JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(First Chamber)

5 November 2013

Case F‑63/12

Carlo De Nicola

v

European Investment Bank (EIB)

(Civil service — Compliance with a judgment — Costs — Reimbursement of costs — Reimbursement of the sum paid by way of recoverable costs following a judgment annulling in part the judgment by which the applicant was ordered to pay those costs)

Application:      under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr De Nicola requests the Tribunal to annul the refusal of the European Investment Bank (EIB) to reimburse the costs paid on the basis of a judgment of the Tribunal which was subsequently annulled by the General Court of the European Union.

Held:      The decisions of 4 and 25 May 2012 of the European Investment Bank are annulled. The European Investment bank is ordered to pay Mr De Nicola the sum of EUR 6 000, with compensatory interest as from 29 April 2012. The compensatory interest rate must be calculated on the basis of the rate set by the European Central Bank for its principal refinancing operations applicable over the period concerned, increased by two points. The remainder of the application is dismissed. The European Investment Bank is to bear its own costs and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by Mr De Nicola.

Summary

Judicial proceedings — Costs — Reimbursement of a sum paid by way of recoverable costs following a judgment annulling in part the judgment by which the applicant was ordered to pay those costs

(Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 115)

Under Article 115 of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, where the General Court of the European Union annuls a judgment or an order of the Tribunal and refers the case back to it, the Tribunal must, in the decision ending the proceedings, make an order as to the costs relating, first, to the proceedings instituted before it and, second, to the proceedings on the appeal before the General Court.

That provision demonstrates that the annulment, albeit in part, by the General Court of a judgment or order of the Tribunal has the effect of annulling the provisions by which the Tribunal, in that judgment or order, made an order as to costs.

Consequently, it was for the institution to agree to the applicant’s request for reimbursement of the sum paid by way of recoverable costs.

(see paras 23-24, 27)