CELEX: 62018TN0617
Language: en
Date: 2018-10-12 00:00:00
Title: Case T-617/18: Action brought on 12 October 2018 — ZH/ECHA

3.12.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 436/63
            
         
      Action brought on 12 October 2018 — ZH/ECHA
      (Case T-617/18)
      (2018/C 436/87)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: ZH (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the applicant’s 2016 appraisal report;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  annul also, in so far as necessary, the decision of ECHA of 2 July 2018, notified to the applicant on 3 July 2018, which rejects the applicant’s complaint against the 2016 appraisal report;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the compensation of the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay all 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 a violation of Article 2.2 of the ECHA Decision of 18 June 2015 laying down general provisions for implementing Article 15(2) of the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Union (‘CEOS’) and implementing the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Staff Regulations of the European Union.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging a violation of the procedural framework to conduct appraisal reports as laid down by the ECHA decision and in particular by Article 7, as well as a violation of Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, applicable by analogy to temporary staff by virtue of article 15 of the CEOS.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging manifest errors of appreciation by the reporting officer, with regard to the negative criticism of the applicant.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging a breach of the duty to state reasons.