Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2019 –Steifer v EESC
(Case T‑331/17)
(Civil service — Officials — Pensions — Pension entitlement acquired before entry into service of the EU — Transfer to the EU scheme — Grant of additional seniority — Reimbursement of the amount of pension entitlement not taken into account in the scheme for the calculation of annuities of pension of the EU — No new and substantial facts — No excusable error — Liability — Inadmissibility)
1.      Actions brought by officials — Prior administrative complaint — Time-limits — Mandatory — Claim barred by lapse of time — Reopening — Condition — New and material fact — Concept
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 61, 64, 65, 67, 70-72, 87-89, 100, 101, 110, 114)
2.      Actions brought by officials — Prior administrative complaint — Time-limits — Mandatory — Claim barred by lapse of time — Excusable error — Concept — Burden of proof
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 68, 120, 125, 126)
3.      Actions brought by officials — Actions for damages — Pre-litigation procedure — Different process depending on whether there is an act having adverse effect
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 133-135)
Re:
Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, to annul the decision of 21 October 2002 of the Director of Human and Financial Resources of the EESC rejecting the applicant’s request of 2 October 2002 for reimbursement, together with applicable interest, of the part of his Belgian pension rights not credited on transfer to the EU pension scheme and Decision No 360/03 A of that Director of 15 December 2003 fixing the applicant’s entitlement to a retirement pension, second, to order the EESC to reimburse the applicant the amount of the periodic annuity payments paid by the Belgian National Pensions Office to the EESC since 1 January 2004 as a result of the transfer of his pension rights and to reimburse the applicant each month the amount of the periodic annuity payments to be paid in the future and, third, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of one of the grounds of that decision by which the Director wrongly informed him that he had no right to a Belgian pension.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action as inadmissible;
2.
Orders Guy Steifer to pay the costs.