Case T-705/19: Action brought on 15 October 2019 — GV v Commission
Date: 2019-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, damages, harassment at work, indemnification, pay scale, reassignment, right to justice, staff regulations (EU)








C_2019413EN.01006102.xml










9.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 413/61






Action brought on 15 October 2019 — GV v Commission
(Case T-705/19)
(2019/C 413/74)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: GV (represented by: B.-H. Vincent, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


give priority to the present case;










—


annul the decision of 26 July 2019 under reference No R/213/19 and requesting his request for assistance;










—


order the appointing authority to take any transfer measure of such a nature as to remove the applicant from DG EAC in compliance with the grade by respecting the actual location of the post in Brussels in order to avoid any family or private prejudice;










—


order the Commission to pay the provisional sum of EUR 13 018 by way of compensation for material damage and EUR 250 per day from 1 February 2018 to the day on which the judgment is delivered by way of compensation for non-material damage;










—


order the Commission to pay all the costs of the proceedings in accordance with the rules of procedure.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 24 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’), the principle of sound administration and the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials. In that regard, the applicant submits that the Commission rejected his request for assistance, that it did not take any investigative measures and that it dealt with his request in a slow, bureaucratic and inappropriate manner.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 12a of the Staff Regulations, in that the Commission should have classified as harassment the facts on which the request for assistance is based.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations. The applicant alleges that the Commission failed to strike the necessary balance between the interests of the service and the interests of the official concerned.










4.


Fourth plea in law, based on Article 270 TFEU and Article 91 of the Staff Regulations. The applicant submits in that regard that the Union has an obligation to make good the damage caused to its staff by any illegality committed in its capacity as an employer without the need to prove a sufficiently serious infringement. According to the applicant, the facts on which the request for assistance is based are unlawful acts committed in their capacity as employers and therefore oblige the Union to compensate for material and non-material damage, namely the costs of medical and legal assistance and the suffering caused during the period in question.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, on the ground that the procedures relating to an application for transfer require, by its very nature, a swift decision.