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 62011TN0281

Case T-281/11 P: Appeal brought on 3 June 2011 by Diego Canga Fano against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 24 March 2011 in Case F-104/09, Canga Fano v Council

SL C 238, 13.8.2011, p. 20–21 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

Date of document:
03/06/2011
Date lodged:
03/06/2011
Author:
Opći sud
Form:
Pravosudna informacija
Authentic language:
francuski
Link
Select all documents mentioning this document
Case affecting:
Link

13.8.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/20

Appeal brought on 3 June 2011 by Diego Canga Fano against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 24 March 2011 in Case F-104/09, Canga Fano v Council

(Case T-281/11 P)

2011/C 238/37

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Diego Canga Fano (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought by the appellant

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

—

declare the appeal admissible;

—

set aside the judgment delivered on 24 March 2011 by the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union in Case F-104/09;

—

grant the applications for annulment and damages which the applicant brought before the Civil Service Tribunal, subject to the proviso that the applicant would be satisfied with the annulment of the decision adopted and would accept one euro as symbolic compensation for the damage caused to him;

—

order the Council to pay the costs of both instances.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on a single plea in law, divided into three parts and alleging an error of law.

—

In the first part, the applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal interpreted the applicable provisions in a manner contrary to that laid down by the Court of Justice and the General Court in their case-law concerning the appointing authority's discretion (paragraphs 35 and 36 of the judgment under appeal).

—

In the second part, the applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal drew conclusions unjustified in law in its review of the manifest error of assessment (paragraphs 48, 51, 52, 58, 78, and 79 of the judgment under appeal) and contradicted its own criteria, with which it claims to replace the case-law of the Court of Justice and the General Court.

—

In the third part, the applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal's statement of reasons is vitiated by inaccuracies of fact, linked to distortion of, or failure to take account of, evidence put before it (paragraphs 80, 81, 85, 88 and 90 of the judgment under appeal).
Top