CELEX: 62014TN0683
Language: en
Date: 2014-09-16 00:00:00
Title: Case T-683/14 P: Appeal brought on 16 September 2014 by Rhys Morgan against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 8 July 2014 in Case F-26/13, Morgan v OHIM

1.12.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 431/33
            
         Appeal brought on 16 September 2014 by Rhys Morgan against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 8 July 2014 in Case F-26/13, Morgan v OHIM
   (Case T-683/14 P)
   (2014/C 431/56)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Rhys Morgan (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Form of order sought by the appellant
   
   The appellant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 8 July 2014 in Case F-26/13;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the Appraisal Report issued to the appellant in respect of the period from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2011;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay an adequate compensation in the discretion of the Court — not below an amount EUR 500 — to the appellant for the moral and immaterial damages suffered by the appellant as a result of the aforesaid Appraisal Report;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs as regards the proceedings in the Civil Service Tribunal and in the General Court.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on five pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal erred in failing to recognize that a general assessment must be based on the official’s performance during the appraisal period as a whole.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal erred in failing to recognize the gravity of the procedural violations committed by OHIM.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Third plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal committed an error when appreciating the plea in law alleging infringement of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal committed errors when appreciating the plea in law alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment.
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Civil Service Tribunal failed to evaluate properly, or even to examine, the evidence in relation to the plea of misuse of powers.