CELEX: 62013TN0226
Language: en
Date: 2013-04-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-226/13 P: Appeal brought on 14 April 2013 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 February 2013 in Case F-67/12, Marcuccio v Commission

15.6.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/36
            
         Appeal brought on 14 April 2013 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 February 2013 in Case F-67/12, Marcuccio v Commission
   (Case T-226/13 P)
   2013/C 171/69
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought by the appellant
   
   
               —
            
            
               Grant all the appellant’s claims in the proceedings at first instance;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Commission to reimburse the appellant in respect of the costs incurred by him in the proceedings at first instance.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   These proceedings are brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 6 February 2013 rejecting as manifestly lacking any foundation in law an action seeking: (i) annulment of the decision by which the European Commission rejected the appellant’s claim for compensation for the damage arising as a result of the fact that a letter concerning the manner in which the judgment of the Tribunal of 4 November 2008 in Case F-41/06 Marcuccio v Commission was to be enforced was sent to the lawyer who represented him in the appeal proceedings against that judgment; and (ii) an order that the Commission pay compensation for the damage purportedly caused as a result of that act.
   In support of his appeal, the appellant alleges an absolute failure to state reasons for the rejection of his claim for compensation, by reason, inter alia, of failure to make inquiries, distortion and misrepresentation of the facts, arbitrary reasoning and incorrect and unreasonable interpretation and application of:
   
                
            
            
               the rules of law relating to the incurring of Aquilian liability on the part of the institutions of the European Union;
            
         
                
            
            
               the concept of the duty to state reasons incumbent on all European Union institutions and the European Union judicature;
            
         
                
            
            
               the concept of unlawful conduct on the part of a European Union institution.
            
         
                
            
            
               The appellant also contends that the ruling of the court at first instance on costs was unlawful.