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 C2006/178/79

    Case F-63/06: Action brought on 5 May 2006 — Mascheroni v Commission

    JO C 178, 29.7.2006, p. 42–42 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    29/07/2006; data publicării
    Author:
    Tribunalul Funcţiei Publice
    Form:
    Informații juridice

    29.7.2006   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 178/42

    Action brought on 5 May 2006 — Mascheroni v Commission

    (Case F-63/06)

    (2006/C 178/79)

    Language of the case: Italian

    Parties

    Applicant: Luigi Mascheroni (Vergiate, Italy) (represented by: A. Vianello and G. Orelli, lawyers)

    Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

    Form of order sought

    —

    Find and declare that the conduct of the applicant's hierarchical superior is unlawful.

    —

    Find and declare that such conduct is harmful and that the applicant suffered serious harm as a result thereof.

    —

    Declare that the applicant is entitled to be assisted by the Community in the proceedings that he intends to bring before the national court in respect of the harm suffered.

    —

    Order the defendant to pay the costs

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of his action, the applicant claims that the conduct of his hierarchical superior was assessed by the appointing authority on the basis of unsubstantiated claims. The appointing authority moreover infringed various principles of law, such as the principles of non-discrimination, proportionality, non-abuse of powers, impartiality, objectivity, coherence, fairness and reasonableness.

    Top