CELEX: 62019TN0586
Language: en
Date: 2019-08-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-586/19: Action brought on 26 August 2019 — PL v Commission

28.10.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 363/23
            
         
      Action brought on 26 August 2019 — PL v Commission
      (Case T-586/19)
      (2019/C 363/31)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: PL (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the Commission’s decision of 12 December 2018 establishing the applicant’s 2017 CDR;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the Commission to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action against the Commission’s decision establishing the applicant’s career development report in respect of 2017 (2017 CDR), the latter relies on three pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 22a and 22b of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (the Staff Regulations) and infringement by the DG of DG HR of his duty to have regard for the welfare of officials.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union which confers on the applicant the right to good administration and, in particular, the right to have his affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the general implementing provisions for Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, breach of the duty to state reasons and failure to observe the rights of the defence.