Appeal brought on 20 April 2009 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 February 2009 in Case F-42/08, Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-157/09 P)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

set aside in its entirety, without any exception whatsoever, the order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 February 2009 in Case F-42/08 Marcuccio v Commission;

declare that the action brought before the Civil Service Tribunal in respect of which the order under appeal was made was perfectly admissible, and:

grant in their entirety, without any exception whatsoever, the forms of order sought by the appellant before the Civil Service Tribunal which, for all legal intents and purposes, are to be deemed to be reproduced in the present application;

order the Commission to repay the appellant all costs, fees and other expenses incurred by the latter in connection with the proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal, together with the costs incurred by the appellant in the present appeal proceedings;

or, in the lesser alternative:

refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for a decision on the merits, to be taken by that Tribunal sitting in a different formation.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal has been brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 February 2009 dismissing as manifestly inadmissible the action brought by the appellant for compensation for the damage which he purportedly suffered as a result of the fact that the Commission sent a note intended for him to a fax number which was not at his disposal.

In support of his claims, the appellant alleges a total failure to state reasons in relation to the following:

the inadmissibility of the action for compensation for damage ;

the inadmissibility of the forms of order seeking, inter alia, confirmation by the Civil Service Tribunal that the event which had given rise to the damage was unlawful;

the date on which the defence was lodged: on this point, it is also alleged that the Civil Service Tribunal committed a procedural error by failing to comply with the obligation to discount the content of the defence where that document is submitted out of time, such that the interests of the applicant would be seriously compromised.

The appellant also alleges breach of the rules governing the right to a fair hearing; infringement of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights; and infringement of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

____________