EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 31 March 2009. # Luigi Marcuccio v Commission of the European Communities. # Public service - Officials - Manifest inadmissibility. # Case F-146/07.

ECLI:EU:F:2009:28

62007FO0146

March 31, 2009
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

(Civil service – Officials – Request for an investigation into an accident of which the applicant claims to have been the victim – Action for damages – Action manifestly unfounded in law – Manifest inadmissibility)

Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mr Marcuccio seeks, in particular, annulment of the Commission’s decision not to grant his request to open an investigation into an incident which allegedly occurred when he was posted to the Commission’s delegation in Angola, as well as compensation for the damage he allegedly suffered in connection with that incident.

Held: The action is dismissed as partly manifestly inadmissible and partly manifestly unfounded in law. The applicant is ordered to pay the costs.

Summary

Officials – Actions – Prior administrative complaint – Time-limits – Claim barred by lapse of time – Reopening – Condition – New fact

(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)

The possibility of submitting a request as provided for in Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations does not allow an official to set aside the time-limits laid down in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations for the lodging of a complaint and an appeal by indirectly calling in question, by means of a request, a previous decision which had not been challenged within the time-limits. It follows that only the existence of important new facts is capable of justifying the submission of a request for reconsideration of a decision which is no longer open to challenge.

(see paras 39, 47)

See:

232/85 Becker v Commission [1986] ECR 3401, para. 8

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia