CELEX: 62013TN0043
Language: en
Date: 2013-01-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-43/13: Action brought on 29 January 2013 — Donnici v Parliament

16.3.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 79/31
            
         Action brought on 29 January 2013 — Donnici v Parliament
   (Case T-43/13)
   2013/C 79/52
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Beniamino Donnici (Castrolibero, Italy) (represented by: V. Vallefuoco and J. Van Gyseghem, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Parliament
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the General Court should find serious fault on the part of the European Parliament in relation to its decision adopted on 24 May 2007 to the applicant’s disadvantage, subsequently annulled by the judgment of the Court of Justice of 30 April 2009 and, thus, order the European Parliament to make good the material and non-material damage suffered or to be suffered by him as a result of that unlawful measure, even on an equitable basis which amounts to EUR 1 720 470, or in such lesser amount as the Court considers appropriate. The applicant claims that the European Parliament should pay the costs.
   
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The applicant in the present proceedings — who is also the applicant in Cases T-215/07 and C-9/08 Donnici v Parliament — seeks compensation for the damage suffered as a result of the defendant’s refusal to recognise the validity of his mandate as a member of the European Parliament. That decision was subsequently annulled by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
   In support of his action, the applicant submits that in the present case all the conditions established by the case-law for a declaration that the institutions of the European Union are non-contractually liable are satisfied; this applies in particular to:
   
               —
            
            
               the unlawfulness of the conduct alleged;
            
         
               —
            
            
               the requirement for the damage to be real;
            
         
               —
            
            
               the existence of a causal link, and
            
         
               —
            
            
               fault on the part of the European Union, or the degree of infringement by it. In that regard, the applicant states that, through the decision giving rise to the present proceedings, the defendant has disregarded in a sufficiently serious manner a rule intended to confer rights on individuals.