# C_2012184EN.01002401.xml

| 23.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 184/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/24

---

Action brought on 16 March 2012 — ZZ v EIB

(Case F-37/12)

2012/C 184/52

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Isola, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

First, an application for annulment of the letter by which the President of the EIB rejected, following the report by the ‘Dignity at work’ committee, the applicant’s complaint alleging mobbing. Second, an application for annulment of the opinion of the abovementioned committee, in so far as it failed to find that the applicant was a victim of mobbing.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the letter of 20 December 2011 in so far as the President of the EIB, in addition to not adopting any provision on the mobbing to which the applicant has been subjected for 20 years, claimed that he could threaten the applicant in order to force him to accept submissively all his acts of bullying and the acts of oppression to which he is subjected on a daily basis, starting with the abandonment of a third of the appeals brought before the Committee of Inquiry; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the letter of 20 December 2011 in so far as the President of the EIB, in addition to not adopting any provision on the mobbing to which the applicant has been subjected for 20 years, claimed that he could threaten the applicant in order to force him to accept submissively all his acts of bullying and the acts of oppression to which he is subjected on a daily basis, starting with the abandonment of a third of the appeals brought before the Committee of Inquiry;

| — | Annul the report and the conclusions adopted on 26 October 2011 by the Committee of Inquiry, in far as they:






  — | provided an inadequate definition of mobbing and failed to address the applicant’s complaint, so that the measures adopted by the EIB are wholly inadequate; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Annul the report and the conclusions adopted on 26 October 2011 by the Committee of Inquiry, in far as they:

—

provided an inadequate definition of mobbing and failed to address the applicant’s complaint, so that the measures adopted by the EIB are wholly inadequate;

| — | dismissed the appeal, without referring to the applicable rules; |
| --- | --- |

—

dismissed the appeal, without referring to the applicable rules;

| — | failed to provide any evidence of the investigations purportedly carried out and failed to refer to either the facts complained of by the applicant or the grounds of justification provided by the EIB; |
| --- | --- |

—

failed to provide any evidence of the investigations purportedly carried out and failed to refer to either the facts complained of by the applicant or the grounds of justification provided by the EIB;

| — | Annul all related, consequent and prior measures, including in particular those used by the Committee for mobbing, which were requested to no avail on 21 December 2011 and refused on 6 January 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul all related, consequent and prior measures, including in particular those used by the Committee for mobbing, which were requested to no avail on 21 December 2011 and refused on 6 January 2012;

| — | order the EIB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EIB to pay the costs.

---