# C_2017318EN.01002002.xml

| 25.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/20

---

Action brought on 31 July 2017 — Fleig v EEAS

(Case T-492/17)

(2017/C 318/27)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Stephan Fleig (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of 19 September 2016 by which the Director of the ‘Human Resources’ Directorate of the European External Action Service (EEAS), acting in his capacity as the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment, decided to terminate the applicant’s employment contract of indefinite duration with effect from 19 June 2017 (in the version of that decision to terminate most recently received through the rejection of the applicant’s complaint on 19 April 2017); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 19 September 2016 by which the Director of the ‘Human Resources’ Directorate of the European External Action Service (EEAS), acting in his capacity as the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment, decided to terminate the applicant’s employment contract of indefinite duration with effect from 19 June 2017 (in the version of that decision to terminate most recently received through the rejection of the applicant’s complaint on 19 April 2017);

| — | order the EEAS to pay to the applicant a reasonable sum, of an amount to be decided by the Court, as compensation for the non-material damage suffered by him; and |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EEAS to pay to the applicant a reasonable sum, of an amount to be decided by the Court, as compensation for the non-material damage suffered by him; and

| — | order the EEAS to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EEAS to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law: manifest errors of assessment on the part of the European External Action Service (EEAS). |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law: manifest errors of assessment on the part of the European External Action Service (EEAS).

| 2. | Second plea in law: infringement by the EEAS of the duty of care, of the principle of good administration (Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union), of the principle of proportionality and of the right to protection against unjustified dismissal (Article 30 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law: infringement by the EEAS of the duty of care, of the principle of good administration (Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union), of the principle of proportionality and of the right to protection against unjustified dismissal (Article 30 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).

| 3. | Third plea in law: infringement of the right to be heard under Article 41(1) and 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law: infringement of the right to be heard under Article 41(1) and 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

---