

2.Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment by the selection board, in that the verification of the minimum professional experience in the field of the competition which the selection board was initially required to conduct could not relate to the applicant’s suitability for the vacancy and to the selection criteria set out in that regard given that the verification stage for the admission criteria takes place during the final stages of the competition.

3.Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 27 and 29(1) of the Staff Regulations, Article 5 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations and paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 of the General rules governing open competitions and also procedural defects and a consequent manifest error of assessment.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment of candidates with regard to the selection based on qualifications.

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