# C_2021431EN.01004701.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/47

---

Action brought on 1 September 2021 — VP v Cedefop

(Case T-534/21)

(2021/C 431/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: VP (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision not to implement sections (1) and (2) of the operational part of the judgment of the GCEU, of 16 December 2020, in case T-187/18, VP v Cedefop; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision not to implement sections (1) and (2) of the operational part of the judgment of the GCEU, of 16 December 2020, in case T-187/18, VP v Cedefop;

| — | annul the connected decision not to renew the applicant’s employment contract for an indefinite period with retroactive effect; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the connected decision not to renew the applicant’s employment contract for an indefinite period with retroactive effect;

| — | order the compensation of the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant evaluated ex aequo et bono to fifty thousand Euros; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the compensation of the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant evaluated ex aequo et bono to fifty thousand Euros;

| — | order the compensation of the material damage incurred by the applicant equal to the cost of the necessary pre-litigation procedure from the date of the judgment in Case T-187/18, VP v Cedefop; and |
| --- | --- |

—

order the compensation of the material damage incurred by the applicant equal to the cost of the necessary pre-litigation procedure from the date of the judgment in Case T-187/18, VP v Cedefop; and

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

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 that the defendant’s decision not to implement the core sections (1) and (2) of the judgment of 16 December 2020 in case T-187/20, VP v Cedefop and, consequently, not to renew the employment contract of the applicant is vitiated by a violation of the obligation to state reasons; |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s decision not to implement the core sections (1) and (2) of the judgment of 16 December 2020 in case T-187/20, VP v Cedefop and, consequently, not to renew the employment contract of the applicant is vitiated by a violation of the obligation to state reasons;

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed its obligation to duty of care. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed its obligation to duty of care.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the principles of equal treatment and protection of legitimate expectations. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed the principles of equal treatment and protection of legitimate expectations.

| 4. | Forth plea in law, alleging that the defendant misused its powers. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Forth plea in law, alleging that the defendant misused its powers.

---