CELEX: 62019TN0519
Language: en
Date: 2019-07-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-519/19: Action brought on 22 July 2019 — Forte v Parliament

9.9.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 305/66
            
         
      Action brought on 22 July 2019 — Forte v Parliament
      (Case T-519/19)
      (2019/C 305/76)
      Language of the case: Italian
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: Mario Forte (Naples, Italy) (represented by: C. Forte and G. Forte, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Parliament
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  Primarily, annul the contested act;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Primarily, annul every previous and subsequent preparatory act connected to the contested act which has legal effects in regard to the applicant;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Order the European Parliament to pay the costs of the proceedings.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      The present action has been brought against European Parliament Decision D (2019) 20777, signed by Mr Sune Hansen, Head of the Members’ Salaries and Social Entitlements Unit, Directorate for financial and social entitlements, Directorate-General for Finance of the European Parliament, revising retirement pension rights following the entry into force on 1 January 2019 of Resolution No 14/2018 of the Office of the Italian Chamber of Deputies and ordering recovery of the amounts unduly paid out.
      The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Cases T-345/19, Santini v Parliament; T-347/19, Falqui v Parliament and T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.
      The applicant claims, in particular, that the reasoning for the contested decision is illogical; that there was no evaluation of the lawfulness of Resolution No 14/2018 in relation to the general EU-law principles of reasonableness, proportionality, certainty, predictability, legitimate expectations and the protection of acquired rights; infringement of Article 6 TEU; infringement of the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament; infringement of the Financial Regulation; failure to observe the principles of equality and non-retroactivity of legal rules; and failure to observe the principle of access to protection and justice.