CELEX: C2006/331/85
Language: en
Date: 2006-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Joined Cases T-35/05, T-61/05, T-107/05, T-108/05 and T-139/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 November 2006 — Agne-Dapper and Others v Commission and Others (Officials — Pensions — Application of the weighting calculated by reference to the average cost of living in the country of residence — Transitional arrangements set up by the regulation amending the Staff Regulations of Officials from 1 May 2004 — Act adversely affecting an official — Objection of illegality)

30.12.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 331/38
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 November 2006 — Agne-Dapper and Others v Commission and Others
   (Joined Cases T-35/05, T-61/05, T-107/05, T-108/05 and T-139/05) (1)
   
   (Officials - Pensions - Application of the weighting calculated by reference to the average cost of living in the country of residence - Transitional arrangements set up by the regulation amending the Staff Regulations of Officials from 1 May 2004 - Act adversely affecting an official - Objection of illegality)
   (2006/C 331/85)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   In Case T-35/05,
   
      Applicants: Elisabeth Agne-Dapper (Schoorl, Netherlands) and the other former officials of the Commission of the European Communities whose names are set out in the annex to the judgment (represented initially by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and A. Finchelstein, and subsequently by G. Vandersanden and L. Levi)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, Agents)
   
      Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, Agents)
   In Case T-61/05,
   
      Applicants: Cornelius Rozemeijer (Alkmaar, Netherlands), Gaston Vaesken (Saint-Mandrier, France) and Pierrette Vaesken (Sanary-sur-Mer, France) (represented initially by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and A. Finchelstein, and subsequently by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and C. Ronzi, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, Agents)
   In Case T-107/05,
   
      Applicant: François Muller (Strasbourg, France) (represented initially by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and A. Finchelstein, and subsequently by G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Court of Auditors of the European Communities (represented by: T. Kennedy, J.-M. Stenier and M. Bavendamm, Agents)
   In Case T-108/05,
   
      Applicant: Suzy Frederic-Leemans (Lahas, France) (represented initially by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and A. Finchelstein, and subsequently by G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented by: M. Bermejo Garde and E. Fierro, Agents)
   
      Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, Agents)
   In Case T-139/05,
   
      Applicants: Charlotte Becker (Menton, France), Seamus Killeen (Dublin, Ireland), Robert Payne (Dublin, Ireland), Paul Van Raij (Overeen, Netherlands), Wilhelmus Van Miltenburg (Huizen, Netherlands) and Deirdre Gallagher (Dublin, Ireland) (represented initially by G. Vandersanden, L. Levi and A. Finchelstein, and subsequently by G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Mustapha-Pascha, L. Knudsen and K. Zejdova, Agents)
   
      Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, Agents)
   Re:
   In essence, annulment of the applicants' pension statements — and, in one case only, of the payslip of an applicant assigned to non-active status — of May 2004, in so far as those pension statements and payslips apply for the first time a weighting calculated illegally by reference to the cost of living in the applicants' respective countries of residence, and no longer in relation to the cost of living in the capital of each of those countries.
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Dismisses the actions as inadmissible.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders each of the parties to bear its own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 143, 11.6.2005.