Judgment — ECLI:EU:F:2014:13
Date: 2014-02-11
Language of the case: French
Court formation: First Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Action for damages - unfounded;Staff cases - successful

Summary Officials — Remuneration — Family allowances — Dependent child allowance — Conditions for granting — Actual maintenance — Concept (Staff Regulations, Annex VII, Art. 2(2)) The concept of actual maintenance of a child, appearing in Article 2(2), first subparagraph, of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, means actual responsibility for all or part of the child’s essential needs, in particular in relation to board and lodging, clothing, education and medical care and costs. Consequently, where an official takes actual responsibility for all or part of the essential needs of his spouse’s child he must be considered to be actually maintaining that child and, as a result, having that child as a dependent, within the meaning of Article 2(2), first subparagraph, of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations. In that regard, neither that provision nor any other provision of the Staff Regulations makes an official’s right to receive the dependent child allowance in respect of his spouse’s child totally conditional on that spouse not being an official or other member of staff of the European Union. Nor can such a condition be inferred from the general scheme of the provisions of the Staff Regulations. (see paras 31-32, 40-41) See: 11 July 2000, T‑134/99 Skrzypek v Commission, para. 69; 10 October 2006, T‑87/04 Arranz Benitez v Parliament, para. 42