EN
C 198/64
Official Journal of the European Union
16.5.2022
— annul the decision of the appointing authority of the European Commission of 19 May 2021 imposing on the applicant the disciplinary penalty of removal from post without reduction of pension rights; — annul the decision of the appointing authority of the European Commission of 15 December 2021 rejecting the applicant’s complaint [confidential] (1) under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations; — order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law. 1.
First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 10 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations, on the ground that the disciplinary penalty imposed on the applicant was not proportionate to the seriousness of the misconduct committed, taking into account the assessment criteria laid down in Article 10 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) and did not take account of mitigating circumstances. 2.
Second plea in law, alleging breach of the duty to state reasons.
The applicant submits that the Commission did not follow the opinion of the Disciplinary Board, which recommended the penalty of downgrading within the meaning of Article 9(1)(f) of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations, without justifying its reasons for taking a different decision to the requisite legal standard.
(1)
Confidential data omitted.
Action brought on 29 March 2022 — Saure v Commission (Case T-165/22) (2022/C 198/92) Language of the case: German Parties Applicant: Hans-Wilhelm Saure (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: C. Partsch, lawyer) Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought The applicant claims that the Court should: — annul the Commission’s decision of 7 February 2022 to reject the applicant’s request for access to documents of the Commission by refusing to provide him with copies of all of the correspondence that it has exchanged, since 1 April 2020, with the company AstraZeneca plc or with its subsidiaries as well as with the Federal Chancellery of Germany or with the Federal Ministry of Health, relating to the company AstraZeneca plc or its subsidiaries, and in particular to the quantity of Covid-19 vaccines offered by AstraZeneca plc and its delivery deadlines; — order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law. 1.
First plea in law: The applicant has a right to access the European Commission documents at issue pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
(1) The refusal by the Commission infringes that provision.