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 62009FN0075

    Case F-75/09: Action brought on 11 September 2009 –Wenig v Commission

    SL C 267, 7.11.2009, p. 85–85 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    7.11.2009   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 267/85

    Action brought on 11 September 2009 –Wenig v Commission

    (Case F-75/09)

    2009/C 267/155

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: Fritz Harald Wenig (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: Georges-Albert Dal and Dominique Voillemot, lawyers)

    Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

    Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

    First, application for annulment of the implied decision rejecting the applicant's request of 23 September 2008 for assistance from the European Commission and, second, an application for annulment of the rejection decision of the European Commission of 14 November 2008.

    Form of order sought

    —

    annul the implied decision rejecting the applicant's request of 23 September 2008 that the European Commission assist him in relation to the infringement of his rights which he suffered by reason of the publication of an offensive and defamatory article published on 7 September 2008 on the website of the British daily newspaper The Sunday Times and the unlawful actions of its authors;

    —

    should that decision be regarded as an express decision refusing the request for assistance made by the applicant, annul the Commission's decision of 14 November 2008 in so far as it rejects the applicant's request for assistance in the context of the organisation of the ‘Worst Conflicts of Interest Award’ calling him into question and infringing his integrity and the presumption of innocence;

    —

    order the defendant to pay compensation for the financial and non-material loss suffered;

    —

    order the defendant to pay the costs.
    Top