CELEX: C2005/132/63
Language: en
Date: 2005-05-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-139/05: Action brought on 31 March 2005 by Charlotte Becker and Others against the European Parliament

28.5.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 132/35
            
         Action brought on 31 March 2005 by Charlotte Becker and Others against the European Parliament
   (Case T-139/05)
   (2005/C 132/63)
   Language of the case: French
   An action against the European Parliament was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 31 March 2005 by Charlotte Becker, residing in Manton (France), Seamus Killeen, residing in Sutton (Dublin), Robert Payne, residing in Terenure (Dublin), Deirdre Gallagher, residing in Terenure, Paul Van Raij, residing in Overveen (Netherlands), Wilhemus Van Miltenburg, residing in Huizen (Netherlands), represented by Georges Vandersanden, Laure Levi and Aurore Finchelstein, lawyers.
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the applicants' pension slips for May 2004, with the exception of Ms Gallagher's, with the effect of applying a weighting at the rate for the capital of their country of residence or, at the very least, a weighting such as will adequately reflect the differences in the cost of living between the places in which the applicants are deemed to incur their expenditure and thus corresponding with the principle of equivalence,
            
         
               —
            
            
               as regards Ms Gallagher, annul her payslip for May 2004, with the effect of applying a weighting to the allowance which she receives for being assigned to non-active service, fixed at the rate for the capital of the country of residence or, at the very least, a weighting such as will adequately reflect the differences in the cost of living in the place where the applicant is deemed to incur her expenditure and thus corresponding to the principle of equivalence;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   In support of their action, the applicants put forward the same pleas in law and arguments as those put forward in Case T-35/05.