CELEX: 62020TN0179
Language: en
Date: 2020-03-18 00:00:00
Title: Case T-179/20: Action brought on 18 March 2020 — JP v Commission

22.6.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 209/29
            
         
      Action brought on 18 March 2020 — JP v Commission
      (Case T-179/20)
      (2020/C 209/40)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the decision of 17 July 2019 not placing the applicant on the reserve list of successful candidates of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 — Administrators (AD7), along with the decision of 10 December 2019 rejecting the applicant’s request for review;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the defendant to compensate the damages occurred; and,
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order that defendant to pay all the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle according to which the members of the Selection Board shall have the necessary abilities to make an objective assessment of the performance and professional qualifications of the applicant during the field-related interview, breach of the principle of equal treatment and breach of the principle of legitimate expectations.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle according to which the composition of the selection board must be sufficiently stable.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment.