CH v European Parliament
Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2018
Open official document (opens in a new tab)About this page & coverageIndividual case
- What you’ll find
- The selected case’s official title, court metadata, matched topics and links to the publishing source, with retrieved-text status shown for each document.
- Coverage and limits
- The record reflects what the collection has imported. Generating an AI summary requires retrieved source text; any generated text is interpretation, not a court finding. The linked official document remains the authority.
Official source
Civil service – Accredited parliamentary assistants – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Request for assistance – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Psychological harassment – Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between accredited parliamentary assistants and Members of the European Parliament and its prevention at the workplace – Decision rejecting the request for assistance – Right to be heard – Audi alteram partem rule – Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses – Refusal by the defendant institution to comply with a measure of inquiry of the General Court.
Full official title
Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 13 December 2018.#CH v European Parliament.#Civil service – Accredited parliamentary assistants – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Request for assistance – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Psychological harassment – Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between accredited parliamentary assistants and Members of the European Parliament and its prevention at the workplace – Decision rejecting the request for assistance – Right to be heard – Audi alteram partem rule – Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses – Refusal by the defendant institution to comply with a measure of inquiry of the General Court.#Case T-83/18.
- EUR-Lex document 62018TJ0083(opens in a new tab)Text retrieved 12 October 2026
AI summary
Not generatedGenerated interpretation, not a court finding. Verify every point against the official source above.
No summary has been generated for this case yet.
Use your ChatGPT or Claude subscription
Copy a research prompt, then open your AI app and paste it into a new chat. You use your own account there; the answer stays in that app.
The prompt includes retrieved official source text and marks any known gaps.