Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Marie Tzirani v European Commission (F-46/11)
Judgment
Law
B –The claim for annulment of the cont…
5.Fifth plea: breach of the obligation…
b)Findings of the Tribunal
The statement of reasons for the conte…
138

Marie Tzirani v European Commission (F-46/11)

Judgment of 11 Jul 2013law://eu/cjeu/2011/f-46-11/para_138@2026-11-10

138It is settled case-law that the statement of reasons required by Article 296 TFEU must show clearly and unequivocally the reasoning of the authority which adopted the contested measure (see, to that effect, judgment of 14 December 2004 in Case C‑210/03 Swedish Match, paragraph 63).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Civil Service Tribunal · Second Chamber
Case: F-46/11 · ECLI:EU:F:2013:115
Decided: 11 Jul 2013
Procedure: staff cases unfounded
Applicant: Marie Tzirani
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: K. Bradley
Bench: 3 judges
M.I. Rofes i Pujol, I. Boruta, K. Bradley
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62011FJ0046

Topics

Staff Regulations of Officials

History · 1 version

11 Jul 2013Reading

Connections

Cited by 20: CQ v European Economic and Social Committee (T-117/24); KF v European Investment Bank (T-222/24); HF v European Parliament (T-565/22); WV v European External Action Service (T-371/21); NV v European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (T-661/20); MW v European Parliament (T-630/20); AI v European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (T-65/19)2 provisions; HF v European Parliament (C-570/18 P)2 provisions; ZQ v European Commission (T-647/18); DQ and Others v European Parliament (T-730/18); UZ v European Parliament (T-47/18); Belén Bernaldo de Quirós v European Commission (T-273/18); QH v European Parliament (T-748/16); CH v European Parliament (T-83/18); CN v European Parliament (T-76/18); Jasenko Selimovic v European Parliament (T-61/17); HF v European Parliament (T-218/17)4 provisions; HQ v Community Plant Variety Office (T-592/16); OZ v European Investment Bank (T-607/16); HG v European Commission (F-149/15)
Cites 25: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Flavia Angeletti v European Commission (T-394/03); Paulette Füller-Tomlinson v European Parliament (T-390/10); Christos Michail v European Commission (T-486/04); Riccardo Achille Menghi v European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) (F-2/09); Maria Concetta Cerafogli v European Central Bank (T-114/13 P); Carmela Lo Giudice v European Commission (T-154/05); Carina Skareby v European Commission (F-42/10); BG v European Ombudsman (T-406/12); Gregorio Valero Jordana v European Commission (T-385/04); Herbert Meister v European Union Intellectual Property Office (F-138/06); The Queen, on the application of: Swedish Match AB and Swedish Match UK Ltd v Secretary of State for Health (C-210/03); BG v European Ombudsman (F-54/11); N v European Parliament (F-93/08); Maria Concetta Cerafogli v European Central Bank (ECB) (F-43/10); Daniele Grassi v Council of the European Union (C-188/73); K v European Parliament (F-15/07); Gaetano Aquilino v Council of the European Union (T-130/96); Vassilliki Labiri v European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (F-124/10); Georges Tzoanos v European Commission (T-74/96); J v European Commission (F-53/09); Aristotelis Perakis v European Parliament (T-78/92); Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of the Council of 29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities and instituting special measures temporarily applicable to officials of the Commission (Staff Regulations of Officials); European Commission v Q (T-80/09)