Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62024TN0355

    Case T-355/24: Action brought on 16 July 2024 – EM v Europol

    OJ C, C/2024/5639, 30.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5639/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)

    ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5639/oj

    European flag

    Official Journal
    of the European Union

    EN

    C series


    C/2024/5639

    30.9.2024

    Action brought on 16 July 2024 – EM v Europol

    (Case T-355/24)

    (C/2024/5639)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: EM (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    annul the decision of 11 October 2023 rejecting the request for assistance submitted under Article 90(1) and Article 24 of the Staff Regulations; (1)

    annul, to the extent necessary, the decision rejecting the complaint dated 12 April 2024, in so far as it supplements or amends the decision of 11 October 2023;

    order the defendant to pay compensation to the applicant in respect of the loss resulting from the excessive duration of the procedure assessed ex aequo et bono at EUR 10 000;

    order the defendant to pay all the costs of the case.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

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

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging infringement of the definition of harassment and the existence of contradictions between the statement of reasons and the findings of the investigation report.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging irregularities in connection with the conduct of the administrative investigation and the commission of errors in the assessment of the facts submitted and of the information provided to the investigators.

    3.

    Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the adversarial principle and of the right to be heard.

    4.

    Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment.

    5.

    Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the reasonable time principle.


    (1)  Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, established by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of 29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities and instituting special measures temporarily applicable to officials of the Commission (OJ English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 30).


    ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5639/oj

    ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)


    Top