This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015FA0133
Case F-133/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 10 June 2016 — HI v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Article 11 of the Staff Regulations — Duty of loyalty — Article 11a — Conflict of interests — Official responsible for monitoring a project funded by the European Union — Family link between that official and an employee recruited for the purposes of the project by the company responsible for that project — Disciplinary procedure — Disciplinary action — Downgrading — Lawfulness of the composition of the Disciplinary Board — Obligation to state reasons — Length of the procedure — Reasonable time — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Principle of ne bis in idem — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality of the penalty — Mitigating circumstances)
Case F-133/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 10 June 2016 — HI v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Article 11 of the Staff Regulations — Duty of loyalty — Article 11a — Conflict of interests — Official responsible for monitoring a project funded by the European Union — Family link between that official and an employee recruited for the purposes of the project by the company responsible for that project — Disciplinary procedure — Disciplinary action — Downgrading — Lawfulness of the composition of the Disciplinary Board — Obligation to state reasons — Length of the procedure — Reasonable time — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Principle of ne bis in idem — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality of the penalty — Mitigating circumstances)
Case F-133/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 10 June 2016 — HI v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Article 11 of the Staff Regulations — Duty of loyalty — Article 11a — Conflict of interests — Official responsible for monitoring a project funded by the European Union — Family link between that official and an employee recruited for the purposes of the project by the company responsible for that project — Disciplinary procedure — Disciplinary action — Downgrading — Lawfulness of the composition of the Disciplinary Board — Obligation to state reasons — Length of the procedure — Reasonable time — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Principle of ne bis in idem — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality of the penalty — Mitigating circumstances)
OJ C 270, 25.7.2016, p. 69–69
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
25.7.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 270/69 |
Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 10 June 2016 — HI v Commission
(Case F-133/15) (1)
((Civil service - Officials - Article 11 of the Staff Regulations - Duty of loyalty - Article 11a - Conflict of interests - Official responsible for monitoring a project funded by the European Union - Family link between that official and an employee recruited for the purposes of the project by the company responsible for that project - Disciplinary procedure - Disciplinary action - Downgrading - Lawfulness of the composition of the Disciplinary Board - Obligation to state reasons - Length of the procedure - Reasonable time - Infringement of the rights of the defence - Principle of ne bis in idem - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality of the penalty - Mitigating circumstances))
(2016/C 270/76)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: HI (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision to impose on the applicant, following an investigation concerning a conflict of interest, a penalty of permanent downgrading by two grades, and for compensation for the non-material damage which the applicant claims to have suffered.
Operative part of the judgment
The Tribunal:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders HI to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
(1) OJ C 414, 14.12.2015, p. 45.