This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62024TN0416
Case T-416/24: Action brought on 8 August 2024 – ES v Commission
Case T-416/24: Action brought on 8 August 2024 – ES v Commission
Case T-416/24: Action brought on 8 August 2024 – ES v Commission
OJ C, C/2024/5835, 7.10.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5835/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
Official Journal |
EN C series |
C/2024/5835 |
7.10.2024 |
Action brought on 8 August 2024 – ES v Commission
(Case T-416/24)
(C/2024/5835)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: ES (represented by: D. Rovetta, and V. Villante, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
annul the decision of 29 April 2024 of the Directorate General for Human Resources of the European Commission, received by the applicant on 29 April 2024, rejecting the applicant's complaint under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, lodged on 31 October 2023; |
— |
annul the decision of 2 August 2023 of Directorate-General Human Resources and Security of the European Commission rejecting the applicant’s request for review of the decision of the Selection Board not to admit her to the next phase of internal competition COM/AD/03/22 AD5 – Administrators; |
— |
annul the decision of the Selection Board of 26 June 2023, not to invite the applicant to the oral phase of the internal competition COM/AD/03/22 AD5 – Administrators; |
— |
award the applicant 10 000 euros in compensation for the damages incurred due to the unlawful abovementioned contested decisions. In light of the significant distress, time loss, and damage to career prospects caused by the flawed selection process, the applicant seeks equitable compensation. The applicant argues that the decision has caused long-lasting harm to her career development and financial stability, thus justifying the requested compensation of 10 000 euros. |
— |
order the European Commission to bear the costs of the present proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law, alleging a breach of the principle of sound and good administration, a manifest error of assessment by the European Commission, the illegality and inapplicability under Article 277 TFEU of Section 5.1 of Annex III of the Notice of Competition, and a breach of diligence and of the duty of care towards candidates by the European Commission. |
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging a breach of the principle of equal treatment before the law. |
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5835/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)