ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

30 June 2015

Fernando Centurione

v

European Commission

‛Civil Service — Officials — Social security — Accident — Article 73 of the Staff Regulations — Common rules on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease — Setting of the degree of partial permanent invalidity — Report of the Medical Committee — Article 82 of the Rules of Procedure — Absolute bar to proceeding — Lack of concordance between the action and the claim — Inadmissibility’

Application:

under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Centurione seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 June 2014 recognising partial permanent invalidity of 2% and granting him payment of the corresponding capital sum under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

Held:

The action is dismissed. Each party is to bear its own costs.

Summary

Officials — Social security — Insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease — Expert medical report — Discretion of the Medical Committee — Judicial review — Limits

(Staff Regulations, Art. 73; Rules on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease, Art. 23)

The provisions relating to Medical Committees and Invalidity Committees are designed to confer upon medical experts the task of definitively appraising all medical questions. Judicial review may not extend to medical appraisals properly so-called, which must be considered definitive, provided that the conditions in which they are made are not irregular. Moreover, it is for the Medical Committee to decide to what extent medical reports drawn up previously must be taken into consideration, and the fact that the Medical Committee makes no explicit reference, in its report, to certain documents or, a fortiori, to the content of certain documents is not sufficient to invalidate its findings.

(see para. 27)

See:

Judgment of 23 November 2004 in O v Commission, T-376/02, EU:T:2004:338, para. 29 and the case-law cited therein

Judgment of 2 October 2013 in Nardone v Commission, F-111/12, EU:F:2013:140, para. 48 and the case-law cited therein

ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

30 June 2015

Fernando Centurione

v

European Commission

‛Civil Service — Officials — Social security — Accident — Article 73 of the Staff Regulations — Common rules on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease — Setting of the degree of partial permanent invalidity — Report of the Medical Committee — Article 82 of the Rules of Procedure — Absolute bar to proceeding — Lack of concordance between the action and the claim — Inadmissibility’

Application:

under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Centurione seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 June 2014 recognising partial permanent invalidity of 2% and granting him payment of the corresponding capital sum under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

Held:

The action is dismissed. Each party is to bear its own costs.

Summary

Officials — Social security — Insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease — Expert medical report — Discretion of the Medical Committee — Judicial review — Limits

(Staff Regulations, Art. 73; Rules on insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease, Art. 23)

The provisions relating to Medical Committees and Invalidity Committees are designed to confer upon medical experts the task of definitively appraising all medical questions. Judicial review may not extend to medical appraisals properly so-called, which must be considered definitive, provided that the conditions in which they are made are not irregular. Moreover, it is for the Medical Committee to decide to what extent medical reports drawn up previously must be taken into consideration, and the fact that the Medical Committee makes no explicit reference, in its report, to certain documents or, a fortiori, to the content of certain documents is not sufficient to invalidate its findings.

(see para. 27)

See:

Judgment of 23 November 2004 in O v Commission, T-376/02, EU:T:2004:338, para. 29 and the case-law cited therein

Judgment of 2 October 2013 in Nardone v Commission, F-111/12, EU:F:2013:140, para. 48 and the case-law cited therein