15.5.2023

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/41

(Case T-171/23)

(2023/C 173/54)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: VR (represented by: L. Levi and P. Baudoux, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—declare the present action admissible and well founded;

and consequently,

—annul the decision of 9 June 2022 notifying the applicant that his contract would be terminated and, in so far as necessary, the decision of 20 December 2022 rejecting the applicant’s complaint against the decision of 9 June 2022;

—order the defendant to make good the damage suffered by the applicant;

—order the 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 a manifest error of assessment as regards the grounds for the decision and breach of the principle of proportionality.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and, more specifically, the right to be heard, the obligation to state reasons, compliance with the requirement of impartiality on the part of the administration and the duty of diligence.

3.Third plea in law, alleging breach of the duty of care.