CELEX: 62020TN0728
Language: en
Date: 2020-12-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-728/20: Action brought on 14 December 2020 — OM v Commission

15.2.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 53/47
            
         
      Action brought on 14 December 2020 — OM v Commission
      (Case T-728/20)
      (2021/C 53/63)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: OM (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the General Court should
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the decision rejecting requests for reimbursement 247-251 and 252-256;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  annul the decision of 23 March 2020 rejecting the complaint;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant invokes first of all the admissibility of her action against a decision notified through the rejection, dated 23 March 2020, of her complaint made on 5 December 2019, which the applicant considers to be a new decision, adopted on the basis of a new examination of her situation, after the administration accepted the main argument developed through her first complaint. As regards the substance, the applicant relies on four pleas in law:
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging that the decisions are contradictory in relation to the change in reasoning following the previous reimbursement of similar expenses.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging the lack of a specific and thorough examination of the requests for reimbursement of the medical expenses at issue.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging failure to comply with the right to be heard.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment of the file.