# C_2008313EN.01001701.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/17

---

Appeal brought on 1 October 2008 by Luigi Marcuccio against the judgment delivered on 9 July 2008 in Joined Cases T-296/05 and T-408/05 Marcuccio v Commission

(Case C-432/08 P)

(2008/C 313/25)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by: G. Cipressa, avvocato)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

| — | 1. In any event:






  (1.a) | annul the judgment under appeal in its entirety; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

1. In any event:

(1.a)

annul the judgment under appeal in its entirety;

| (1.b) | declare that both the pending actions are fully admissible; |
| --- | --- |

(1.b)

declare that both the pending actions are fully admissible;

and in addition:

| — | 2/A., primarily, grant the forms of order sought by the applicant at first instance, that is to say: (2/A.1) annul the contested decisions; (2/A.2) annul, in so far as necessary, both decisions dismissing the claims in question; (2/A.3) order the defendant, by way of reimbursement of the amount of the medical costs incurred by the applicant and referred to in the claims in question seeking 100 % reimbursement, or by way of compensation for the damage resulting from the unlawful conduct of the defendant, to pay to the applicant sums equal to EUR 2 572,32 (two thousand five hundred and seventy two point three two) and EUR 381,04 (three hundred and eight one point zero four), or greater or lesser sums than those stated above as the Court deems fair and equitable; (2/A.4) order the defendant to pay the applicant default interest on the sums stated above in point 2/A.3 of this appeal, in the amount to be capitalised on the start and end date in accordance with what is stated in the case-files; (2/A.5) order the defendant to pay the applicant's costs relating to this appeal and also to the pending cases;
  or |
| --- | --- |

—

2/A., primarily, grant the forms of order sought by the applicant at first instance, that is to say: (2/A.1) annul the contested decisions; (2/A.2) annul, in so far as necessary, both decisions dismissing the claims in question; (2/A.3) order the defendant, by way of reimbursement of the amount of the medical costs incurred by the applicant and referred to in the claims in question seeking 100 % reimbursement, or by way of compensation for the damage resulting from the unlawful conduct of the defendant, to pay to the applicant sums equal to EUR 2 572,32 (two thousand five hundred and seventy two point three two) and EUR 381,04 (three hundred and eight one point zero four), or greater or lesser sums than those stated above as the Court deems fair and equitable; (2/A.4) order the defendant to pay the applicant default interest on the sums stated above in point 2/A.3 of this appeal, in the amount to be capitalised on the start and end date in accordance with what is stated in the case-files; (2/A.5) order the defendant to pay the applicant's costs relating to this appeal and also to the pending cases;

2/A., primarily

or

| — | 2/B., in the alternative, refer both the cases in question back to the Court of First Instance for it to give another ruling on the same. |
| --- | --- |

—

2/B., in the alternative, refer both the cases in question back to the Court of First Instance for it to give another ruling on the same.

2/B., in the alternative

Pleas in law and main arguments

Distortion and misrepresentation of the facts and statements of the applicant in its pleadings, following also from the material inaccuracy of the findings of the Court of First Instance (in particular, paragraphs 30, 44, 46 and 49 of the judgment under appeal).

Misinterpretation and misapplication of the concept of a challengeable act, also for confusion, unreasonableness and illogicalness, infringement of Article 231 of the EC Treaty and failure to appreciate the case-law concerning the effects of annulment by the Community courts of a decision issued by a Community institution, infringement of the principle of the authority of res judicata, infringement of the principle of the separation of powers (in particular, paragraphs 43, 44 and 49 of the judgment under appeal).

res judicata

Complete absence of preliminary investigations and failure to rule on a fundamental issue of the dispute (in particular, paragraph 12 and paragraphs 43 to 51 inclusive of the judgment under appeal).

---