do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-20/14: Action brought on 8 January 2014 — Nguyen v Parliament and Council
Date: 2014-01-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: allowances and expenses, equal treatment, holiday, indemnification, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, regulations for civil servants, travel, working conditions








C_2014112EN.01004201.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/42





Action brought on 8 January 2014 — Nguyen v Parliament and Council
(Case T-20/14)
2014/C 112/55
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Huynh Duong Vi Nguyen (Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendants: Council of the European Union and European Parliament

Form of order sought







—


Annul provisions including Article 7 (travelling time) of Annex V to the Staff Regulations and Article 8 (travel expenses) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, as amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union [(OJ 2013 L 287, p. 15)], in so far as the entitlement to travel expenses and travelling time is linked to the expatriation or foreign-residence allowance;










—


Order the defendant to pay the applicant the amount of EUR 169 051,96 for the pecuniary loss suffered and the amount of EUR 40 000 for the non-pecuniary harm;










—


Order the defendant to pay damages with late-payment and compensatory interest at the rate of 6,75 % in respect of the pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss suffered;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant — whose place of origin is New York, but who does not receive the expatriation or foreign-residence allowance and, as a result, following the reform of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, loses the right to the lump-sum payment of the travel expenses and the increase in annual leave by additional days of leave for travelling time, relies on five pleas in law, alleging:






—


infringement of an essential procedural requirement and of Article 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union concerning the right to information and the consultation of workers, since the Staff Regulations Committee was side-lined in the review of the Staff Regulations of Officials;










—


infringement of the principle of due regard for established rights, the principles concerning intertemporal law and the principle of legal certainty;










—


infringement of the right to legitimate expectations;










—


infringement of the principle of equal treatment; and










—


infringement of the principle of proportionality.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2014-01-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, EU waters, English Channel, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








C_2014003EN.01000701.xml










8.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 3/7





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
2014/C 3/07
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


10.12.2013




Duration


10.12.2013-31.12.2013




Member State


Belgium




Stock or group of stocks


SRX/07D.




Species


Skates and rays (Rajiformes)




Zone


EU waters of VIId




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


84/TQ39






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2014-01-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, Belgium, EU waters, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, ship's flag








C_2014003EN.01000702.xml










8.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 3/7





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
2014/C 3/08
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


10.12.2013




Duration


10.12.2013-31.12.2013




Member State


Belgium




Stock or group of stocks


HAD/7X7A34




Species


Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus)




Zone


VIIb-k, VIII, IX and X; EU waters of CECAF 34.1.1




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


83/TQ39






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Case T-26/14 P: Appeal brought on 8 January 2014 by Peter Schönberger against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 5 November 2013 in Case F-14/12, Schönberger v Court of Auditors
Date: 2014-01-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Civil Service Tribunal, equal treatment, judgment of the Court (EU), promotion








C_2014093EN.01002601.xml










29.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/26





Appeal brought on 8 January 2014 by Peter Schönberger against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 5 November 2013 in Case F-14/12, Schönberger v Court of Auditors
(Case T-26/14 P)
2014/C 93/45
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Peter Schönberger (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by O. Mader, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Court of Auditors of the European Union

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 5 November 2013 in Case F-14/12 (Schönberger v Court of Auditors);










—


allow the applicant’s claims at first instance;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on seven grounds of appeal.






1.


First ground of appeal: The Civil Service Tribunal failed to give a ruling on the first plea in law, according to which, with only three positions available for promotions in the promotion year 2011, the five-year average for 2007 until 2011 stated in the Staff Regulations was missed by 10 positions.










2.


Second ground of appeal: The appellant claims that, by declaring the promotion years 2010 until 2014 to be the five-year period at issue, the judgment under appeal distorts the position of the parties.










3.


Third ground of appeal: The appellant submits that the applicant’s rights of defence were infringed because he was not given an opportunity to comment on the five-year period considered relevant by the Civil Service Tribunal.










4.


Fourth ground of appeal: The appellant alleges a failure to state reasons because the judgment under appeal does not explain why the five-year period from 2010 until 2014 must be accepted as the reference period.










5.


Fifth ground of appeal: The appellant complains that, by its interpretation of the Staff Regulations, the Civil Service Tribunal goes against the clearly-expressed intention of the legislature to start with a new five-year period in the year 2014.










6.


Sixth ground of appeal: The appellant complains here that, by basing its judgment on an interpretation of the Staff Regulations which was explicitly rejected by the defendant, the Civil Service Tribunal infringed the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.










7.


Seventh ground of appeal: The appellant claims that the principle of equal treatment was applied incorrectly and not in accordance with settled case-law.