Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document C2007/211/74

Case T-233/07 P: Appeal brought on 5 July 2007 by Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 25 April 2007 in Case F-71/06 Lebedef-Caponi v Commission

OJ C 211, 8.9.2007, p. 39–39 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

8.9.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/39

Appeal brought on 5 July 2007 by Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 25 April 2007 in Case F-71/06 Lebedef-Caponi v Commission

(Case T-233/07 P)

(2007/C 211/74)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi (Senningerberg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) (represented by F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought by the appellant

—

Annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 25 April 2007 in case F-71/06;

—

Grant the form of order sought by the applicant at first instance and, consequently, declare the appeal in Case F-71/06 admissible and well-founded;

—

Alternatively, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;

—

Make an order as to the costs, expenses and fees and order the Commission to pay them.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In her appeal, the applicant seeks the annulment of the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal dismissing the action by which she sought the annulment of her Career Development Report (CDR) for the period 1.1.2004-31.12.2004.

In support of her appeal, the applicant submits that the Civil Service Tribunal has made errors of interpretation and assessment of the facts which led it to hold that the critical assessment of the applicant in the contested CDR was well-founded.

Top