Language of document :

Action brought on 13 January 2006 -Villa and Others v Parliament

(Case F-4/06)

Language of the case: French


Applicants: Renata Villa (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) and Others (represented by: G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

annul decisions Nos 102494, 102494 and 102496 of 8 February 2005 whereby the appointing authority of the European Parliament refused to reimburse to the applicants the excess premium resulting from the difference between the rights acquired during the years when they were affiliated to the Italian scheme and the number of annuities transferred to the Community scheme following a new calculation of the transfer of their pension rights;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main argument

In 1991, the applicants, who are officials of the European Parliament, transferred to the Community scheme the pension rights which they had acquired in Italy before entering the service of the Communities. The difference between the actual number of years of affiliation to the Italian scheme and the number of annuities resulting from the calculation of the premium in the Community scheme was determined in accordance with the general implementing provisions then applied by the Parliament, which did not align the premium with the number of years of affiliation in Italy.

Following the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations, the applicants submitted requests seeking to obtain a new calculation of the premium previously obtained, in reliance on Article 26(5) and (6) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations. The requests were rejected and the applicants lodged complaints, which were also rejected by the appointing authority.

In their action, the applicants claim that there has been a breach of Article 26 of Annex XIII to the new Staff Regulations, and also of Article 1(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, in both the new and the old versions.

They further maintain that the Parliament has also breached the principles of proper administration, of equal treatment, of non-discrimination, of the prohibition of unfair process, of the protection of legitimate expectations, of non-enrichment and also of the duty to have regard for the welfare of staff.