CELEX: C2006/010/56
Language: en
Date: 2006-01-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-399/05: Action brought on  21 October 2005  — Wils v European Parliament

14.1.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 10/28
            
         Action brought on 21 October 2005 — Wils v European Parliament
   (Case T-399/05)
   (2006/C 10/56)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Dieter Wils (Altrier, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Vandersanden and C. Ronzi, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Parliament
   Form of order sought
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the applicant's salary slip for January 2005 with retroactive effect from 1 July 2004, insofar as it increases the rate of contribution to the pension scheme to 9.75 %, and order repayment to the applicant of the percentage of the contribution corresponding to the increase in rate. Accordingly — in the earlier salary slips — restore the rate of contribution to the level set before 1 July 2004;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant, an official of the Parliament, challenges the increase in the rate of contribution to the pension scheme to 9,75 %, introduced by Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, which came into force on 1 May 2004. In support of his claims, he alleges the illegality of that annex, in the light of Article 83(4) of the Staff Regulations, in the version applicable prior to 1 May 2004. The effect of that latter provision was to allow the contribution at issue to be altered for the sole purpose of ensuring actuarial balance. However, the applicant submits that the increase in question was decided upon for other reasons, namely, to cover a pre-existing deficit in the Community pension scheme.
   Furthermore, the applicant claims that the criteria used by Eurostat to calculate the actuarial balance are based on parameters which have led to miscalculations. He also pleads a breach of the principle of proportionality, in that the increase in question goes beyond what is strictly necessary to restore actuarial balance. Lastly, the applicant alleges infringement of his legitimate expectations, since the Parliament clearly let it be understood that it would not allow the rate of contribution to be altered otherwise than in strict compliance with the actuarial balance.