# C_2012174EN.01003101.xml

| 16.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 174/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 174/31

---

Action brought on 28 November 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-126/11)

2012/C 174/49

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Boury, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The application to annul the decision of the Appointing Authority as far as it imposes a disciplinary measure in the form of a written reprimand on the applicant.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annul the Appointing Authority’s decision CMS 10/038 to issue a written reprimand to the applicant, and Appointing Authority Decision No R/393/11 which confirmed the first decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Appointing Authority’s decision CMS 10/038 to issue a written reprimand to the applicant, and Appointing Authority Decision No R/393/11 which confirmed the first decision;

| — | declare that the written reprimand issued by the Appointing Authority to the applicant, without the production of cogent evidence of the alleged acts of harassment of which his is accused and without a proper independent, impartial and fair investigation being carried out which would establish the truth about the alleged harassment which the applicant is accused of committing against his colleague, is a discretionary sanction which constitutes an act of discrimination by the Appointing Authority against the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that the written reprimand issued by the Appointing Authority to the applicant, without the production of cogent evidence of the alleged acts of harassment of which his is accused and without a proper independent, impartial and fair investigation being carried out which would establish the truth about the alleged harassment which the applicant is accused of committing against his colleague, is a discretionary sanction which constitutes an act of discrimination by the Appointing Authority against the applicant;

| — | declare that throughout the case the applicant has suffered serious material and non-material damage and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for that damage, which is to be determined according to the criteria to be laid down by the Tribunal; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that throughout the case the applicant has suffered serious material and non-material damage and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for that damage, which is to be determined according to the criteria to be laid down by the Tribunal;

| — | declare, in particular that throughout the proceedings and the previous connected cases, the applicant has been the victim of serious infringements of his human rights, rights enshrined in the Treaties, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for those infringements, which is for the Tribunal to decide. |
| --- | --- |

—

declare, in particular that throughout the proceedings and the previous connected cases, the applicant has been the victim of serious infringements of his human rights, rights enshrined in the Treaties, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights and that he is, as a result, entitled to compensation for those infringements, which is for the Tribunal to decide.

---