- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-164/20: Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2023 — BG v Parliament (Civil service — Accredited parliamentary assistants — Psychological harassment — Article 12a of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Refusal of the request — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the Parliament and its prevention at the workplace — Right to be heard — Refusal to disclose the report of the Advisory Committee — Liability — Non-material harm)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TA0164
62020TA0164
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 104/23
(Case T-164/20) (*)
(Civil service - Accredited parliamentary assistants - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Refusal of the request - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the Parliament and its prevention at the workplace - Right to be heard - Refusal to disclose the report of the Advisory Committee - Liability - Non-material harm)
(2023/C 104/36)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: BG (represented by: A. Tymen, L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)
Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Windisch, C. González Argüelles and I. Lázaro Betancor, acting as Agents)
Re:
By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Parliament of 20 May 2019 by which the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment refused her request for assistance and, second, compensation for the non-material harm she claims to have suffered.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 20 May 2019 refusing the request for assistance lodged by BG;
2.Orders the Parliament to pay BG, in respect of non-material harm suffered, an amount of EUR 2 500;
3.Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.
(*)
Language of the case: English.
ECLI:EU:C:2023:140
* * *
(*) Language of the case: English.