Case F-54/06: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 19 June 2007 — Davis and Others v Council (Staff cases — Officials — Pensions — Weightings — Retirement after the entry into force of the version of the Staff Regulations applicable from 1 May 2004 — Application of weightings calculated on the basis of the average cost of living in the country of residence of retired officials — Transitional scheme — Abolition of weightings for pension rights acquired after the entry into force of the version of the Staff Regulations applicable from 1 May 2004 )
Date: 2007-08-04
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European official, action by staff, equal pay, equal treatment, pension scheme, regulations for civil servants

4.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/43

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of
19 June 2007 — Davis and Others v Council

Form of order sought

(Case F-54/06) (1)

(Staff cases — Officials — Pensions — Weightings — Retire-
ment after the entry into force of the version of the Staff
Regulations applicable from 1 May 2004 — Application of
weightings calculated on the basis of the average cost of
living in the country of residence of retired officials — Transi-
tional scheme — Abolition of weightings for pension rights
acquired after the entry into force of the version of the Staff
Regulations applicable from 1 May 2004)

(2007/C 183/83)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Davis and Others (Bolton, United Kingdom) and
three Others (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis
and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of
M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, acting as Agents)

the European Union (represented by:

Re:

Annulment of the Council's decisions determining the appli-
cants' pension entitlements, on the grounds that the portion of
their pension entitlement acquired after 30 April 2004 is not
multiplied by a weighting, and that the weighting by which the
portion of their pension entitlement acquired before 30 April
2004 is multiplied differs from that by which the remuneration
of officials in active employment in the United Kingdom or
Denmark is multiplied.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.7.2006, p. 28.

— Annul the decision of 8 February 2007 to reduce the appli-

cant's survivor's pension by 50 %;

— Order the defendant, with retrospective effect from 1 April
2006, and monthly henceforth, to pay the applicant the
further 50 % of the survivor's pension of his deceased wife
Gisela Neumann.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The European Parliament cut the applicant's survivor's pension
as the widower of Gisela Neumann with reference to non-recog-
the Belgian decree of divorce which the deceased
nition of
obtained against her first husband in 1995.

The claim is brought against the non-recognition of that decree
against Council Regulation No 2201/2203/EC of
and
24 November 2003. The applicant argues that he is the sole
‘surviving spouse’, since the marriage between himself and the
deceased came into existence in a legally effective way (Art. 18
Annex VIII of the Staff Regulations).

Action brought on 30 May 2007 — Tiralongo v
Commission

(Case F-55/07)

(2007/C 183/85)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Giuseppe Tiralongo (Ladispoli, Italy) (represented by:
F. Sciaudone, R. Sciaudone and S. Frazzani, lawyers)

Action brought on 16 May 2007 — Wolfgang A. Mandt v
European Parliament

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

(Case F-45/07)

(2007/C 183/84)

Language of the case: German

Form of order sought

— declare the present action admissible;

Parties

Applicant: Wolfgang A. Mandt (Kreuztal, Germany) (represented
by: B. Kolb, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

— order the Commission to provide the information and docu-
ments relating to the initial engagement of Ms X and to the
successive extensions of her contract within the European
Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), and order Ms X to testify as a
witness;