Case T‑43/13

Beniamino Donnici

v

European Parliament

(Actions for damages — Members of the European Parliament — Verification of powers — Decision of the Parliament declaring the mandate of a Member of the European Parliament invalid — Annulment of the decision of the Parliament by judgment of the Court of Justice — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

Summary — Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber), 20 March 2014

1.      Judicial proceedings — Objection of inadmissibility — Period for lodging — Point from which time starts to run — Receipt of application by the defendant

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 46(1), and 114(1))

2.      Actions for damages — Limitation period — Point from which time starts to run — Responsibility for an individual act — Date on which the harmful effects of the measure with regard to the person concerned became apparent — Account taken of subjective assessment of the reality of the damage — Not permissible

(Art. 340, second para., TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 46)

3.      Actions for damages — Limitation period — Point from which time starts to run — Damage of a continuing nature — Date to be taken into consideration

(Art. 340, second para., TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 46)

4.      Non-contractual liability — Conditions — Unlawfulness —Damage — Causal link — One of the conditions not satisfied — Claim for compensation dismissed in its entirety

(Art. 340, second para., TFEU)

1.      The period prescribed for lodging a defence is two months. That is the period of time within which the defendant institution must respond to the application, choosing either to answer the substance of the case by lodging a defence or to raise an objection of inadmissibility by lodging an objection to that effect in accordance with Article 114(1) of the Rules of Procedure. It must therefore be held that the prescribed period for lodging an objection of inadmissibility is also two months.

Moreover, the period provided for by Article 46(1) of the Rules of Procedure for lodging the defence does not begin to run until the date of receipt of the application by the defendant. That solution is to be regarded as equally applicable to the period for lodging an objection of inadmissibility.

(see paras 37-39, 41, 42)

2.      Under Article 46 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, proceedings against the European Union in matters arising from non-contractual liability are barred after a period of five years from the occurrence of the event giving rise thereto. That limitation period begins to run once the requirements governing the obligation to provide compensation for damage are satisfied and, in particular, once the damage to be made good has materialised. However, the conditions to which the obligation to pay compensation for damage referred to in the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU is subject and, therefore, the rules on limitation periods which govern actions relating to that compensation for such damage may be based only on strictly objective criteria. Thus, exact and detailed knowledge of the facts of the cause is not one of the conditions which must be met in order for the limitation period to begin running. Similarly, the subjective appraisal of the reality of the damage by the victim cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the moment at which the limitation period begins to run in proceedings brought against the European Union for non-contractual liability.

In the case of disputes arising from individual measures, the period of limitation begins as soon as the decision has produced its effects vis-à-vis the persons concerned by it. In that context, it is irrelevant, as regards the starting point of the period of limitation, that the Union’s unlawful conduct was established by a court ruling.

(see paras 46, 48, 50-52, 56)

3.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 59, 60)

4.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 81-87)