CELEX: 62021CN0716
Language: en
Date: 2021-11-25 00:00:00
Title: Case C-716/21 P: Appeal brought on 25 November 2021 by Graham R. Watson (T-245/20) against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 15 September 2021 in Joined Cases T-240/20 to T-245/20, Arnaoutakis and Others v Parliament

24.1.2022   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 37/23
            
         
      Appeal brought on 25 November 2021 by Graham R. Watson (T-245/20) against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 15 September 2021 in Joined Cases T-240/20 to T-245/20, Arnaoutakis and Others v Parliament
      (Case C-716/21 P)
      (2022/C 37/31)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: Graham R. Watson (represented by: J. M. Martínez Gimeno, abogado, D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero, abogado, E. Arnaldos Orts, abogado, and F. Doumont, avocat)
      
         Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  set aside the judgment under appeal in its entirety;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  rule on the dispute and annul the Parliament’s decision in so far as it rejects the appellant’s application to be granted a voluntary additional pension on the ground that he has not reached the required age of 65;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the Parliament to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and the costs of the proceedings before the General Court in Case T-245/20.
               
            
         Grounds of appeal and main arguments
      
      The grounds of appeal allege: (i) the Bureau’s lack of competence to take the decision of the Bureau of 2018, inter alia in so far as it lays down substantive conditions for rights conferring prospective entitlement before the entry into force of the Staff Regulations; (ii) infringement of the first sentence of Article 27(2) of the Staff Regulations by reason of non-observance of rights conferring prospective entitlement prior to the entry into force of the Staff Regulations; (iii) infringement of the principle of equality and non-discrimination and of the principle of proportionality; and (iv) infringement of the principle of legal certainty (lack of transitional measures) and the principle of legitimate expectations.