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 62011FN0126

    Case F-126/11: Action brought on 28 November 2011 — ZZ v Commission

    OJ C 174, 16.6.2012, p. 31–31 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    16.6.2012   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 174/31

    Action brought on 28 November 2011 — ZZ v Commission

    (Case F-126/11)

    2012/C 174/49

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

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

    Defendant: European Commission

    Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

    The application to annul the decision of the Appointing Authority as far as it imposes a disciplinary measure in the form of a written reprimand on the applicant.

    Form of order sought

    —

    annul the Appointing Authority’s decision CMS 10/038 to issue a written reprimand to the applicant, and Appointing Authority Decision No R/393/11 which confirmed the first decision;

    —

    declare that the written reprimand issued by the Appointing Authority to the applicant, without the production of cogent evidence of the alleged acts of harassment of which his is accused and without a proper independent, impartial and fair investigation being carried out which would establish the truth about the alleged harassment which the applicant is accused of committing against his colleague, is a discretionary sanction which constitutes an act of discrimination by the Appointing Authority against the applicant;

    —

    declare that throughout the case the applicant has suffered serious material and non-material damage and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for that damage, which is to be determined according to the criteria to be laid down by the Tribunal;

    —

    declare, in particular that throughout the proceedings and the previous connected cases, the applicant has been the victim of serious infringements of his human rights, rights enshrined in the Treaties, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for those infringements, which is for the Tribunal to decide.
    Top