JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Single Judge)
16 December 2004
Case T-11/02
Spyridon de Athanassios Pappas
v
Commission of the European Communities
(Officials – Retirement – Monthly allowance under Article 50 of the Staff Regulations – Services taken into account in the calculation of the allowance – Employment prior to entry into the service of the Communities – Transfer of pension rights)
Full text in French II - 0000
Application: for annulment of the decision of the Commission fixing the duration of the monthly allowance which the applicant receives following his retirement in the interests of the service under Article 50 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities.
Held: The action is dismissed. The parties are ordered to pay their own costs.
Summary
1. Community law – Interpretation – Context and everyday meaning of terms to be taken into account – Need for uniform interpretation – Taking into consideration the various language versions
2. Officials – Retirement in the interests of the service – Calculation of the allowance provided for by Article 50 of the Staff Regulations – Account taken only of years of service with the institutions
(Staff Regulations, Art. 50; Annex IV, sole article)
1. The meaning and scope of terms for which Community law provides no definition must be determined by considering the general context in which they are used and their usual meaning in everyday language.
Moreover, the need for a uniform interpretation of Community law makes it impossible for the text of a provision to be considered in isolation but requires, on the contrary, that it should be interpreted and applied in the light of the versions existing in the other official languages.
(see paras 32, 34)
See: 9/79 Koschniske [1979] ECR 2717, para. 6; 349/85 Denmark v Commission [1988] ECR 169, para. 9; C-164/98 P DIR Intenational Film and Others v Commission [2000] ECR I-447, para. 26; T-68/97 Neumann and Neumann-Schölles v Commission [1999] ECR-SC I‑A‑193 and II‑1005, paras 79 and 80; T‑80/97 Starway v Council [2000] ECR II‑3099, para. 81
2. Under Article 50 of the Staff Regulations, an official in Grade A 1 or A 2 who is retired in the interests of the service by decision of the appointing authority receives an allowance calculated in accordance with Annex IV to the Staff Regulations. Paragraph 3 of the sole article of Annex IV provides that the period for which the official is to receive the allowance provided for in Article 50 is to be determined by multiplying his length of service by the appropriate percentage for his age.
Having regard both to the literal interpretation of the term ‘length of service’ in the sole article of Annex IV to the Staff Regulations and the purpose of the allowance provided for in Article 50 of the Staff Regulations, and having regard to the link between service with the institutions and that compensatory allowance, only years of service with the institutions should be taken into account for the calculation of the allowance referred to in Article 50 of the Staff Regulations.
The purpose of that allowance is to compensate for the decision to retire the official, which is at the discretion of the appointing authority and to enable an official who has worked for the Communities to be reintegrated into working life by granting him, for a given period, a monthly allowance intended to safeguard his financial interests. As this benefit is closely linked to the services performed for the institutions as an official of the Communities, that allowance must be proportionate to the length of that official’s career with the Communities.
Moreover, given that provisions conferring entitlement to financial benefits must be strictly interpreted, it cannot be denied, in the light of the absence of any reference in the Staff Regulations to the years of service prior to taking up duties with the Community institutions as regards the application of Article 50 of the Staff Regulations, that the intention of the legislature was to take account only of the years of service with the Community institutions in order to calculate the amount of the compensatory allowance provided for in the event of retirement in the interests of the service.
(see paras 30, 38, 40, 53-54)
See: T-221/02 Lebedef and Others v Commission [2003] ECR-SC I‑A‑211 and II‑1037, para. 38, and the case-law cited therein
Top