do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-353/22: Action brought on 1 June 2022 — XH v Commission
Date: 2022-06-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, promotion, protection of privacy, staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2022294EN.01003802.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/38






Action brought on 1 June 2022 — XH v Commission
(Case T-353/22)
(2022/C 294/55)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: XH (represented by: K. Górny-Salwarowska, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 10 November 2021 (IA no 31-2021) concerning non-inclusion of the applicant’s name in the list of the promoted officials in 2021, upheld by the decision No R/72/22 issued by the Appointing Authority on 8 June 2022 in response to the complaint filed by the applicant on 5 February 2021;










—


compensate loss and damages of the applicant;










—


order the defendant the payment of all the costs and expenses under Article 268 TFEU.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging error of law and the irregularity of the contested promotion procedure 2021: the violation of GIP 45 Decision C (2013) 8968 laying down general provisions implementing Article 45 of the Staff Regulations; the violation of Article 45(1) Staff Regulations in the light of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and the absence of actual comparison of the merits.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment in applying the promotion criteria provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations, in the light of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Case C-352/22: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Hamm (Germany) lodged on 1 June 2022 — Criminal proceedings against A.
Date: 2022-06-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to refugees, extradition, foreign national, international human rights law, international protection, interpretation of the law, refugee








C_2022359EN.01002601.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/26






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Hamm (Germany) lodged on 1 June 2022 — Criminal proceedings against A.
(Case C-352/22)
(2022/C 359/28)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Hamm

Parties to the main proceedings:


Requested person: A.

Applicant: Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm

Questions referred

Must Article 9(2) and (3) of Directive 2013/32/EU, (1) in conjunction with Article 21(1) of Directive 2011/95/EU, (2) be interpreted as meaning that the final recognition of a person as a refugee within the meaning of the Geneva Convention on Refugees in another Member State of the European Union is binding for the purposes of the extradition procedure in the Member State requested to extradite such a person on account of the obligation under EU law to interpret national law in conformity with the directives (third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU and Article 4(3) TEU), that is to say, is binding in such a way that extradition of the person to the third country or country of origin is thereby necessarily precluded until his or her recognition as a refugee has been revoked or has expired?


(1)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60).

(2)  Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (recast) (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9).
Case T-334/22: Action brought on 1 June 2022 — Danske Fragtmænd v Commission
Date: 2022-06-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Denmark, State aid, aid to undertakings, capital increase, control of State aid, postal service, reimbursement of aid








C_2022326EN.01001901.xml










29.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/19






Action brought on 1 June 2022 — Danske Fragtmænd v Commission
(Case T-334/22)
(2022/C 326/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Danske Fragtmænd A/S (Åbyhøj, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the application admissible and well founded;










—


annul Commission Decision (EU) 2022/459 of 10 September 2021 (1); and










—


order the Commission to pay its own costs and those of the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission erred by considering that the grant of approximately SEK 5,67 billion to Post Danmark foreseen by the October 2017 Agreement consists of several separate measures, namely (i) one measure covering the grant by Denmark to Post Danmark of SEK 1,683 billion for its redundancy costs; (ii) one measure covering the grant by Denmark of SEK 267 million to PostNord AB (to be transferred to Post Danmark); (iii) one measure covering the grant by Sweden of SEK 400 million to PostNord AB (to be transferred to Post Danmark); and (iv) one measure covering PostNord Group’s injection to Post Danmark of DKK 2,339 billion (SEK 3,3 billion).










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that, even if the capital injection by PostNord Group to Post Danmark of DKK 2,339 billion (SEK 3,3 billion) may be considered as a separate measure (quod non), the Commission erred by finding that the capital injection granted to Post Danmark by PostNord Group did not confer an advantage on Post Danmark.






(1)  Commission Decision (EU) 2022/459 of 10 September 2021 on the State aid SA.49668 (2019/C) (ex 2017/FC) and SA.53403 (2019/C) (ex 2017/FC) implemented by Denmark and Sweden for PostNord AB and Post Danmark A/S (notified under document C(2021) 6568) (OJ 2022 L 93, p. 146).