CELEX: 62011TA0234(01)
Language: en
Date: 2013-07-09 00:00:00
Title: Case T-234/11 P-RENV-RX: Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2013 — Arango Jaramillo and Others v EIB (Appeal — Civil service — Staff of the EIB — Review of the judgment of the General Court — Action at first instance dismissed as inadmissible — Pensions — Increase in the contribution to the pension scheme — Time-limit for bringing proceedings — Reasonable period)

24.8.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 245/8
            
         Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2013 — Arango Jaramillo and Others v EIB
   (Case T-234/11 P-RENV-RX) (1)
   
   (Appeal - Civil service - Staff of the EIB - Review of the judgment of the General Court - Action at first instance dismissed as inadmissible - Pensions - Increase in the contribution to the pension scheme - Time-limit for bringing proceedings - Reasonable period)
   2013/C 245/10
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellants: Oscar Orlando Arango Jaramillo (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and the 34 other appellants whose names are set out in the annex to the judgment (represented by: B. Cortese and C. Cortese, lawyers)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented by: C. Gómez de la Cruz and T. Gilliams, acting as Agents, and by P.-E. Partsch, lawyer)
   
      Re:
   
   Appeal against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 4 February 2011 in Case F-34/10 Arango Jaramillo and Others v EIB [2011] ECR-SC I-A-1-0000 and II-A-1-0000, seeking to have that order set aside.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Sets aside the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 4 February 2011 in Case F-34/10 Arango Jaramillo and Others v EIB;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Refers the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Reserves the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 211, 16.7.2011.