ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

11 December 2014

Luigi Marcuccio

v

European Commission

‛Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure — Adverse effect on the proper administration of justice — Exclusion of a lawyer from the proceedings’

Application:

under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof

Held:

Mr Z is excluded from the proceedings in accordance with Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure. A copy of this order is to be sent to the competent Italian Bar, of which Mr Z is a Member.

Summary

Judicial proceedings — Representation of the parties — Exclusion from the proceedings of a party’s representative

(Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 34(1) and (2))

Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal must be applied in order to exclude an applicant’s lawyer from the proceedings before the Tribunal and to send a copy of the order to the competent national Bar of which he is a member where there is sufficient evidence that, by his conduct, the lawyer is indiscriminately encouraging the applicant in his querulous attitude, which, in view of the particularly large number of actions he has brought before the three courts of the Union — of which a lawyer exercising ordinary care must have been aware — has proved to be especially prejudicial to the proper administration of justice.

In those circumstances, the lawyer is not fulfilling his role, which should lead him to advise the applicant to litigate in moderation and, in any event, not to bring a repetitive, superfluous action which is likely to add to the heavy workload of the three courts of the Union, which have already been greatly and often fruitlessly overburdened by actions brought by the applicant.

Exclusion requires the applicant to appoint another lawyer pursuant to Article 34(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Tribunal, but in no way prejudges the Tribunal’s assessment of the merits of the application, which remains before it as long as the applicant retains an interest in bringing proceedings, or unless he withdraws the action or it becomes devoid of purpose.

(see paras 20-23)

ORDER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

11 December 2014

Luigi Marcuccio

v

European Commission

‛Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure — Adverse effect on the proper administration of justice — Exclusion of a lawyer from the proceedings’

Application:

under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof

Held:

Mr Z is excluded from the proceedings in accordance with Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure. A copy of this order is to be sent to the competent Italian Bar, of which Mr Z is a Member.

Summary

Judicial proceedings — Representation of the parties — Exclusion from the proceedings of a party’s representative

(Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 34(1) and (2))

Article 34(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal must be applied in order to exclude an applicant’s lawyer from the proceedings before the Tribunal and to send a copy of the order to the competent national Bar of which he is a member where there is sufficient evidence that, by his conduct, the lawyer is indiscriminately encouraging the applicant in his querulous attitude, which, in view of the particularly large number of actions he has brought before the three courts of the Union — of which a lawyer exercising ordinary care must have been aware — has proved to be especially prejudicial to the proper administration of justice.

In those circumstances, the lawyer is not fulfilling his role, which should lead him to advise the applicant to litigate in moderation and, in any event, not to bring a repetitive, superfluous action which is likely to add to the heavy workload of the three courts of the Union, which have already been greatly and often fruitlessly overburdened by actions brought by the applicant.

Exclusion requires the applicant to appoint another lawyer pursuant to Article 34(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Tribunal, but in no way prejudges the Tribunal’s assessment of the merits of the application, which remains before it as long as the applicant retains an interest in bringing proceedings, or unless he withdraws the action or it becomes devoid of purpose.

(see paras 20-23)