# C_2008064EN.01006701.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/67

---

Action brought on 29 December 2007 — Luigi Marcuccio v Commission of the European Communities

(Case F-146/07)

(2008/C 64/110)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the dispute

Action brought against the rejection by the defendant of the applicant's request that it should carry out or conclude an investigation relating to the fact that on 29 October 2001, in the premises of the European Commission's delegation in Angola where he was employed as an official of the defendant, and during working hours, the applicant came accidentally into contact with a whitish powder of unknown nature and that it should provide him with any information as to what befell the sample of that powder and concerning the procedures for keeping the sample and for gaining access to it.

The applicant puts forward, in support of his arguments concerning the rejection by the defendant, the three following pleas in law: (1) absolute lack of any statement of reasons, also that the decision was illogical, inconsistent, unreasonable, confused, a mere pretext and relied on inadequate preparatory inquiries; (2) serious, obvious and manifest infringement of law; (3) breach of the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials and of the principle of sound administration.

Form of order sought by the applicant

| — | annul, in so far as necessary, the note dated 23 February 2007, prot. ADMINB.2/MB/nb D(07)4623; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, in so far as necessary, the note dated 23 February 2007, prot. ADMINB.2/MB/nb D(07)4623;

| — | annul the decision, however framed, which constituted rejection by the defendant of the request of 10 October 2006 submitted by the applicant to the appointing authority; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision, however framed, which constituted rejection by the defendant of the request of 10 October 2006 submitted by the applicant to the appointing authority;

| — | annul, in so far as necessary, the decision, however framed, rejecting the complaint dated 27 April 2007 submitted by the applicant to the appointing authority; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, in so far as necessary, the decision, however framed, rejecting the complaint dated 27 April 2007 submitted by the applicant to the appointing authority;

| — | annul, in so far as necessary, the note dated 4 September 2007 prot. ADMINB.2/MB/ls D(07) 19393; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, in so far as necessary, the note dated 4 September 2007 prot. ADMINB.2/MB/ls D(07) 19393;

| — | establish the fact that the defendant did not carry out, or did not conclude, any suitable investigation, including therein any measures preparatory or consequential to such investigation, for the purpose of ascertaining any circumstance, whether occurring earlier or later, in any way whatsoever connected with the fact that on 29 October 2001, in the premises of the European Commission's delegation in Angola where he was at that time employed as an official of the defendant, and during working hours, the applicant came accidentally into contact with a whitish powder of unknown nature; |
| --- | --- |

—

establish the fact that the defendant did not carry out, or did not conclude, any suitable investigation, including therein any measures preparatory or consequential to such investigation, for the purpose of ascertaining any circumstance, whether occurring earlier or later, in any way whatsoever connected with the fact that on 29 October 2001, in the premises of the European Commission's delegation in Angola where he was at that time employed as an official of the defendant, and during working hours, the applicant came accidentally into contact with a whitish powder of unknown nature;

| — | establish and declare that the failure to conduct any investigation was unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

establish and declare that the failure to conduct any investigation was unlawful;

| — | order the defendant to carry out or conclude the investigation, to perform a series of relevant acts consequential upon the latter, to supply the applicant with pieces of information concerning the event of 29 October 2001 and to guarantee the applicant access to the sample of dust; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to carry out or conclude the investigation, to perform a series of relevant acts consequential upon the latter, to supply the applicant with pieces of information concerning the event of 29 October 2001 and to guarantee the applicant access to the sample of dust;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant, as indemnification for that part of the damage already irreversibly caused to date as a result of the failure to carry out the investigation, the sum of EUR 3 000 000, or such greater or lesser sum as the Court of First Instance may consider just and fair; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant, as indemnification for that part of the damage already irreversibly caused to date as a result of the failure to carry out the investigation, the sum of EUR 3 000 000, or such greater or lesser sum as the Court of First Instance may consider just and fair;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant, as indemnification for that part of the damage arising hereafter from the failure to carry out the investigation, the sum of EUR 300, or such greater or lesser sum as the Court may consider just and fair, for every day passing between tomorrow and the day on which, when the investigation has been carried out and all measures taken preparatory or consequential thereto, communication is made to the applicant, together with suitable publicity, in the premises of the delegation and also in the Development and External Relations Directorates-General, of the conclusions of the investigation; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant, as indemnification for that part of the damage arising hereafter from the failure to carry out the investigation, the sum of EUR 300, or such greater or lesser sum as the Court may consider just and fair, for every day passing between tomorrow and the day on which, when the investigation has been carried out and all measures taken preparatory or consequential thereto, communication is made to the applicant, together with suitable publicity, in the premises of the delegation and also in the Development and External Relations Directorates-General, of the conclusions of the investigation;

| — | assess the defendant's conduct before, during and after the event of 29 October 2001 in any way connected to that event, save only the failure to carry out an investigation; |
| --- | --- |

—

assess the defendant's conduct before, during and after the event of 29 October 2001 in any way connected to that event, save only the failure to carry out an investigation;

| — | establish and declare that the conduct in question was unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

establish and declare that the conduct in question was unlawful;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant, by way of indemnification of the damage caused by the conduct in question, the sum of EUR 5 000 000 or such greater or lesser sum as the Court may consider just and fair; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant, by way of indemnification of the damage caused by the conduct in question, the sum of EUR 5 000 000 or such greater or lesser sum as the Court may consider just and fair;

| — | order the EC to make reimbursement to the applicant of all the costs, disbursements and fees involved in the proceedings, including those relating to the preparation of the party's expert's report which may be drawn up in order to ascertain whether the conditions are met for the defendant to be ordered to pay the applicant each of the abovementioned sums and, more generally, to ascertain any fact whatsoever of relevance for the purpose of the judgment to be given in this case. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EC to make reimbursement to the applicant of all the costs, disbursements and fees involved in the proceedings, including those relating to the preparation of the party's expert's report which may be drawn up in order to ascertain whether the conditions are met for the defendant to be ordered to pay the applicant each of the abovementioned sums and, more generally, to ascertain any fact whatsoever of relevance for the purpose of the judgment to be given in this case.

---