# C_2022037EN.01003401.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/34

---

Action brought on 19 October 2021 — XH v Commission

(Case T-613/21)

(2022/C 37/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: XH (represented by: E. Auleytner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 4 December 2020 concerning the refusal of the applicant’s request for assistance and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 4 December 2020 concerning the refusal of the applicant’s request for assistance and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant;

| — | annul the decision of 26 May 2021 concerning the opening of the invalidity procedure and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 26 May 2021 concerning the opening of the invalidity procedure and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant;

| — | compensate the applicant for loss and damages; |
| --- | --- |

—

compensate the applicant for loss and damages;

| — | order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging error of law and the irregularity of the contested procedure: the violation of Article 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular violation of the duty of care and the principle of sound administration contained in Article 41 of the Charter. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging error of law and the irregularity of the contested procedure: the violation of Article 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular violation of the duty of care and the principle of sound administration contained in Article 41 of the Charter.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 12a, 24, and 59-60 of the Staff Regulations, by setting clearly unattainable objectives requiring the applicant to provide work during sickness leave with 100 % incapacity for work. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 12a, 24, and 59-60 of the Staff Regulations, by setting clearly unattainable objectives requiring the applicant to provide work during sickness leave with 100 % incapacity for work.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging violation of Article 59 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Articles 12a and 24 thereof — opening of the invalidity procedure without the required amount of the sick leave at the moment of the opening. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging violation of Article 59 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Articles 12a and 24 thereof — opening of the invalidity procedure without the required amount of the sick leave at the moment of the opening.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

---