Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2018 — SQ v EIB

(Case T-377/17) (1)

((Civil Service - EIB staff - Complaint of psychological harassment - Administrative enquiry - Concept of ‘psychological harassment’ - Requirement that the conduct complained of must be repetitive in order to constitute ‘psychological harassment’ - Refusal to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the person responsible for that conduct - Duty of confidentiality in relation to an ongoing administrative enquiry and, subsequently, to the decision terminating the procedure finding that there had been psychological harassment))

(2018/C 341/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: SQ (represented by: N. Cambonie and P. Walter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented by: G. Faedo and K. Carr, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer, and J. Currall, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 50a(1) of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and Article 41 of the EIB Staff Regulations seeking, first, the partial annulment of the decision of the President of the EIB of 20 March 2017 and, second, compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of psychological harassment by her superior and the EIB’s conduct.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Annuls in part the decision of the President of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 20 March 2017, in so far as it applies an incorrect definition of the concept of ‘psychological harassment’, does not provide for immediate disciplinary action in the event of a proven case of psychological harassment within the EIB, and imposes a duty of confidentiality on the addressee of that decision, contrary to the purposes of an investigation procedure concerning an alleged case of psychological harassment;

2.	Dismisses the remainder of the claims for annulment;

3.	Orders the EIB to pay to SQ, in respect of the non-material damage suffered, an amount of EUR 10 000;

4.	Dismisses the remainder of the claims for compensation;

5.	Orders the EIB to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by SQ;

6.	Orders SQ to bear half of her own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.