# C_2014292EN.01005701.xml

| 1.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/57

---

Appeal brought on 9 July 2014 by Christodoulos Alexandrou against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 May 2014 in Case F-140/12, Alexandrou v Commission

(Case T-516/14 P)

2014/C 292/70

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Christodoulos Alexandrou (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by R. Duta, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | without prejudice to any pleas in law and in fact and evidence offered in support to be produced and supplied later, declare the present appeal formally admissible and well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

without prejudice to any pleas in law and in fact and evidence offered in support to be produced and supplied later, declare the present appeal formally admissible and well founded;

| — | consequently, reverse if not set aside the judgment under appeal on the basis of the claims set out; |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, reverse if not set aside the judgment under appeal on the basis of the claims set out;

| — | if necessary, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for it to give judgment in accordance with the judgment to be given on the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

if necessary, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for it to give judgment in accordance with the judgment to be given on the appeal;

| — | order the European Commission to pay all the costs of both sets of proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay all the costs of both sets of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal refused to assess the applicant’s arguments based on Regulation No 1049/2001 (1) and, in particular, Article 9(4) thereof. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal refused to assess the applicant’s arguments based on Regulation No 1049/2001 (1) and, in particular, Article 9(4) thereof.

1

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging misapplication of the judgment of 29 June 2011 in Angioi v Commission, F-7/07, ECR-SC, EU:F:2011:97, inasmuch as this is a restrictive, obsolete line of case-law inapplicable to non-paper-based competitions.
  In the alternative, if the judgment in Angioi v Commission should be found to be applicable, the applicant considers that he satisfies the criteria established by that case-law. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging misapplication of the judgment of 29 June 2011 in Angioi v Commission, F-7/07, ECR-SC, EU:F:2011:97, inasmuch as this is a restrictive, obsolete line of case-law inapplicable to non-paper-based competitions.

Angioi

Commission

In the alternative, if the judgment in Angioi v Commission should be found to be applicable, the applicant considers that he satisfies the criteria established by that case-law.

Angioi

Commission

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging failure by the Civil Service Tribunal to apply Article 44(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging failure by the Civil Service Tribunal to apply Article 44(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal.

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

1

---