CELEX: 62011TA0644
Language: en
Date: 2014-07-04 00:00:00
Title: Case T-644/11 P: Judgment of the General Court of 4 July 2014  — Kimman v Commission (Appeal — Cross-appeal — Civil service — Officials — Reports — Appraisal report — 2009 appraisal exercise — Rule that the application corresponds to the complaint — Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations — Opinion of the ad-hoc committee — Distortion — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment)

25.8.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 282/26
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 4 July 2014 — Kimman v Commission
   (Case T-644/11 P) (1)
   
   ((Appeal - Cross-appeal - Civil service - Officials - Reports - Appraisal report - 2009 appraisal exercise - Rule that the application corresponds to the complaint - Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations - Opinion of the ad-hoc committee - Distortion - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment))
   2014/C 282/33
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Eugène Emile Marie Kimman (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, Agents)
   
      Re:
   
   Appeal against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 29 September 2011 in Case F-74/10 Kimman v Commission, not yet published, seeking annulment of that judgment.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   
      The Court:
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 29 September 2011 in Case F-74/10 Kimman v Commission (F-74/10), first, in that it declares admissible the second plea in law, the six first parts of the third plea in law and the fourth plea in law, except the claim that the work done by the applicant in the interest of the institution had not been taken into account, raised by the appellant in the proceedings at first instance and, second, in that it orders the European Commission to bear, in addition to its own costs, one quarter of the appellant’s costs related to those proceedings;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Dismisses the main appeal;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Rejects the action brought by Mr Eugène Emile Marie Kimman before the Civil Service Tribunal;
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Orders Mr Kimman to bear the entirety of the costs both at first instance and of the main appeal;
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Orders each party to bear its own costs in the cross-appeal.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.