Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2000:261
Date: 2000-11-08
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Unlimited jurisdiction;Family allowances;Revocation / Repeal
Procedure: Staff cases - unfounded;Staff cases - successful

SUMMARY — CASE T-210/98 
Held: the Commission decision of 14 July 1998 is annulled in so 
far as it withdraws the grant of the double allowance for 
a dependent child provided for in Article 67(3) of the Staff 
Regulations of Officials of the European Communities for 
the period from 1 January 1997 until 14 July 1998. The 
Commission decision of 23 July 1998, recovering the sum 
of LUF 181 446 is annulled. The Commission is ordered 
to repay to the applicant the sums recovered from her 
pension, amounting to LUF 181 446. The remainder of the 
action is dismissed. The Commission is to pay the costs. 
Summary 
1. Officials — Remuneration — Family allowances - Dependent child allowance 
— Double allowance - Suspension — Obligation to state reasons — Scope 
(Staff Regulations, Arts 25, second para., and 67(3)) 
2. Officials — Remuneration — Family allowances — Dependent child allowance 
- Double allowance — Conditions for granting — Reconsideration in the light of 
new facts 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 67(3)) 
3. Acts of the institutions — Withdrawal - Conditions — Decision to grant a double 
dependent child allowance 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 67(3)) 
4. Officials — Actions — Subject-matter - Unlimited jurisdiction — Claim for 
payment — Admissible 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 91(1)) 
I-A - 242 
E v COMMISSION 
1. Article 67(3) of the Staff Regulations contains a specific requirement for a 
reasoned decision only for the granting of a double dependent child allowance. In 
the absence of a particular limitation period for decisions terminating payment of 
such an allowance, the reasons for such a decision must be assessed in the light of 
the second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations. 
(see para. 45) 
2. The marriage of the child of the recipient of a double dependent child allowance 
under Article 67(3) of the Staff Regulations is a relevant matter for the assessment 
of the expenses borne by the recipient as a result of the child's handicap, having 
regard to the foreseeable result of that union inter alia as regards the support which 
the child's spouse is likely to provide. The institution concerned is therefore entitled 
to reconsider whether the conditions for granting the allowance obtain when it learns 
of the child's marriage. 
Against that background, in so far as it is for the recipient of the allowance to prove 
that the conditions for granting it obtain, the institution is entitled to suspend 
payment of the allowance until it has finished reconsidering the matter if the 
recipient does not produce all the documentary evidence requested. 
(see paras 51-52) 
3. The retroactive withdrawal of a favourable administrative act is generally subject 
to very strict conditions. Those include a condition that the institution which adopted 
the act find that it is tainted by illegality. 
I-A - 243 
SUMMARY - CASE T-210/98 
The retroactive withdrawal of a decision granting a double dependent child 
allowance under Article 67(3) of the Staff Regulations cannot therefore be justified 
on the sole ground that the appointing authority is aware of circumstances which 
may give rise to doubts as to whether the conditions for granting the allowance 
obtain, but requires that it find definitively that, during the period concerned by the 
withdrawal of the act, the granting of the allowance was illegal. 
(see paras 60-61) 
See: C-90/95 de Compte v Parliament [1997] ECR I-1999, para. 35 
4. Pursuant to the second sentence of Article 91(1) of the Staff Regulations, the 
Court has unlimited jurisdiction in a dispute of a financial character. It therefore has 
jurisdiction to order a defendant institution to pay a specific amount where 
appropriate. 
(see para. 66) 
See: T-130/96 Aquilino v Council [1998] ECR-SCI-A-351 and II-1017, paras 39 and 40 
I-A - 244