Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62009TA0260

Case T-260/09: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2010 — OHIM v Simões Dos Santos (Appeal — Cross-appeal — Civil service — Officials — Promotion — 2003 promotion procedure — Merit points reset at zero and their total recalculated — Compliance with a judgment of the General Court — Res judicata — Legal basis — Non-retroactivity — Legitimate expectation — Material damage — Loss of opportunity for promotion — Non-material damage)

SL C 13, 15.1.2011, p. 24–25 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

15.1.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/24


Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2010 — OHIM v Simões Dos Santos

(Case T-260/09) (1)

(Appeal - Cross-appeal - Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2003 promotion procedure - Merit points reset at zero and their total recalculated - Compliance with a judgment of the General Court - Res judicata - Legal basis - Non-retroactivity - Legitimate expectation - Material damage - Loss of opportunity for promotion - Non-material damage)

2011/C 13/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: I. de Medrano Caballero, agent, and D. Waelbroeck, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Simões Dos Santos (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: A. Creus Carreras, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 5 May 2009 in Case F-27/08 Simões Dos Santos v OHIM, not published in the ECR, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Paragraphs 2 to 25 of the operative part of the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 5 May 2009 in Case F-27/08 Simões Dos Santos v OHIM are annulled.

2.

The main appeal and the cross appeal are dismissed as to the remainder.

3.

The case is referred back to the Civil Service Tribunal.

4.

The costs are reserved.


(1)  OJ C 220, 12.9.2009.


Top