This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62009FB0054
Case F-54/09: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 — Lebedef v Commission (Staff cases — Officials — Annual leave — Half-time secondment for the purposes of union representation — Unauthorised absence — Deduction from annual leave entitlement — Article 60 of the Staff Regulations — Action manifestly unfounded)
Case F-54/09: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 — Lebedef v Commission (Staff cases — Officials — Annual leave — Half-time secondment for the purposes of union representation — Unauthorised absence — Deduction from annual leave entitlement — Article 60 of the Staff Regulations — Action manifestly unfounded)
Case F-54/09: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 — Lebedef v Commission (Staff cases — Officials — Annual leave — Half-time secondment for the purposes of union representation — Unauthorised absence — Deduction from annual leave entitlement — Article 60 of the Staff Regulations — Action manifestly unfounded)
SL C 24, 30.1.2010, p. 79–79
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
30.1.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 24/79 |
Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 — Lebedef v Commission
(Case F-54/09) (1)
(Staff cases - Officials - Annual leave - Half-time secondment for the purposes of union representation - Unauthorised absence - Deduction from annual leave entitlement - Article 60 of the Staff Regulations - Action manifestly unfounded)
2010/C 24/150
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: Giorgio Lebedef (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and G. Berscheid, Agents)
Re:
Annulment of several decisions concerning the deduction of 39 days of the applicant’s leave entitlement for 2008.
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded in law;. |
|
2. |
Mr Lebedef is ordered to pay the costs in their entirety. |
(1) OJ C 167, 18.07.2009, p. 28