Judgment Case T-47/91 Analysis

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What must the rules for payment of remuneration take into account for officials?

The number of years of service of the officials

The level of education of the officials

The difference in the cost of living in different countries

The differences in the respective situations of the officials (correct)

What percentage of their remuneration are officials serving in non-member countries assumed to spend in the country of employment?

75%

100%

50%

80% (correct)

Which costs are officials serving in a non-member country not required to bear?

Salary costs

Health care costs (correct)

Travel costs

Training costs

Who represented Annick Auzat in her application against the Commission?

G.Vandersanden Signup and view all the answers

In which court was the application made for the annulment of the decision?

Court of First Instance of the European Communities Signup and view all the answers

What was the applicant's request regarding her salary?

For full payment in the currency of her country of employment Signup and view all the answers

Who acted as the agent for the Commission during the proceedings?

J.Griesmar Signup and view all the answers

Which language was used during the case proceedings?

French Signup and view all the answers

What legal principle does the applicant claim Articles 11 and 12 of Annex X infringe upon?

Higher legal principle of equality of treatment Signup and view all the answers

How much does Articles 11 and 12 effectively reduce the applicant's salary by?

7.8% Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant assert about officials serving in non-member countries compared to herself?

They have a more favorable salary system Signup and view all the answers

What requirement must be fulfilled for the applicant to receive the remaining 20% of her remuneration?

A special statement of reasons Signup and view all the answers

What benefit do officials in Belgium have according to the applicant?

Independent of actual expenditure Signup and view all the answers

Which article outlines the purpose of ensuring equivalent purchasing power for officials?

Article 64 of the Staff Regulations Signup and view all the answers

What is a consequence mentioned regarding the application of weighting for the applicant?

Reduced salary and purchasing power Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant argue regarding the application of the weighting system?

It is arbitrary and arbitrary based on location Signup and view all the answers

What principle is alleged to be violated by Articles 11 and 12 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations?

Principle of equivalence of purchasing power Signup and view all the answers

How does Article 11 of Annex X specify the payment of remuneration in Belgium?

In Belgian francs subject to local cost adjustments Signup and view all the answers

What does Article 12 of Annex X allow the appointing authority to do?

Pay remuneration in the currency of the country of employment upon request Signup and view all the answers

What percentage of net remuneration may the appointing authority agree to pay in the currency of the country of employment according to internal directives?

80% Signup and view all the answers

What is a possible reason for the appointing authority to pay more than 80% of remuneration in local currency?

For cases with valid justifications Signup and view all the answers

What is a primary concern raised by the applicant regarding the Commission's interpretation of Article 12?

That it violates the principle of non-discrimination Signup and view all the answers

What significant action did the Commission take during the hearing regarding the application?

Withdrew its objection of inadmissibility Signup and view all the answers

What does Article 1 of the internal directives primarily concern?

Arrangements for payment in local currency Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary principle regarding education for the children of Community officials serving outside the Community?

Education must be free for their children through various allowances. Signup and view all the answers

What additional provision is made for officials serving in countries with high health charges?

Supplementary insurance covering 100% of medical fees. Signup and view all the answers

How does the status of officials serving in non-member countries compare to that of national diplomats?

Their status is assimilated to that of national diplomats. Signup and view all the answers

What complicates the situation for officials serving in non-member countries?

The educational options available are often limited and costly. Signup and view all the answers

What does the mobility obligation for staff of external delegations imply?

They often have to establish their center of interests away from the workplace. Signup and view all the answers

According to the policy, who is responsible for half of the insurance costs?

The individual official. Signup and view all the answers

What is a key difference highlighted between officials serving in non-member countries and those within the Community?

Officials overseas face unique challenges not experienced by local officials. Signup and view all the answers

What is proposed to address the education costs for children of officials serving outside the Community?

Providing increased allowances to cover reasonable fees. Signup and view all the answers

What is one of the key differences between officials serving in non-member countries and those serving in the Community?

Mobility is a crucial aspect for officials in non-member countries. Signup and view all the answers

According to the Court, what did the applicant acknowledge regarding the treatment of officials?

