Case T-390/02: Action brought on 24 December 2002 by Antonio Cagnato against the Court of Justice of the European Communities
Date: 2003-02-22
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, European official, General Court (EU), appeal to the Court (EU), asbestos, indemnification, occupational disease

C 44/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.2.2003

Action brought on 24 December 2002 by Antonio Cagna-
to against the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
ties

Action brought on 24 December 2002 by the Bundesver-
band der Nahrungsmittel- und Speiseresteverwertung e.V.
and Josef Kloh against the European Parliament and the
Council of the European Union

(Case T-390/02)

(2003/C 44/78)

(Language of the case: French)

(Case T-391/02)

(2003/C 44/79)

(Language of the case: German)

Justice of

the European
An action against the Court of
Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities on 24 December 2002 by
Antonio Cagnato, residing in Dippach-Gare (Luxembourg),
represented by Juan Ramon Iturriagagoitia and Karine Delvol-
vé, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Court of Justice given on
24 September 2002 and concerning the complaint lodged
by the applicant on 25 January 2002 against the decision
of 25 October 2001;

— order the defendant to pay the applicant compensation
for the damage and non-material damage of every kind
that he has suffered as a result of his being exposed to
asbestos when carrying out his duties at the Palais de
Justice of the Court of First Instance and the Court of
Justice of the European Communities, estimated at a sum
of EUR 350 000, subject to all necessary reservations;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs.

An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union was brought before the Court of First
Insurance of the European Communities on 24 December
2002 by the Bundesverband der Nahrungsmittel- und Speisere-
steverwertung e.V., Bochum (Germany), and Josef Kloh, Eich-
enried (Germany), represented by R. Steiling and S. von
Zimmermann-Wienhues.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul Article 32(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October
2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-
products not intended for human consumption (1) in so
far as transitional measures under Article 32(1) of the
regulation are permitted for no more than four years
from 1 November 2002;

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official of the Court of Justice, challenges
that institution’s refusal to compensate him for the damage
suffered as a result of his occupational disease, which has
already been recognised by decision of the appointing auth-
ority of 31 May 2001, adopted under Article 73 of the Staff
Regulations, and on the basis of which a sum was paid to him.

The pleas relied on in support of this application are similar to
those in Case T 255/02 H v Court of Justice (OJ C 274 of
9.11.2002, p. 26).

The action challenges the time-limit on transitional measures
which may be adopted under Article 32 of the contested
regulation in the case of Member States with a secure system
for processing food and kitchen waste [catering waste].

1.

The imposition of a time-limit exceeds the bounds of the
Parliament’s and the Council’s discretion; it runs counter
to the principle of subsidiarity (Article 5(2) EC) and the
principle of proportionality (Article 5(3) EC).

In matters of Community health and hygiene law the
institutions do not enjoy wide political discretion:
decisions must be based on scientific evidence. There is