CELEX: 62021TN0778
Language: en
Date: 2021-12-15 00:00:00
Title: Case T-778/21: Action brought on 15 December 2021 — Folkertsma v Commission

21.2.2022   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 84/42
            
         
      Action brought on 15 December 2021 — Folkertsma v Commission
      (Case T-778/21)
      (2022/C 84/60)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Rommert Folkertsma (Zierikzee, Netherlands) (represented by: L. Levi and P. Baudoux, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  recognise the non-contractual liability of the defendant;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  grant a compensation for the material and moral prejudice suffered by the applicant due to the defendant’s unlawful conduct;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  if need be, annul the decision of the defendant dated 5 October 2021, rejecting its liability in the applicant’s removal from the SUBRATA Project in the Philippines; and,
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay all the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies, as to the unlawful conduct of the defendant, on three pleas in law:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s right to be heard.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging the breach of the defendant’s duty to give reasons.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging the infringement of the defendant’s duty of diligence.
               
            The damage suffered by the applicant is actual, certain and quantifiable. It consists in the loss of income for the duration of the service contract that the applicant had, then in the loss of a serious chance to have the contract renewed for another two years at it initial term and thirdly, to the breach to the applicant’s good name. The applicant searches the compensation of his material prejudice and of his moral prejudice.