CELEX: 62021TN0318
Language: en
Date: 2021-06-08 00:00:00
Title: Case T-318/21: Action brought on 8 June 2021 — KF v BEI

26.7.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 297/47
            
         
      Action brought on 8 June 2021 — KF v BEI
      (Case T-318/21)
      (2021/C 297/59)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: KF (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Investment Bank
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the defendant’s decision of 13 October 2020;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  annul the defendant’s decision of 9 March 2021 rejecting the applicant’s request for an administrative review of the defendant’s decision of 13 October 2020;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  grant compensation for the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant; and
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  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 violation of Article 8(1), Article 46(1) and Article 51(1) of the defendant’s Pension Scheme Regulations and a manifest error of appreciation of the legal concept of invalidity.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging violation of Article 34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and a violation of the duty of care.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of good administration.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging lack of impartiality.
               
            
                  5.
               
               
                  The applicant also considers that the illegalities set out in the appeal amount to faults committed by the defendant. The applicant therefore seeks compensation for the moral damage arising from the contested decision.