Case T-850/25: Action brought on 9 December 2025 – OB and Others v EEAS
Date: 2025-12-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, Tanzania, allowances and expenses, living conditions, principle of proportionality, public safety








C_202600672EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/672


9.2.2026






Action brought on 9 December 2025 – OB and Others v EEAS


(Case T-850/25)

(C/2026/672)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: OB and 17 other applicants (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the decisions of 18 December 2024 fixing the living conditions allowance for Tanzania (‘the LCA’) at 25 % from 1 January 2025 and discontinuing, as a result, rest leave, and the decision of 1 October 2025 rejecting the applicants’ complaint;










—


order the European External Action Service to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants put forward five pleas in law.






1.


The first plea, alleging manifest error of assessment. The applicants claim, as regards the ‘security’ parameter, that the appointing authority/authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment based its assessment on obsolete data from the World Health Organisation (‘the WHO’) (2021) whereas the most recent Tanzanian statistics (2023-2024) show a deterioration of road safety (+6.6 % deaths). They also claim that the banning of Air Tanzania by the European Commission on 13 December 2024, 5 days before the contested decision, was not taken into account. In addition, the applicants argue that the enhanced security measures deployed by the EEAS itself (Permanent Regional Security Officer, armoured vehicles, 24-hour armed guards) contradict the claim that the security situation has improved. Lastly, as regards the ‘health’ parameter, they argue that the death in August 2024 of an agent’s spouse due to a lack of medical evacuation and the deterioration of hospital capacity have not been taken into consideration.










2.


The second plea, alleging a procedural irregularity and the undermining of the consultation process. The applicants claim that the LCA Technical Group had recommended an additional verification of the data for Tanzania and that that recommendation was not acted upon. They also claim that two members of the Technical Group opposed the reduction. Lastly, they argue that the EEAS disregarded the significant reservations of the staff committees regarding the methodology used.










3.


The third plea, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons. The applicants claim that no specific reasons were given for the rejection of recent Tanzanian data in favour of the assessments by the WHO from 2021. They also claim that no explanation was given regarding the inclusion of the ban on Air Tanzania in the assessment. Lastly, they criticise the lack of communication regarding the taking into account of serious incidents and enhanced security measures.










4.


The fourth plea, alleging infringement of the duty to have regard for the welfare and interests of agents. The applicants claim that the EEAS did not examine the specific situation of the agents and did not strike a fair balance between the interest of the service and those of the agents. Next, they argue that the EEAS disregarded both the tragic death which occurred in August 2024 and its own enhanced security measures which attest to persistent serious danger. Lastly, they argue that the qualification of the post as ‘non-family’ by Sweden and the maintenance of a rapid reaction force by Denmark confirm the dangerous nature of the post.










5.


The fifth plea, alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality. The applicants claim that the reduction of the LCA places an excessive burden on agents whereas living conditions have not improved. They also claim that the budgetary savings made are minimal in the light of the security costs borne by the EEAS in respect of that post. Lastly, they argue that less restrictive measures are possible, such as the temporary maintenance of the LCA in anticipation of consolidated data.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/672/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)