CELEX: C1997/199/75
Language: en
Date: 1997-06-28 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 16 April 1997 by Paul Keyaerts against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-114/97)

28 . 6 . 97              EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                              No C 199/29
Action brought on 16 April 1997 by Paul Keyaerts against                      Members of the Court of Auditors, to decide at the
         the Commission of the European Communities                           same time on an appropriate increase in the rate of the
                          ( Case T-l 14/97)                                   applicant's pension, as provided for by Article 18
                                                                              of Council Regulation ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC)
                             ( 97/C 199/75                                    No 2290/77 .
                  (Language of the case: French)
                                                                         — order the defendant to pay the costs.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Instance of the European Communities on 16 April 1997
by Paul Keyaerts, residing at Overijse ( Belgium ),
represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an              The applicant, a former Member of the Court of Auditors
address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of Fidu­                who ceased to hold office in February 1994, states that he
ciaire Myson Sari , 30 Rue de Cessange.                                  first became entitled to payment of his pension on 1 March
                                                                         1997. On 27 February he received the calculation of the
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              net amount of his pension, from which he noted that,
                                                                         pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation ( EEC, Euratom,
— annul the Commission's decision of 17 June 1996                        ECSC ) No 840/95 of 10 April 1995 amending Regulation
                                                                         ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 2290/77, his pension had not
     rejecting the applicant's request that it give
     consideration to the possible application of Article 31             been increased following the increase in the salaries
                                                                         granted by Article 1 of that Regulation to the President
     ( 2 ) of the Staff Regulations,                                     and    the  Members     of the   Court   of Auditors .  That
                                                                         individual decision constitutes        the   measure    being
— annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision                     challenged in this case .
     adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
     expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,
                                                                         The applicant pleads first that Article 2 of Regulation
— order the defendant to pay all the costs.                              ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 840/95 is unlawful : it provides
                                                                         expressly that an increase in pensions acquired will not
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                      take place even though Article 1 of that same regulation
                                                                         lays down the amounts of the Increase in the basic salaries
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in                   and monthly transitional allowances of the President and
                                                                         Members of the Court of Auditors . He considers that that
Case T-l 6/97 (').
                                                                         provision is incompatible with Article 18 of Regulation
(') OJ No C 74 , 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27.
                                                                         ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 2290/77, according to which,
                                                                         should the Council decide to increase the basic salary, it
                                                                         shall at the same time decide on an appropriate increase in
                                                                         the rates of existing pensions . He points out, secondly,
                                                                         that the provision in question constitutes an amendment
                                                                         that is lacking any valid grounds on the basis of the
                                                                         previous settled practice of the Council .
Action brought on 16 April 1997 by Richie Ryan against
                       the Court of Auditors
                           ( Case T-121 /97 )                            In the alternative, he claims that Regulation ( EEC,
                                                                         Euratom, ECSC ) No 840/95 does not apply to his case,
                              ( 97/C 199/76 )                            inasmuch as it refers to acquired pensions, that is to say to
                                                                         pensions that have been settled when it entered into force.
                  (Language of the case: French)                         The applicant's pension had not been settled, in the sense
                                                                         that it had not been paid, prior to the date on which the
An action against the Court of Auditors was brought                      Regulation entered into force — 1 May 1995 — and was
before the Court of First Instance of the European                       only settled at a much later date .
Communities on 16 April 1997 by Richie Ryan, resident
in Dublin ( Ireland ), represented by Georges Vandersanden,
of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in                      The applicant also points out that, on the basis of
Luxembourg at the Offices of Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30                   Article 18 of Regulation ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 2290/
Rue de Cessange .                                                         77 which was applicable when he took up his duties as a
                                                                         Member of the Court of Auditors, he was legitimately
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              entitled to expect that the amount of his pension would be
                                                                          increased appropriately, when the basic salary was
                                                                          increased, by a decision of the Council taken at the same
— annul the decision settling the applicant's pension                    time . He accordingly considers that in not complying with
     rights as first brought to his attention on 27 February
                                                                         that provision the Council has disregarded the principle of
      1997 with effect from 1 March 1997, inasmuch as
                                                                          the protection of legitimate expectations .
     that decision, pursuant to Article 2 of Council
      Regulation ( EEC, Euratom, ECSC ) No 840/95 ,
      disregards the Council's obligation, if it decides to               Lastly, he pleads that the principle of non-discrimination
      increase the basic salaries of the President and the                has been infringed, pointing out that the system