This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TB0638
Case T-638/20: Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission (Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Open competition — Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) — Non-inclusion on the reserve list — Lis pendens — Manifest inadmissibility)
Case T-638/20: Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission (Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Open competition — Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) — Non-inclusion on the reserve list — Lis pendens — Manifest inadmissibility)
Case T-638/20: Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission (Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Open competition — Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) — Non-inclusion on the reserve list — Lis pendens — Manifest inadmissibility)
OJ C 340, 5.9.2022, p. 41–41
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
5.9.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 340/41 |
Order of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission
(Case T-638/20) (1)
(Action for annulment and for damages - Civil service - Open competition - Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Lis pendens - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2022/C 340/56)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Milanowska and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)
Re:
By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 refused, after review, to include her name on the reserve list of successful candidates in that competition, and, secondly, compensation for the damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
The action is dismissed. |
|
2. |
JP shall pay the costs. |