# C_2020010EN.01003601.xml

| 13.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/36

---

Action brought on 17 October 2019 – Bujar v Commission

(Case T-708/19)

(2020/C 10/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Marcin Bujar (Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium) (represented by: R. Wardyn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Commission’s decision of 20 December 2018; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Commission’s decision of 20 December 2018; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the process. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the process.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging violation of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII of Staff Regulations and Article 7(1) of the GIP:






  — | the transferable pensionable years should be calculated on the basis of the amount actually transferred minus the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging violation of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII of Staff Regulations and Article 7(1) of the GIP:

—

the transferable pensionable years should be calculated on the basis of the amount actually transferred minus the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer;

| — | the PMO erred by calculating the transferable pensions rights based on the amount provided by the national administration in the provisional decision while the amount actually transferred was a result of the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer, and: a recalculation of the pension rights by the national authority; the capital appreciation for the period prior to the request for a transfer. |
| --- | --- |

—

the PMO erred by calculating the transferable pensions rights based on the amount provided by the national administration in the provisional decision while the amount actually transferred was a result of the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer, and: a recalculation of the pension rights by the national authority; the capital appreciation for the period prior to the request for a transfer.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging unjustified enrichment of the Union:






  — | the calculation of the transferable years on the basis of a provisional amount which was subject to recalculation and that did not correspond uniquely to the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer resulted in unjustified enrichment of the Union. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging unjustified enrichment of the Union:

—

the calculation of the transferable years on the basis of a provisional amount which was subject to recalculation and that did not correspond uniquely to the capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer resulted in unjustified enrichment of the Union.

---