CELEX: 62017TA0061
Language: en
Date: 2018-09-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-61/17: Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2018 — Selimovic v Parliament (Law governing the institutions — European Parliament — Psychological harassment — Decision of the President of the Parliament imposing on a Member of the European Parliament the penalty of a reprimand — Article 166 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament — Right to good administration — Right of access to the file — Obligation to state reasons — Legal certainty — Misuse of power — Non-contractual liability)

29.10.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 392/23
            
         
      Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2018 — Selimovic v Parliament
      (Case T-61/17) (1)
      
      ((Law governing the institutions - European Parliament - Psychological harassment - Decision of the President of the Parliament imposing on a Member of the European Parliament the penalty of a reprimand - Article 166 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament - Right to good administration - Right of access to the file - Obligation to state reasons - Legal certainty - Misuse of power - Non-contractual liability))
      (2018/C 392/27)
      Language of the case: Swedish
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Jasenko Selimovic (Hägersten, Sweden) (represented initially by: B. Leidhammar and subsequently by: S. Scheiman, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: O. Caisou-Rousseau, L. Tapper Brandberg and E. Taneva, acting as Agents)
      
         Re:
      
      First, application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decisions of the President of the Parliament of 22 November 2016 and the decision of the Bureau of the Parliament of 12 December 2016 imposing the penalty of a reprimand on the applicant and, secondly, application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      The Court:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Dismisses the request for an expedited procedure as manifestly inadmissible;
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Dismisses the action;
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Orders Mr Jasenko Selimovic to pay the costs.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.