Judgment — ECLI:EU:F:2015:19
Date: 2015-03-23
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Staff cases - successful

Summary 1. Actions brought by officials — Request under Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations — Implied refusal — Definition — Existence of a previous request (Staff Regulations, Art. 90(1)) 2. Officials — Pensions — Survivor’s pension — Maintenance fixed by an agreement between the former spouses — Definition — Assessment in the light of national law (Staff Regulations, Annex VIII, Art. 27, first para.) 3. Officials — Pensions — Pension-holder’s legal successors — Time-limits for applying for payment of pension entitlements — Scope — Application following recognition of pension entitlements by a decision of the national courts after the official’s death — Not included — Application of a reasonable time-limit (Staff Regulations, Annex VIII, Art. 42) 1. Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations provides that any person to whom the Staff Regulations apply may submit to the appointing authority a request that it take a decision relating to him and that, upon expiry of a period of four months from the date on which the request was made, the absence of a reply to the request is to be deemed to constitute an implied decision rejecting it. It follows from that provision that, as a rule, an implied decision refusing to grant an entitlement to an official can arise only if the official has first submitted a request to the administration for that entitlement to be granted to him. (see para. 29) 2. The concept of a maintenance obligation agreed between former spouses by reason of their divorce is one of the financial consequences arising from the decree of divorce pronounced on the basis of the rules of the applicable civil law. Consequently, in order to determine whether the divorced spouse of an official or former official has grounds to claim entitlement on his/her own account, upon the death of his/her former spouse, to maintenance from that former spouse and fixed by agreement between them, reference must be made to the law governing the effects of their divorce. In that regard, where, in national law, the annulment by the appeal court of a decision at first instance terminating the payment of maintenance has the effect of eradicating that decision retroactively and, therefore, of retroactively reviving maintenance payments to the former spouse of a deceased official, that former spouse must necessarily be regarded as being entitled on his/her own account, from the time of that appeal judgment, to maintenance from that official. The purpose of Article 27 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations is to enable the divorced spouse of an official or former official who was receiving maintenance from him/her at the time of the official’s death to continue to receive resources providing a livelihood after that death. There would be no justification for denying the divorced spouse of an official or former official the benefit of a survivor’s pension, and thus of a livelihood, solely on the ground, beyond his/her control, that the maintenance he/she was receiving under national law was terminated before the death of the official or former official and then revived retroactively after that death. (see paras 58-61, 67) See: Judgment in M v Court of Justice, T‑172/01, EU:T:2004:108, para. 72 3. It is clear from the very wording of Article 42 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations that the time-limit stipulated for loss of entitlement — one year from the date of death — applies only if those entitled under a deceased official or former official actually have pension or allowance entitlements on the date of his death. Consequently, successors who do not have pension or allowance entitlements on the date of the official’s death, but have those entitlements recognised after the death and retroactively, as a result of the adoption of a decision by a national court, do not fall within the scope of Article 42. However, the principle of legal certainty requires that the successors of a deceased official or former official who are in the situation described above must apply for payment of their pension or allowance entitlements within a reasonable period, which starts to run on the date of service of the national court’s decision on the basis of which their pension or allowance entitlements are recognised retroactively. (see paras 69, 70, 76)