Search Results

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 2 February 2022.
Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. v European Commission.
Competition – Abuse of a dominant position – Gas markets of Central and Eastern Europe – Decision to make binding the individual commitments proposed by an undertaking – Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Whether the commitments are adequate in the light of the competition concerns initially identified in the statement of objections – Commission decision not to require commitments in relation to some of the initial concerns – Principle of sound administration – Transparency – Obligation to state reasons – Energy-policy objectives of the European Union – Principle of energy solidarity – Misuse of powers.
Case T-616/18.

Court reports – general

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2022:43

Opinion of Advocate General Bobek delivered on 6 October 2021.
Nord Stream 2 AG v European Parliament and Council of the European Union.
Appeal – Energy – Internal market in natural gas – Directive 2009/73/EC – Directive (EU) 2019/692 – Extension of the application of Directive 2009/73 to gas lines to or from third countries – Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Action for annulment – Condition that an applicant must be directly concerned by the measure that forms the subject matter of its action – Lack of discretion as to the obligations imposed on an applicant – Condition that an applicant must be individually concerned by the measure that forms the subject matter of its action – Arrangements for the exemptions and derogations excluding the appellant as the sole operator from their benefit – Request that documents be removed from the case file – Rules on the production of evidence before the EU Courts – Documents internal to the European Union institutions.
Case C-348/20 P.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2021:831

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2018.
CN v European Parliament.
Civil service — Accredited parliamentary assistants — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Article 12a of the Staff Regulations — Psychological harassment — Advisory Committee dealing with complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the European Parliament concerning harassment and its prevention at the workplace — Decision rejecting the request for assistance — Right to be heard — Principle of audi alteram partem — Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses — Refusal of the defendant institution to comply with a measure of inquiry of the General Court.
Case T-76/18.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2018:939

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2018.
CH v European Parliament.
Civil service – Accredited parliamentary assistants – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Request for assistance – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Psychological harassment – Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between accredited parliamentary assistants and Members of the European Parliament and its prevention at the workplace – Decision rejecting the request for assistance – Right to be heard – Audi alteram partem rule – Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses – Refusal by the defendant institution to comply with a measure of inquiry of the General Court.
Case T-83/18.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2018:935

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 20 November 2018.
João Miguel Barata v European Parliament.
Civil service — Officials — Promotion — 2015 promotion procedure — Certification procedure — Exclusion from the definitive list of officials authorised to follow the training programme — Article 45a of the Staff Regulations — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Equal treatment — Rights of the defence.
Case T-854/16.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2018:809

Judgment of the General Court (Appeal Chamber) of 26 November 2015.
Rhys Morgan v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs).
Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Appraisal report — 2010-2011 Appraisal period — Distortion — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment.
Case T-683/14 P.

Court reports – Reports of Staff Cases

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2015:890

Judgment of the General Court (Appeal Chamber) of 12 November 2015.
Christodoulos Alexandrou v European Commission.
Appeal — Civil service — Recruitment — Competition notice EPSO/AD/231/12 — Non-admission to the assessment tests — Obligation to state reasons — Access to documents — Refusal of the request for access to the multiple-choice questions set in the admission tests — Secrecy of the Selection Board’s proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Scope of jurisdiction of the Civil Service Tribunal — Article 270 TFEU — Concept of an act adversely affecting an official — Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations.
Joined Cases T-515/14 P and T-516/14 P.

Court reports – Reports of Staff Cases

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2015:844

ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Appeal Chamber) 8 October 2013.
Christos Michail v European Commission.
Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Request for assistance — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Psychological harassment — Appeal clearly unfounded.
Case T‑597/11 P.

Court reports – Reports of Staff Cases

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2013:542

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 September 2013.
Galp Energia España, SA and Others v European Commission.
Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Spanish market for penetration bitumen — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Annual market-sharing and price-fixing arrangements — Evidence of participation in the cartel — Calculation of the amount of the fine.
Case T‑462/07.

European Court Reports 2013 -00000

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2013:459

ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Appeal Chamber) 21 February 2013.
Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission.
Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Social security — Serious illness — Reimbursement of medical expenses — Commission decision refusing to reimburse medical expenses incurred by the appellant at the rate of 100% — Obligation to state reasons — Article 72 of the Staff Regulations — Criteria adopted by the medical council — Opinion of the medical officer produced during the proceedings — Competence of the head of the settlements office — Appeal manifestly unfounded.
Case T‑85/11 P.

Court reports – Reports of Staff Cases

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2013:90