Action brought on 11 August 2006 - Magdalena Antas v Council of the European Union

(Case F-92/06)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Magdalena Antas (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

annul the Council's decision rejecting the applicant's claim for damages for suffering caused by the successive errors made by the institution;

fix a time-limit for the parties so as to allow them to agree on the correct level of compensation for the damage suffered by the applicant;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant took up her duties as a member of the auxiliary staff in the General Secretariat of the Council on 1 November 2003 and her contract ended on 31 March 2005. From 1 January 2005, the Council automatically affiliated her to the compulsory Belgian social security scheme for the last three months of her employment. Subsequently, the Council informed the applicant of her affiliation to the abovementioned scheme with retroactive effect, dated back to the day on which she took up her duties. However, according to the applicant, as a result of the lateness of her affiliation, she was unable to meet the conditions for receiving Belgian unemployment benefits, as laid down in the Belgian Royal Decree of 25 November 1991 on the regulation of unemployment.¹ She was therefore unable to prove that she had sufficient means to be granted a residence permit that would allow her to remain in Belgium for more than three months, in accordance with Article 7 of Directive 2004/38/EC.² Furthermore, the lateness of the affiliation deprived her of the right that she would have enjoyed under Annex XII of the Treaty of Accession of Poland to the European Union of access to the Belgian labour market.

In support of her application, the applicant pleads first of all infringement of Article 70 of the Conditions of Employment of other servants of the European Communities, which lays down the institution's obligation to affiliate auxiliary staff to a compulsory social security scheme and to take responsibility for the employer's contributions required under the legislation in force.

Next, the applicant claims infringement of Articles 4 and 8 of the Belgian Royal Decree of 5 November 2002 establishing an immediate declaration of employment.³

Finally, the applicant relies on infringement of the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials.

____________

¹ - Moniteur belge of 31 December 1991, p. 29888.

² - Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ L 158, p. 77).

³ - Moniteur belge of 20 November 2002, p. 51778.