JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
(First Chamber)
22May 2012
Case F‑109/10
AU
v
European Commission
(Civil service— Contract staff— Pensions— Severance grant)
Application:brought under Article270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article106a thereof, in which AU seeks, principally, annulment of the Commission’s decision refusing to pay him a severance grant.
Held:The action is dismissed. The applicant is to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission.
Summary
Officials— Contract staff— Severance grant— Conditions for granting
(Staff Regulations, Annex VIII, Art. 12)
It clearly follows from the wording of Article12(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations that the benefit of the severance grant is subject to the condition that a member of the contract staff must, since taking up his duties with the European Union, and in order to establish or maintain pension rights, have paid into a national pension scheme, a private insurance scheme or a pension fund of his choice which satisfies the requirements set out in paragraph 1 of that article. Consequently, where the member of the contract staff has not made any payments of that nature, the mere fact that he has continued to acquire pension rights in a Member State does not entitle him to the severance grant. The provisions of Union law granting entitlement to financial benefits must be interpreted strictly.
Furthermore, under Article12(1)(b) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, members of the contract staff who have paid into a private insurance scheme or a pension fund in order to establish or maintain pension rights may receive a severance grant only if that private insurance scheme or pension fund satisfies a number of conditions, including that it guarantees that the capital will not be repaid to the staff in question.
(see paras 24-25)
See:
16December 2004, T‑11/02 Pappas v Commission, para. 53