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 62013FN0007

Case F-7/13: Action brought on 22 January 2013 — ZZ v Commission

IO C 114, 20.4.2013, p. 47–47 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

20.4.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/47

Action brought on 22 January 2013 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-7/13)

2013/C 114/71

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: E. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision rejecting the claim against the decision taken in response to the applicant’s request, when he was posted to the Commission Delegation in Antananarivo, Madagascar, for compensation for the difficulties encountered when taking up residence in that city.

Form of order sought

—

Annul the decision taken by the Head of Unit within the Directorate-General for Human Resources and Security, concerning the ‘claim under Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations — 0/867/11 — seeking compensation for the difficulties encountered when taking up residence in Antananarivo’, under which that claim is rejected on the ground that ‘the conditions required for such compensation for the non-pecuniary and psychological damage’ were not met since it is apparent from the facts that ‘the Delegation did all it could to resolve the problems encountered, by having additional work done in the initial accommodation and by suggesting to you, during that work, possible alternative accommodation’;

—

Annul the response to the applicant’s claim by which the Appointing Authority rejected his claim on the grounds that (i) ‘there has been no administrative error, and even less unlawful conduct, by the administration in this case’, that (ii) the applicant ‘has not shown even the slightest evidence of the alleged non-pecuniary and psychological damage’ and that (iii) ‘the contested decision dealt at length with the evidence of the administration’s goodwill towards the applicant’ and ‘in accordance with settled case-law, a failure to state reasons can be remedied by an adequate statement of reasons supplied at the stage of the response to the claim’, which is the case here;

—

Order the Commission to pay, in respect of compensation for the applicant’s non-pecuniary and psychological damage, provisionally assessed, reserving the right to increase or decrease it during the proceedings, at EUR 30 000;

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.
Top