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 62015TN0734

    Case T-734/15 P: Appeal brought on 17 December 2015 by the European Commission against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 October 2015 in Case F-119/14, FE v Commission

    OJ C 68, 22.2.2016, p. 36–37 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    22.2.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 68/36

    Appeal brought on 17 December 2015 by the European Commission against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 October 2015 in Case F-119/14, FE v Commission

    (Case T-734/15 P)

    (2016/C 068/46)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Appellant: European Commission (represented by F. Simonetti and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

    Other party to the proceedings: FE (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

    Form of order sought by the appellant

    The appellant claims that the Court should:

    —

    set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 October 2015 in Case F-119/14, FE v Commission;

    —

    dismiss the action brought by FE in Case F-119/14 as unfounded;

    —

    decide that each of the parties is to bear its own costs relating to the present proceedings;

    —

    order FE to pay the costs of the proceedings brought before the Civil Service Tribunal.

    Grounds of appeal and main arguments

    In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on three grounds.

    1.

    First ground, alleging a number of errors of law committed by the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) and a distortion of the documents in the file in the selection board’s interpretation and application of the condition for admission relating to minimum professional experience.

    2.

    Second ground, alleging an error of law in the CST’s conclusion that the Appointing Authority committed a manifest error of assessment.

    3.

    Third ground, alleging an error of law and a number of breaches of the obligation to state reasons committed by the CST in ordering the Commission to pay EUR 10 000 to the applicant at first instance.
    Top