EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015TN0719
Case T-719/15 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2015 by LP against the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 September 2015 in Case F-73/14 LP v Europol
Case T-719/15 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2015 by LP against the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 September 2015 in Case F-73/14 LP v Europol
Case T-719/15 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2015 by LP against the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 September 2015 in Case F-73/14 LP v Europol
IO C 59, 15.2.2016, p. 37–38
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 08/12/2015
- Date lodged:
- 08/12/2015
- Author:
- Cúirt Ghinearálta
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Fraincis
- Type of procedure:
- Achomharc, Cásanna foirne
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Request to review the judgment 62014FO0073
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
15.2.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 59/37 |
Appeal brought on 8 December 2015 by LP against the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 September 2015 in Case F-73/14 LP v Europol
(Case T-719/15 P)
(2016/C 059/43)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Appellant: LP (The Hague, Netherlands) (represented by M. Velardo, lawyer)
Other party to the proceedings: European Police Office (Europol)
Form of order sought by the appellant
The applicant claims that the General Court should:
|
— |
Set aside the order of 28 September 2015 in Case F-73/14 and give a ruling on the case or, in the alternative, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal; |
|
— |
Order Europol to pay the cost of both parties |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on a single plea in law, alleging that the contested order is vitiated by several errors of law and infringes EU law, in particular in respect of the obligation to provide a statement of reasons, the duty of care and the manifest error of assessment.
