CELEX: 62013TA0114
Language: en
Date: 2015-09-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-114/13: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Cerafogli v ECB (Appeals — ECB Staff — Complaint of discrimination and psychological harassment — Decision of the ECB to close the administrative inquiry initiated following the complaint — Refusal of access to evidence during the administrative procedure — Rejection of a request for an order to produce evidence during the judicial proceedings — Right to effective judicial protection — Error of law)

23.11.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 389/28
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Cerafogli v ECB
   (Case T-114/13) (1)
   
   ((Appeals - ECB Staff - Complaint of discrimination and psychological harassment - Decision of the ECB to close the administrative inquiry initiated following the complaint - Refusal of access to evidence during the administrative procedure - Rejection of a request for an order to produce evidence during the judicial proceedings - Right to effective judicial protection - Error of law))
   (2015/C 389/29)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Maria Concetta Cerafogli (Rome, Italy) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: F. Feyerbacher, B. Ehlers, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)
   
      Re:
   
   Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2012 in Cerafogli v ECB (F-43/10, ECR, EU:F:2012:184), seeking the annulment of that judgment.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2012 in Cerafogli v ECB (F-43/10);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Refers the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Reserves the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013.