Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62012FN0126

    Case F-126/12: Action brought on 26 October 2012 — ZZ v Commission

    OJ C 71, 9.3.2013, p. 29–29 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    26/10/2012
    Date lodged:
    26/10/2012
    Author:
    Civil Service Tribunal
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    French

    9.3.2013   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 71/29

    Action brought on 26 October 2012 — ZZ v Commission

    (Case F-126/12)

    2013/C 71/50

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Boury, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

    Application to annul the response to the complaint by which the applicant sought, firstly, the acknowledgement by the Commission that only certain documents in his personal administrative file may be transferred to the pre-trial judge at the Court of First Instance of Brussels, and, secondly, the finding of unlawfulness of the concealment from that Court of the decision of 2 February 2001.

    Form of order sought

    —

    Annul the Appointing Authority’s response of 24 August 2012 to complaint No R/367/12;

    —

    acknowledge the unlawfulness of the concealment from the Belgian courts of his genuine administrative personal file, and of the Appointing Authority’s decision of 2 February 2001 and of all the documents relating to it, documents which were demanded from the Commission by the Belgian criminal courts;

    —

    acknowledge the unlawfulness of the transfer to the Court of Brussels of confidential documents produced without any legal check, and outside the rules of the Staff Regulations, within the former Unit ADMIN B9 responsible for the administrative investigation opened on 2 February 2001 by the Appointing Authority, in infringement of the rules of the Staff Regulations;

    —

    acknowledge the unlawfulness of the intervention in the investigation of his complaint to the Court of Brussels and with an objective which was detrimental to him by Commission officials who had neither the authority nor the competence to do so;

    —

    acknowledge that throughout that case he, as well as his family, was a victim of serious infringements of his fundamental human rights and that he suffered serious professional, non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage which is reparable only with difficulty and that, therefore, he is entitled to obtain compensation for that damage.
    Top