CELEX: 62016TN0903
Language: en
Date: 2016-12-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-903/16: Action brought on 19 December 2016 — RE v Commission

20.2.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 53/41
            
         Action brought on 19 December 2016 — RE v Commission
   (Case T-903/16)
   (2017/C 053/50)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: RE (Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               order the annulment of the decision SEC 10.20/06/15 of the European Commission of 12 October 2016 for the part pertaining to Regulation 45/2001, and order the defendant to pay to the applicant ten thousand euros (EUR 10 000) as fair and equitable compensation for non-material damages from the unlawful refusal for access to his personal data;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to produce a document relating to the applicant’s recruitment, pursuant to Article 91 (c) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court or, alternatively, to communicate this document to the Court pursuant to Article 104 of the above Rules and order the defendant to pay to the applicant thirty thousand euros (EUR 30 000) in compensation for non-material damages from the unethical and unlawful processing of his personal data during the investigation;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to bear its own costs as well as the costs of the applicant in the current proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of its action for annulment, the applicant alleges that the contested decision is vitiated by a complete lack of reasoning as regards data for which no exception was invoked that would justify the refusal to grant the applicant access to these personal data.
   Moreover, the applicant puts forward that as far as it precluded the applicant from accessing his personal data invoking an exception pertinent to the protection of investigations under Article 20(1)(a) of Regulation 45/2001 (1), the contested decision must be considered unlawful as it failed to demonstrate how such an exception continued to apply after the closing of the investigation involving the applicant.
   The applicant further submits that the contested decision’s rejection of his specific request to obtain access in an expunged/redacted form, submitted for the first time with his application of 21 September 2016, must be considered unlawful as far as it did not provide any reasons as to why disclosure of the applicant’s personal data in an expunged form was not possible in this case, particularly after the closing of the investigation.
   In support of his action for damages, the applicant alleges that he suffered moral damage stemming from the Directorate-General Human Resources and Security’s unlawful refusal of access to his personal data, that he incurred significant damage to his professional advancement from the unlawful processing of his personal data by the said Directorate and more specifically from the unlawful dissemination of information regarding the investigation with the intent of harming the development of his career, which damage cannot be remedied solely by the annulment of the contested decision. In this context, the applicant asks the Court to take into consideration two documents so as to examine the applicant’s claim for reparation of the non-material harm incurred due to the administration’s conduct and order the award of compensation for non-material damages.
   
      (1)  Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, p. 1)