Corte di giustizia UE/2023

[OSCURATO:PERSONA] ([OSCURATO:PERSONA]) 29 March 2023 ( * ) (Arbitration clause – Application to set aside – Stay of execution of the judgment by default) [OSCURATO:PERSONA] T‑242/17 RENV-OP, SC, represented by A. Kunst, lawyer, applicant in the main proceedings, v [OSCURATO:PERSONA], established in Pristina ([OSCURATO:PERSONA]), represented by L.-G. Wigemark, acting as Agent, and by E. Raoult, lawyer, defendant in the main proceedings, [OSCURATO:PERSONA] ([OSCURATO:PERSONA]), composed of J. [OSCURATO:PERSONA], [OSCURATO:PERSONA], C. [OSCURATO:PERSONA] and M. Stancu (Rapporteur), [OSCURATO:PERSONA], [OSCURATO:PERSONA]: E. Coulon, makes the following [OSCURATO:PERSONA] 1 By judgment of 19 October 2022, SC v [OSCURATO:PERSONA] (T‑242/17 RENV, not published, under appeal; ‘the judgment by default’, EU:T:2022:637), the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] gave judgment in favour of the applicant in the main proceedings by default in accordance with Article 123(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] and thus ordered [OSCURATO:PERSONA] to pay her compensation in respect of the material damage suffered equivalent to 19 months’ gross salary, to which the daily subsistence allowance and the salary increase was to be added, to correspond to the situation in which the final employment contract of the applicant in the main proceedings was renewed until 14 June 2018, together with compensation for the non-material damage suffered, assessed ex æquo et bono at EUR 50 000. 2 By application lodged at the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] of the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] on 28 November 2022, [OSCURATO:PERSONA] sought to have the judgment by default set aside, pursuant to Article 166 of the Rules of Procedure. 3 By separate document lodged at the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] on the same day, [OSCURATO:PERSONA] requested that, in accordance with Article 123(4) of the Rules of Procedure, the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] grant a stay of execution of the judgment by default until it had given its decision on the application to set aside. [OSCURATO:PERSONA] submits, inter alia, that such a stay is necessary because of the serious reasons raised in the application to set aside as well as the disproportionate nature of the compensation awarded, which should lead the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] to set aside the judgment by default. 4 In her observations on the application to set aside lodged at the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] on 27 January 2023, the applicant in the main proceedings indicated that she did not oppose the stay of execution of the judgment by default. 5 In accordance with Article 41 of the Statute of the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] of Justice of the [OSCURATO:PERSONA], applicable to the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] by virtue of Article 53 of that statute, the objection is not to have the effect of staying enforcement of the judgment by default unless the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] decides otherwise. 6 On the other hand, Article 123(4) of the Rules of Procedure provides that, where the judgment by default is enforceable, the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] may, however, grant a stay of execution until it has given its decision on any application under Article 166 of the Rules of Procedure to have that judgment set aside. 7 In the absence of any objections on the part of the applicant in the main proceedings, it is appropriate, having regard to the lodging of the application to set aside by [OSCURATO:PERSONA] and for the proper administration of justice, to grant a stay of execution of the judgment by default until the [OSCURATO:PERSONA] has given its decision on that application to set aside. 8 The costs are to be reserved. On those grounds, [OSCURATO:PERSONA] ([OSCURATO:PERSONA]) hereby orders: 1. Execution of the judgment of 19 October 2022, SC v [OSCURATO:PERSONA] (T ‑ 242/17 RENV), is stayed until a decision has been given on the application to set aside lodged by [OSCURATO:PERSONA]. 2. The costs are reserved. Luxembourg, 29 March 2023. E. Coulon J. [OSCURATO:PERSONA] * Language of the case: English.