CELEX: 62020TN0648
Language: en
Date: 2020-10-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-648/20: Action brought on 26 October 2020 — NB v Court of Justice of the European Union

21.12.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 443/27
            
         
      Action brought on 26 October 2020 — NB v Court of Justice of the European Union
      (Case T-648/20)
      (2020/C 443/32)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: NB (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the General Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the decision not to promote the applicant to grade AST10, with effect from 1 January 2019;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  as far as necessary, annul the decision to ‘reclassify’/ promote Ms [X] to grade AST10, with effect from 1 January 2019;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  purely in the alternative, annul all decisions to ‘reclassify’/promote the applicant’s colleagues to grade AST10, with effect from 1 January 2019;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging that there was no legal basis for the contested decision.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging that the administration’s approach regarding reclassification from grade AST9 to grade AST10 was illegal.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging misinterpretation of the scope of Article 31(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging failure to inform staff about the rules applicable to reclassification from grade AST9 to grade AST10.