EU Case T-249/19: Expatriation Allowance

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What does the applicant claim about her family's residence during her husband's diplomatic mission?

They were all engaged in gainful occupations at the place of assignment.

They had their center of interests in Greece. (correct)

They had been living in the host country for over a year.

They were habitually residing at the place of assignment.

Which article does the applicant refer to in making her argument about her diplomatic status?

Article 12 of the European Union Treaty.

Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations. (correct)

Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Article 23 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

What consequence does the applicant argue should result from her diplomatic status?

Her family should not have been allowed to reside in the host country.

Her status creates obstacles to forming lasting ties with the host State. (correct)

She should have been granted financial support from the host country.

She should have been considered a permanent resident of the host country.

What does the applicant argue regarding the individual assessment of her situation?

It can include the fact that her husband is part of the diplomatic staff. Signup and view all the answers

What right does the applicant claim is being disregarded in the contested decision?

The right to respect for her private and family life. Signup and view all the answers

What did the Commission request from the applicant during the pre-litigation procedure?

A rental agreement for her accommodation in Brussels Signup and view all the answers

What was the reason the three annexed documents submitted by the applicant were deemed inadmissible?

They could have been submitted in earlier proceedings Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant allege regarding the Commission's interpretation of the expatriation allowance?

It is based on false assumptions about her residence Signup and view all the answers

What is one of the pleas in law raised by the applicant?

Incorrect classification of the facts leading to the decision Signup and view all the answers

In what year did the Commission request the certificate of de-registration from the commune?

2016 Signup and view all the answers

How did the applicant support her case regarding the expatriation allowance?

By submitting a certificate of former residence Signup and view all the answers

What period does the applicant claim she was not habitually resident in Brussels?

The entire reference period Signup and view all the answers

What is the applicant challenging in her action against the Commission?

The contested decision due to an alleged error of assessment Signup and view all the answers

What distinguishes the applicant's situation from that of the applicant in the case of Wywiał-Prząda v Commission?

The applicant did not establish habitual residence in Brussels. Signup and view all the answers

What does Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations specifically cover?

Work done by the actual official entering service Signup and view all the answers

Why does the applicant believe her interim employment contracts should not contribute to habitual residence?

Because they were equivalent to professional traineeships. Signup and view all the answers

Why can't the provisions of Article 4(1)(a) be extended to a partner of an official working for another state?

Due to the absence of direct work involvement Signup and view all the answers

What evidence does the applicant provide to support the temporary nature of her stay in Brussels?

She was hosted by friends instead of renting an apartment. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of the applicant who benefited from diplomatic status, what was significant about their employment situation?

They were not a member of any international staff Signup and view all the answers

What was the purpose of the applicant accepting short-term contracts during her stay in Brussels?

To support her family during the economic crisis in Greece. Signup and view all the answers

What key factor did the Court of Justice emphasize in determining the applicant's integration issues?

The specific tie to another State Signup and view all the answers

What does the residence certificate issued by the Greek State signify regarding the applicant's stay in Brussels?

It confirms the temporary nature of her stay. Signup and view all the answers

Which judgment highlighted that special status cannot solely be derived from privileges and immunities?

Commission v Hosman-Chevalier Signup and view all the answers

When did the entire family move to Greece after their time in Brussels?

At the end of her husband's mandate in August 2016. Signup and view all the answers

What aspect of the applicant's situation was specifically noted by the Commission?

Holding diplomatic status but no formal employment Signup and view all the answers

During which specific period did the applicant claim to have no durable occupation?

1 September 2016 to 1 February 2017. Signup and view all the answers

What was the conclusion about the applicant's work relations as per Article 4(1)(a)?

It applies only to work performed in the state of employment Signup and view all the answers

What was the applicant's primary concern regarding her habitual residence during her stay in Brussels?

She believed her stay lacked durability and stability. Signup and view all the answers

What did the second sentence of the second indent of Article 4(1)(a) exclude?

Work performed by non-officials Signup and view all the answers

What is the main claim of the applicant in the second plea regarding the Commission's assessment?

The Commission misinterpreted the provided evidence. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following does the applicant assert as evidence of her definitive move from Brussels?

Moving all of her furniture. Signup and view all the answers

What was the Commission's response to the applicant's claim concerning the examination of her documents?

The Commission stated that they examined the facts thoroughly. Signup and view all the answers

How did the Commission support its position against the second plea?

By referring to the first plea's factual examination. Signup and view all the answers

Which action did the PMO take regarding the applicant’s documents?

They requested more supporting documents from the applicant. Signup and view all the answers

What is the outcome of the second plea as mentioned in the content?

It was rejected as unfounded. Signup and view all the answers

What aspect of the applicant's personal situation did the Court consider?

Details provided in the first plea. Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant argue about the Commission's conclusions?

They included assumptions that were unfounded. Signup and view all the answers

What is required for a stay in a country to potentially qualify as habitual residence?

Lasting social and professional ties Signup and view all the answers

How does the nature of employment contracts affect the classification of residence?

Short-term contracts do not suggest habitual residence. Signup and view all the answers

What was the applicant's living situation during her employment in Brussels?

She stayed with friends. Signup and view all the answers

What type of work were the applicant's temporary contracts related to?

Remunerated professional services Signup and view all the answers

What can be inferred about intent from temporary employment contracts that are not for training?

They indicate a lack of significant intention to reside. Signup and view all the answers

According to case law, what is necessary for a temporary stay to be classified as habitual residence?

Interplay of various relevant factors. Signup and view all the answers

What judgment addressed the presumption regarding a person’s intent to change their residence?

Asturias Cuerno v Commission Signup and view all the answers

Which factor does NOT contribute to establishing habitual residence according to the provided content?

Educational background Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) - 15 October 2020

Case: T-249/19
Applicant: Marina Karpeta-Kovalyova, residing in Woluwe-Saint-Pierre (Belgium)
Defendant: European Commission
Issue: Decision refusing entitlement to expatriation allowance, daily subsistence allowance, installation allowance, and reimbursement of removal expenses. Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations.
Background: Applicant had Ukrainian nationality and acquired Greek nationality. Moved from Ukraine to Brussels (Belgium) in 2009. Worked as interim staff member in Brussels (2016-2017), then employed by the European Commission from August 2017 to July 2018.
Commission's Decision (14 June 2018): Refused entitlement to allowances due to missing documents. Established applicant's place of origin and recruitment as Brussels.
Contested Decision (14 June 2018): Applicant was not entitled to allowances due to missing documents (and information) and was asked to re-submit them.
Applicant's Complaint: Rejected by the appointing authority (10 January 2019).
Reference Period: February 1, 2012 to February 1, 2017
Habitual Residence: Applicant argued habitual residence was in Athens, but the appointing authority believed Brussels was the habitual residence based on family and interests.
Legal Arguments: The applicant argued for the applicability of article 4(1) (a) and related rulings. The Commission argued that the applicant was habitually resident in Brussels.
Court's Decision/Judgment: Dismissed the action and ordered the applicant to pay costs. The court considered the documents that were submitted
Key Issues: Criteria for determining habitual residence, diplomatic status impact on residence, temporary employment contracts' impact on habitual residence.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

Explore the details of the Judgment of the General Court regarding case T-249/19. This quiz covers the refusal of entitlements for expatriation and daily subsistence allowances to applicant Marina Karpeta-Kovalyova. Delve into the implications of her nationality changes and the European Commission's decisions.