I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
(2023/C 63/77)
Language of the case: French
Applicant: PT (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
The applicant claims that the General Court should:
Declare and adjudge that
—the European Commission is ordered to refund to the applicant the updated capital representing her pension rights that she transferred to the Pension Scheme of the European Union Institutions under Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;
—the European Commission is ordered to pay the costs.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law.
The applicant relies on unjust enrichment, in so far as she transferred her pension rights into the Pension Scheme of the European Union Institutions (‘PSEUI’), which gave rise to a ‘crediting’ of additional pensionable years recognised in the PSEUI. However, that ‘crediting’ did not give rise to any increase in the amount of pension paid to her under the fourth paragraph of Article 77 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’), the calculation of which is based exclusively on years of service (to the exclusion of additional pensionable years to be credited in respect of the transfer of pension rights).
The refusal to repay the pension rights transferred having no effect where the mechanism of the minimum subsistence figure referred to in the fourth paragraph of Article 77 of the Staff Regulations applies, gives rise, according to the applicant, to the unjust enrichment of the European Union.