ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Single judge)

25 June 2013

Luigi Marcuccio

v

European Commission

‛Civil service — Officials — Action for damages — Availability of a parallel remedy — Manifest inadmissibility’

Application:

brought under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Marcuccio seeks, inter alia, annulment of the decision by which the European Commission rejected his note of 19 July 2011, and payment of the sum of EUR 5 500, together with interest, in compensation for the harm purportedly suffered.

Held:

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. Mr Marcuccio is to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

Summary

Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Bringing an action for annulment having the same purpose as an application for taxation of costs — Inadmissibility

(Art. 270 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 92(1); Staff Regulations, Art. 91)

The specific procedure for seeking taxation of costs, provided for in Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, excludes any claim for the same sums, or sums expended for the same purposes, in connection with proceedings initiated in accordance with Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations. Thus an applicant may not bring an action for damages, on the basis of Article 270 TFEU and Article 91 of the Staff Regulations, which has, in reality, the same subject-matter as an application for taxation of costs. This applies even where the defendant’s claim is not the same as the sum sought by the applicant in respect of the harm purported to have been sustained.

(see paras 21, 26)

See:

16 July 2009, C‑440/07 P Commission v Schneider Electric

11 July 2007, T‑351/03 Schneider Electric v Commission, para. 297

10 November 2009, F‑70/07 Marcuccio v Commission, para. 17

ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Single judge)

25 June 2013

Luigi Marcuccio

v

European Commission

‛Civil service — Officials — Action for damages — Availability of a parallel remedy — Manifest inadmissibility’

Application:

brought under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Marcuccio seeks, inter alia, annulment of the decision by which the European Commission rejected his note of 19 July 2011, and payment of the sum of EUR 5 500, together with interest, in compensation for the harm purportedly suffered.

Held:

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. Mr Marcuccio is to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

Summary

Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Bringing an action for annulment having the same purpose as an application for taxation of costs — Inadmissibility

(Art. 270 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 92(1); Staff Regulations, Art. 91)

The specific procedure for seeking taxation of costs, provided for in Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, excludes any claim for the same sums, or sums expended for the same purposes, in connection with proceedings initiated in accordance with Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations. Thus an applicant may not bring an action for damages, on the basis of Article 270 TFEU and Article 91 of the Staff Regulations, which has, in reality, the same subject-matter as an application for taxation of costs. This applies even where the defendant’s claim is not the same as the sum sought by the applicant in respect of the harm purported to have been sustained.

(see paras 21, 26)

See:

16 July 2009, C‑440/07 P Commission v Schneider Electric

11 July 2007, T‑351/03 Schneider Electric v Commission, para. 297

10 November 2009, F‑70/07 Marcuccio v Commission, para. 17