Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(Action for annulment — Civil service — Officials — Mission expenses —Act not open to challenge — Act not adversely affecting an official — Irregular nature of the pre-litigation procedure — Premature action — Inadmissibility)
European External Action Service (EEAS), represented by S. Marquardt and R. Spac, acting as Agents,
ACTION based on Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the part of the decision of 30 November 2018 by which the EEAS Appointing Authority rejected the applicant’s complaint of 27 July 2018, inasmuch as it implicitly refused the request concerning mission expenses submitted by the applicant on 26 February 2018,
composed of R. da Silva Passos, President, I. Reine and L. Truchot (Rapporteur), Judges,
The applicant, ZU, is an official of the European Commission who, at the time of the facts giving rise to the present dispute, was assigned to the European External Action Service (EEAS), within the Delegation of the European Union to Russia (‘the delegation’), with headquarters in Moscow (Russia).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.