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-375/23: Action brought on 10 July 2023 — Di Prinzio v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0375

62023TN0375

July 10, 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

Series C

C/2023/21

9.10.2023

(Case T-375/23)

(C/2023/21)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Clara Di Prinzio (Rome, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

declare non-existent or annul in its entirety, the measure of which the applicant was informed by the contested communication (File No D. 305484), adopted by the Head of the Members’ Salaries and Social Entitlements Unit of the European Parliament’s Directorate-General for Finance — and with which the European Parliament redetermined the applicant’s retirement pension rights and ordered the recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation — and notified by registered letter received on 25 May 2023;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

First plea in law, alleging a lack of competence of the author of the act adversely affecting a member of staff, infringement of essential procedural requirements by failing to state reasons and the consequent infringement of Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Second plea in law, alleging the lack of legal basis and a misapplication of Article 75 of the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members.

Third plea in law, alleging manifest infringement of the principle of legal certainty and the principle of protection of legitimate expectations and acquired rights, and the consequent infringement of Article 1 of the Additional Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/21/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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