Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2022:192
Date: 2022-03-30
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Staff cases - unfounded;Action for damages - unfounded

Action brought on 25 January 2021 – PO v Commission (Case T-36/21) Language of the case: French Parties Applicant: PO (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers) Defendant: European Commission Form of order sought The applicant claims that the General Court should: Declare the present action admissible and well-founded; Accordingly, annul the decision of 29 April 2020 informing the applicant that his request for review of the decision not to include his name on the ‘reserve list’ for External Competition ΕΡSO/ΑD/338/17 had been rejected; in so far as necessary, annul the Commission's decision of 14 October 2020 rejecting the applicant's complaint; remedy the material and non-material damage suffered by the applicant; order the defendant to pay all the costs. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law. 1. First plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’), an infringement of Article 1d of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (the ‘Regulations’), an infringement of Article 5 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16), an infringement of Article 2 of the United Nations Convention, an infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and a failure to provide reasonable accommodation; 2. Second plea in law, alleging a breach of the obligation to state reasons; 3. Third plea in law, alleging a breach of the duty to have regard for the welfare of staff. ____________