# C_2022024EN.01004402.xml

| 17.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/44

---

Action brought on 8 October 2021 — Zegers v Commission

(Case T-663/21)

(2022/C 24/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tanja Zegers (Hoeilaart, Belgium) (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 3 December 2020, rejecting the applicant’s application for transfer of pension rights and, so far as necessary, the decision rejecting the complaint; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 3 December 2020, rejecting the applicant’s application for transfer of pension rights and, so far as necessary, the decision rejecting the complaint;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging error of assessment, breach of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, and infringement of the principle nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans, insofar as:

| — | by claiming that the pension rights the transfer of which she has applied for would have been acquired after her entry into the service of the Union, because her participation with the Algemeen Burgerlijk Pensioen-Fonds (ABP) ended on 31 January 2015, without making any distinction between the periods from 1 July 1992 to 31 December 2010 and from 1 January 2011 to 31 January 2015, the Commission ignored a period of eighteen years and six months of transferable pension rights, therefore erring in the assessment of the facts and breaching Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

by claiming that the pension rights the transfer of which she has applied for would have been acquired after her entry into the service of the Union, because her participation with the Algemeen Burgerlijk Pensioen-Fonds (ABP) ended on 31 January 2015, without making any distinction between the periods from 1 July 1992 to 31 December 2010 and from 1 January 2011 to 31 January 2015, the Commission ignored a period of eighteen years and six months of transferable pension rights, therefore erring in the assessment of the facts and breaching Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;

| — | by failing to ensure that the ABP, or its supervisory body within the Dutch state, provides the required calculation, the Commission cannot rightfully reject the applicant’s application for transfer of pension rights, as it amounts to taking advantage of its own failure, in breach of the principle nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans. |
| --- | --- |

—

by failing to ensure that the ABP, or its supervisory body within the Dutch state, provides the required calculation, the Commission cannot rightfully reject the applicant’s application for transfer of pension rights, as it amounts to taking advantage of its own failure, in breach of the principle nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans.

---