This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016TN0455
Case T-455/16 P: Appeal brought on 14 August 2016 by Elia Fernández González against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 June 2016 in Case F-121/15, Fernández González v Commission
Case T-455/16 P: Appeal brought on 14 August 2016 by Elia Fernández González against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 June 2016 in Case F-121/15, Fernández González v Commission
Case T-455/16 P: Appeal brought on 14 August 2016 by Elia Fernández González against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 June 2016 in Case F-121/15, Fernández González v Commission
IO C 383, 17.10.2016, p. 17–18
(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:
- 14/08/2016
- Date lodged:
- 14/08/2016
- 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 62015FJ0121
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
17.10.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 383/17 |
Appeal brought on 14 August 2016 by Elia Fernández González against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 June 2016 in Case F-121/15, Fernández González v Commission
(Case T-455/16 P)
(2016/C 383/24)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Appellant: Elia Fernández González (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by M. Casado García-Hirschfeld and É. Boigelot, lawyers)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
Form of order sought by the appellant
|
— |
Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) in Case F-121/15 delivered on 14 June 2016 in Elia Fernández González v European Commission; |
|
— |
Order the Commission to pay all the costs, including those incurred before the CST. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on a single plea in law, alleging a distortion of the facts by the judgment under appeal and manifest errors of assessment resulting in an imprecise reasoning in law. The appellant contests in particular paragraphs 29 to 31 and 36 to 39 of the judgment under appeal.
