CELEX: 62011TN0630
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-630/11 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Peter Strobl against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 September 2011 in Case F-56/05 Strobl v Commission

18.2.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 49/28
            
         Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Peter Strobl against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 September 2011 in Case F-56/05 Strobl v Commission
   (Case T-630/11 P)
   2012/C 49/51
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Peter Strobl (Besozzo, Italy) (represented by H.-J. Rüber, lawyer)
   
      Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Council of the European Union
   
      Form of order sought by the appellant
   
   
               —
            
            
               Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 September 2011 in Strobl v Commission;
            
         
               —
            
            
               declare the defendant’s grading decision in [Mr Strobl’s] appointment of 7 October 2004 incorrect and annul it;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to cease to discriminate against Mr Strobl and to compensate him for the disadvantage suffered;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs of the entire proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of his appeal, the appellant relies on the following pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               Incorrect findings of fact by the Civil Service Tribunal with regard to the professional experience required for the appellant’s post.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Incorrect findings of fact by the Civil Service Tribunal and contradictory interpretation of the evidence with regard to the grading of the appellant and, to that extent, infringement of the obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Infringement by the Civil Service Tribunal of the obligation to state reasons in relation to its rejection of a number of the appellant’s complaints.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Infringement by the Civil Service Tribunal of the obligation to state reasons with regard to the review of the appellant’s step in grade.
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Failure on the part of the Civil Service Tribunal to state reasons with regard to the applicability of the relevant case-law.