27.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/13

(Case T-11/17)

(2017/C 095/22)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: RK (represented by: L. Levi and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—declare the present action admissible and well founded;

as a result,

—annul the undated decision of the Council, adopted on the basis of Article 42c of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union;

—so far as necessary, annul the decision of 27 September 2016 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 29 April 2016;

—order the defendant to pay compensation in respect of the material harm suffered by the applicant;

—order the defendant to pay damages by way of compensation for the non-material harm 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 four pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, based on an objection of illegality directed against Article 42c of the Staff Regulations, infringement of Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, infringement of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16) and infringement of Article 1d of the Staff Regulations.

2.Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 42c of the Staff Regulations, as implemented by the Staff Note No 71/15 of the Council, and factual and legal inaccuracies and irregularities vitiating the contested decisions;

3.Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to be heard, and infringement of the rights of the defence.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty to have regard for the interests of officials, and infringement of the principle of sound administration.