Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2019:882
Date: 2019-12-19
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Action for damages - successful;Action for damages - unfounded;Staff cases;Action for damages - inadmissible

Action brought on 20 February 2018 — Wehrheim v ECB (Case T-100/18) Language of the case: French Parties Applicant: Christine Wehrheim (Offenbach, Germany) (represented by: N. De Montigny, lawyer) Defendant: European Central Bank Form of order sought The applicant claims that the Court should: annul: the decision to reject the claim for compensation for the loss suffered as a result of having withdrawn her [expatriation allowance] (introduced on 10 May 2017) and dating from 3 July 2017; in so far as necessary, the express decision rejecting her appeal (brought on 3 September 2017) against that decision, which dates from 21 December 2017; order the defendant to pay compensation claimed by the applicant in her claims, as follows: the difference of remuneration for as long as she will employed within the institution under her permanent staff contract, in the amount of EUR 700.53 per month from the month of April 2017; relocation costs in addition to the EUR 1 079.10 already accepted, namely an additional EUR 1 000; in respect of psychological harm suffered, the mount of EUR 2000; together with interest at the statutory rate until full payment; order the defendant to pay all the costs and expenses of the proceedings. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging that the defendant administration has failed to fulfil its obligations regarding good administration and assistance by failing to comply with its duty to have regard for the welfare of staff and by creating an expectation which is clearly untenable with regard to the applicant and which consists of granting an expatriation allowance although she did not meet, initially, the conditions required by the Staff Regulations to do so. That fault, it is claimed, caused damage which has a direct causal link with the failure by the institution to fulfil its obligations. ____________