CELEX: 62013TN0203
Language: en
Date: 2013-04-08 00:00:00
Title: Case T-203/13 P: Appeal brought on 8 April 2013 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 January 2013 in Case F-92/12, Marcuccio v Commission

1.6.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 156/52
            
         Appeal brought on 8 April 2013 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 January 2013 in Case F-92/12, Marcuccio v Commission
   (Case T-203/13 P)
   2013/C 156/95
   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
   
   The appellant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul in its entirety, without any exception, the order under appeal;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The present appeal is brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 28 January 2013 in Case F-92/12 Marcuccio v Commission rejecting as manifestly inadmissible an action for annulment of the decision of the European Commission to withhold certain amounts from the appellant’s invalidity allowance for the months of October, November and December 2011 and for reimbursement of the sums withheld.
   In the order under appeal, the Tribunal stated that the firm of the appellant’s representative which appears at the end of the document sent by fax on 5 September 2012 was not the same as the firm which appears on the application received by post on 13 September 2012.
   In support of his appeal, the appellant alleges absolute failure to state reasons, by reason inter alia of failure to make preliminary inquiries, self-evident, tautologous and arbitrary reasoning, distortion and misrepresentation of the facts and an error of law, by reason inter alia of manifest failure properly to appraise the facts.