Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62008CN0528

    Case C-528/08 P: Appeal brought on 28 November 2008 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 9 September 2008 in Case T-144/08 Marcuccio v Commission

    OJ C 32, 7.2.2009, p. 21–21 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    28/11/2008
    Date lodged:
    28/11/2008
    Author:
    Court of Justice
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    Italian
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    7.2.2009   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 32/21

    Appeal brought on 28 November 2008 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 9 September 2008 in Case T-144/08 Marcuccio v Commission

    (Case C-528/08 P)

    (2009/C 32/36)

    Language of the case: Italian

    Parties

    Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by: G. Cipressa, avvocato)

    Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities

    Form of order sought

    —

    1. In any event:

    (1.a)

    Annul the order under appeal in its entirety;

    (1.b)

    Declare the original action to be fully admissible;

    and in addition:

    —

    2/A as a primary remedy: (2/A.1) annul the contested decision; (2/A.2) annul, in so far as necessary, the statement of reimbursement of 18 July 2005; (2/A.3) annul, to the extent necessary, the decision to reject the complaint in full; (2/A.4) order the defendant to pay to the appellant, by way of reimbursement of the additional sum needed to make up 100 %, with a view to obtaining repayment in full, of the medical expenses at issue, or by way of compensation for the damage arising as a result of the defendant's unlawful conduct, to pay to the appellant the sum of EUR 89,56 or such higher or lower amount as the Court may deem to be just and equitable; (2A/.5) order the defendant to pay to the appellant default interest on the amount referred to at 2/A.4 for the period from the date on which it became due until the date of actual payment, to be determined in accordance with the applicable rules; (2/A.6) order the defendant to pay to the appellant all the costs and expenses of the proceedings;

    or

    —

    2/B. in the alternative, to refer the case back to the Court of First Instance for a fresh decision.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    1.

    Distortion and misrepresentation of the facts and the statements of the appellant in his pleadings, arising also from the material inaccuracy of the findings of the Court of First Instance (in particular, paragraphs 29, 31, 34 and 38 of the order under appeal).

    2.

    Misinterpretation and misapplication of the concept of a challengeable act, and, in addition, confusion, irrationality, illogicality, infringement of Article 231 of the EC Treaty and failure to have regard to the case-law relating to the effects of the annulment by the Community judicature of a decision issued by a Community institution, infringement of the principle of res judicata and infringement of the principle of the separation of powers (in particular, paragraphs 32 and 34 of the order under appeal).

    3.

    Misinterpretation and misapplication of Articles 90 and 91 of the Statute and of the concept of decisions issued by a Community institution.

    4.

    Infringement of the legally-binding principle of natural justice and errors of procedure so serious as to result in the rights of the appellant being infringed, in particular the rights of the defence and the right to a just and equitable hearing.
    Top