CELEX: 62021TN0335
Language: en
Date: 2021-06-15 00:00:00
Title: Case T-335/21: Action brought on 15 June 2021 — PJ v EIT

2.8.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 310/39
            
         
      Action brought on 15 June 2021 — PJ v EIT
      (Case T-335/21)
      (2021/C 310/52)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: PJ (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Institution of Innovation & Technology
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the executive director’s decision of 13 October 2020 refusing her the benefit of teleworking from her place of origin;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  in so far as necessary, annul the executive director’s decision of 9 March 2021 rejecting the applicant’s complaint lodged on 10 November 2020;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to pay all the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty of impartiality, objectivity and neutrality of the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment, and the adoption of internal rules by an authority lacking competence to do so.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to be heard.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of internal rules, and arbitrary and unreasonable interpretation of such rules, as well as a lack of predictability and of legal certainty.
               
            
                  5.
               
               
                  Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty to care towards staff, a failure to take into account the interests of both the institution and the applicant, and the disproportionate nature of the decision in view of the actual interest of the institution.
               
            
                  6.
               
               
                  Sixth plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to respect for private and family life set out in Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) as well as the right to a work-life balance set out in Article 33 of the Charter.
               
            
                  7.
               
               
                  Seventh plea in law, alleging infringement of the effective right to employment and failure to provide fair working conditions.
               
            
                  8.
               
               
                  Eighth plea in law, alleging a failure to take into consideration a force majeure event.