Action brought on 5 June 2007 - Marcuccio v Commission

(Case F-84/06)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

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

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

annul the decision rejecting the claim of 20 June 2005 submitted by the applicant on 21 June 2005 to the office responsible for settling claims of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the European Communities;

annul, in so far as is necessary, the statement of reimbursement of 18 July 2005;

annul, in so far as is necessary, the implied decision of the Appointing Authority rejecting the applicant's claim of 23 December 2005;

order the defendant to pay the applicant, by way of reimbursement of the additional sum needed to make up 100% reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him and in respect of which he claimed reimbursement from the Joint Scheme on 20 June 2005, or by way of compensation for the damage arising as a result of the defendant's unlawful conduct in relation to the applicant, the difference between the sum already paid to the applicant by way of reimbursement of medical expenses and the total cost of the medical expenses, namely the sum of EUR 89.56, or such other sum as the Tribunal may consider just in respect of either or both of those heads;

order the defendant to pay the applicant default interest at the rate of 10 % per annum, to be compounded annually from 21 June 2005 until actual payment, or at a rate to be compounded and from the starting date which the Tribunal may consider just, on the sum of EUR 89.56 or such other sum as the Tribunal may consider just in order to make up 100% reimbursement of medical expenses;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his arguments, the applicant relies on the following three pleas in law:

absolute failure to state grounds also by reason of a total failure to make preliminary inquiries inasmuch as it cannot be understood why the Community did not grant the applicant 100% reimbursement of medical expenses, but only reimbursement in part. It is clear, moreover, that the administration failed properly to open a file relating to the applicant's claim of 20 June 2005, if necessary by taking into account all of the information provided by him;

infringement of the law on the basis that the applicant's medical condition was such as to give rise, within the meaning and for the purposes of Article 72 of the Staff Regulations, to a right in his part to 100% reimbursement of medical expenses;

breach of the obligation to have due regard to the welfare of officials and of the principle of sound administration, given that it is apparent from the matter as a whole that the defendant failed to have due regard to the applicant's interests and did several acts and related deeds which, as a result of their grave unlawfulness and the considerable period of time during which they were committed, constituted a breach of that obligation and principle, the latter, moreover, being enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

____________