F-34/14: The general implementing rules cannot lawfully, by way of explaining more fully a clear term of the Staff Regulations, reduce the scope of those regulations or of the CEOS or lay down rules which derogate from hierarchically superior provisions, such as the provisions of the Staff Regulations or the CEOS or general principles of law; Article 6(2) of the GIP restricts the scope of Article 85(1) of the CEOS in so far as it introduces a supplementary condition for the renewal of a contract as a member of the contract staff within the meaning of Article 3a of the CEOS which is not provided for in the CEOS and which hinders the exercise of the discretion conferred on the administration, without such a restriction being objectively justifiable in the interests of the service.
T-298/20: Civil service- Legal value of Reporting Officer’s Practical dossier – Health problems and duty of care
Staff Regulations: the rule of correspondence between the complaint and the application
AMD Fusion APU Era Begins
The Reform of the data protection legal framework
The Netherlands Dances the Two-Step With Its New Telecom Law : Net-Neutrality and Online Advertisers Learn the Steps
Second Assessment of the Implementation of the Safer Networking Principles
Education and Employment Under the Europe 2020 Strategy
Google and the credibility of EU data protection laws
Is Microsoft ruling an example of European protectionism ?
A law with unintended consequences