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

European Union
AM v European Investment Bank (T-134/19)
Law
Claims for damages
The claim for compensation for alleged…
79

AM v European Investment Bank (T-134/19)

law://eu/cjeu/2019/t-134-19/para_79@2026-11-13

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

Key facts

Court: General Court · First Chamber
Case: T-134/19 · ECLI:EU:T:2021:119
Decided: 10 Mar 2021
Procedure: Action for damages
Applicant: AM
Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB)
Rapporteur: M. Stancu
Bench: 3 judges
H. Kanninen, N. Półtorak, M. Stancu
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62019TJ0134

Topics

Staff Regulations of Officials

History · 1 version

10 Mar 2021Reading

Judgment of 10 Mar 2021

79Since those claims are, therefore, premature, they cannot be accepted (see, to that effect, judgment of 25 June 2020, ZS v EIB, T‑659/18, not published, EU:T:2020:281, paragraph 90 and the case-law cited).

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

Connections

Cited by 12: Friedrich Erlbacher v European Commission (T-195/25); PV v European Commission (T-89/20); TG v European Commission (T-755/22); OD v European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (T-61/22); SV v European Investment Bank (T-311/21); KL v European Investment Bank (T-651/20); KL v European Investment Bank (T-751/20); LR v European Investment Bank (T-529/20); Eleveté Invest Group, SL and Others v European Commission and Single Resolution Board (T-523/17); MG v European Investment Bank (T-573/20); HB v European Investment Bank (T-689/20); JP v European Commission (T-247/20)
Cites 12: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2384 of 17 December 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain aluminium foils originating in the People's Republic of China and terminating the proceeding for imports of certain aluminium foils originating in Brazil following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009; Regulation (EU) 2016/1036; Athinaïki Techniki AE v Commission of the European Communities (C-521/06); C & J Clark International Ltd v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs and Puma SE v Hauptzollamt Nürnberg (C-659/13, C-34/14); Trace Sport v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane, kantoor Eindhoven (C-251/18); ZS v European Investment Bank (T-659/18); Rotho Blaas Srl v Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli (C-207/17); TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-188/92); Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/271; Council Regulation (EC) No 925/2009; Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/865