The situation of officials serving in non-member countries does differ from those in the Community. Signup and view all the answers

What aspect of working conditions for officials in non-member countries is highlighted in the proposal for a regulation?

Their working conditions differ significantly from those within the Community. Signup and view all the answers

What does the practice of the EAC regarding accommodation for staff imply?

Free accommodation is crucial due to the challenges of mobility. Signup and view all the answers

How often are staff in delegations serving outside the Community typically transferred?

At regular intervals, generally not exceeding four years. Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant's statement imply about the advantages provided to officials in non-member countries?

They are intended to address unique disadvantages faced by those officials. Signup and view all the answers

What rationale is provided for accommodating diplomatic staff abroad?

To deal with the mobility problems staff experience. Signup and view all the answers

What is a characteristic of the living conditions in some non-member countries compared to the Community?

They differ significantly in several aspects. Signup and view all the answers

What is the main argument put forth by the applicant regarding Article 12 of Annex X?

It allows officials to demand payment in local currency. Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant believe the expression 'may decide' indicates?

The official's initiative is necessary for payment requests. Signup and view all the answers

According to the Commission, who holds the ultimate decision-making power regarding payment in local currency?

The appointing authority. Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant argue should happen if the Court follows their interpretation?

Article 1 of the internal directives should be annulled. Signup and view all the answers

What does the expression 'all or part' signify in the context of the applicant's claim?

The official can request any percentage of conversion. Signup and view all the answers

What is the Commission’s response to the applicant’s interpretation of Article 12?

It contradicts the specific wording of the provision. Signup and view all the answers

What does the applicant expect the Court to do regarding the contested measure?

Annul the contested measure. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is NOT a claim made by the applicant concerning Article 12 of Annex X?

Article 12 allows unlimited payment in local currency. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Judgment of 15 December 1992 - Case T-47/91

Officials from the European Commission in a non-member country are not required to pay accommodation or health care costs.
The presumption of a 80% expenditure rate for officials in a non-member country, compared with a full expenditure rate for officials within the Community, is proportionate to the differing situations.
Remuneration rules must account for differing purchasing power among officials depending on their location of employment.
The applicant, Annick Auzat, requested remuneration in the currency of her place of employment (Geneva).
Auzat, along with colleagues, sought payment in full Swiss francs, with weighting for the place of employment.
The Director General for Personnel and Administration denied this request.
The applicant complained under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities.
This complaint was rejected by the Commission on 4 March 1991.
The Commission raised an objection of inadmissibility based on Article 113 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance.
The applicant submitted observations on the objection of inadmissibility on 14 October 1991.
The Court Case concerned the legal interpretation of Articles 11 and 12 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations.
The case involved conflicting interpretations of the Staff Regulations, particularly Article 62 regarding payment of remuneration.
The Court considered whether the different treatment for officials in non-member countries versus those in the Community was justified.
The Court found the different treatment was justified by the differing situations.
The Court dismissed the application and ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Facts giving rise to the dispute

The applicant, Annick Auzat, was a Grade B1 official at the Commission's Permanent Delegation in Geneva.
Her employment began 1 October 1989.
On 7 February 1990, the applicant and colleagues requested payment of their full remuneration in the currency of her place of employment, with weighting.
The Director General for Personnel and Administration denied the request in a memorandum dated 3 July 1990.

Procedure

On 28 August 1990, the applicant (and colleagues) submitted a complaint under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations.
The complaint was rejected on 4 March 1991
Formal application was lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 17 June 1991.
The Commission filed an objection of inadmissibility on 28 August 1991.
Observations on the inadmissibility objection were submitted on 14 October 1991.
The Court reserved its decision on the inadmissibility objection until its final judgment in accordance with Article 114(4) of the Rules of Procedure.
The Court opened oral proceedings without a preliminary inquiry.

Studying That Suits You

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

Description

This quiz provides an analysis of the judgment delivered on 15 December 1992 in Case T-47/91. It explores the implications of accommodation and health care costs for European Commission officials in non-member countries, as well as the considerations for remuneration based on purchasing power. Test your understanding of the key arguments and legal principles involved.