This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/074/20
Case C-57/06 P: Appeal brought on 2 February 2006 by Elisabetta Righini against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2005 in Case T-145/04 Elisabetta Righini v Commission of the European Communities
Case C-57/06 P: Appeal brought on 2 February 2006 by Elisabetta Righini against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2005 in Case T-145/04 Elisabetta Righini v Commission of the European Communities
Case C-57/06 P: Appeal brought on 2 February 2006 by Elisabetta Righini against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2005 in Case T-145/04 Elisabetta Righini v Commission of the European Communities
JO C 74, 25.3.2006, p. 11–11
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
25.3.2006 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 74/11 |
Appeal brought on 2 February 2006 by Elisabetta Righini against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2005 in Case T-145/04 Elisabetta Righini v Commission of the European Communities
(Case C-57/06 P)
(2006/C 74/20)
Language of the case: French
An appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2005 in Case T-145/04 Elisabetta Righini v Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 February 2006 by Elisabetta Righini, represented by Eric Boigelot, avocat.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
(1) |
declare the appeal admissible and well founded and, consequently |
(2) |
annul the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-145/04 Righini v Commission delivered on 15 November 2005, |
(3) |
itself give judgment in the case and, upholding the appellant's initial application in Case T-145/04:
|
Pleas in law and main arguments
The pleas in law of the appeal, pursuant to Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, allege a breach of Community law and procedural irregularities before the Court of First Instance infringing the appellant's interests.
The appellant challenges the judgment under appeal in so far as it rejects the plea alleging infringement of Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations, the 1983 decision, the administrative guide and a manifest error of assessment and is, in that regard, flawed by errors of law, by an erroneous and inconsistent statement of reasons and a distortion of the evidence in the file.