|
29.1.2018 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 32/32 |
Action brought on 29 November 2017 — L v Parliament
(Case T-91/17)
(2018/C 032/45)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: L (represented by: I. Coutant Peyre, lawyer)
Defendant: European Parliament
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the decision of the appointing authority of the European Parliament of 31/08/2016, refusing to accept two medical certificates produced by the applicant in order to justify certain absences from work and accordingly declaring the absence in question to be unauthorised. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
|
1. |
First plea in law, alleging breach of the principles under European Union and Lithuanian law relating to the protection of whistleblowers. |
|
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging a breach by the Parliament of its duty of care and of the principle of good administration. |