Action brought on 10 February 2017 – RT v Parliament
(Case T-98/17)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: RT (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyer)
Defendant: European Parliament
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
declare the application admissible;
annul the decision of the appointing authority of 30 June 2016 rejecting a medical certificate; together with, and so far as necessary annul the decision of the appointing authority of 13 January 2017, rejecting the applicant’s complaint; and
order the defendant to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging breach of Article 59 of Staff Regulations and Article 2 of the Internal Rules.
Second plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment and breach of Article 59 of the Staff Regulations and Article 2 of the Internal Rules.
Third plea in law, alleging breach of Article 59 of the Staff Regulations and Article 2 of the Internal Rules, failure to state adequate reasons, and violation of the principle of legal certainty.
____________