ORDER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
(Second Chamber)

16 March 2011

Case F-21/10

Luigi Marcuccio

v

European Commission

(Civil service — Officials — Actions for damages — Unlawfulness — Dispatch of a letter concerning costs in a case to a lawyer who represented the applicant in that case — Action manifestly devoid of any legal basis — Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure)

Application: brought under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Marcuccio seeks, first, annulment of the Commission’s decision rejecting his request for compensation for the damage he claims to have suffered as a result of the dispatch to his representative in the case which resulted in the order of the General Court of the European Communities of 17 May 2006 in Case T‑241/03 Marcuccio v Commission of a letter concerning the payment of costs in that case, and, second, an order that the Commission pay him damages.

Held: The action is dismissed as manifestly devoid of any legal basis. The applicant is to bear all the costs. The applicant is ordered to pay the Tribunal the sum of EUR 2 000.

Summary

1.      Officials — Actions — Action for damages — Application for annulment of the pre-litigation procedure rejecting the claim for damages

(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)

2.      Procedure — Costs — Costs unreasonably or vexatiously caused to the Civil Service Tribunal by an official’s unreasonable action

(Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 94)

1.      Claims for annulment directed against an institution’s decision rejecting a claim for compensation during the pre-litigation phase cannot be assessed in isolation from the claims relating to compensation.

(see paras 19, 20)

See:

14 October 2004, T‑256/02 I v Court of Justice, para. 47 and the case‑law cited therein

2.      Pursuant to Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, where the Tribunal has incurred costs which might have been avoided, in particular where the action is of a manifestly abusive nature, it may order the party which caused them to reimburse them all, or some of them, subject to the proviso that the amount reimbursed may not exceed EUR 2 000.

That provision must be applied in the case of an action by an official who has already had a large number of other applications to the European Union courts dismissed, at least in part, as manifestly inadmissible or manifestly devoid of any legal basis, and whose action is clearly of an unreasonable or vexatious nature, the applicant having opted to bring proceedings without any justification.

(see paras 33, 35, 36)

See:

9 December 2009, C‑513/08 P Marcuccio v Commission; 9 December 2009, C‑528/08 P Marcuccio v Commission

9 September 2008, T‑143/08 Marcuccio v Commission; 9 September 2008, T‑144/08 Marcuccio v Commission; 26 June 2009, T‑114/08 P Marcuccio v Commission; 28 September 2009, T‑46/08 P Marcuccio v Commission

23 March 2010, T‑16/09 P Marcuccio v Commission; 28 October 2010, T‑32/09 P Marcuccio v Commission

11 May 2007, F‑2/06 Marcuccio v Commission; 6 December 2007, F‑40/06 Marcuccio v Commission; 14 December 2007, F‑21/07 Marcuccio v Commission; 4 November 2008, F‑18/07 Marcuccio v Commission; 4 November 2008, F‑87/07 Marcuccio v Commission; 18 February 2009, F‑70/07 Marcuccio v Commission; 31 March 2009, F‑146/07, on appeal before the General Court of the European Union, T‑239/09 P; 20 July 2009, F‑86/07 Marcuccio v Commission, on appeal before the General Court of the European Union, T‑402/09 P; 7 October 2009, F‑122/07 Marcuccio v Commission; 7 October 2009, F‑3/08 Marcuccio v Commission