Action brought on 29 June 2007 - Malheiro v Commission
(Case T-228/07)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Ana Malheiro (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: C. Ebrecht, lawyer)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
Annul the decision adopted by the European Commission, Director-General of Personnel and Administration on 30 April 2007, rejecting complaint No R/6/07, registered on 8 January 2007, seeking annulment of the decision by the European Commission's DG ADMIN not to grant her allowances other than the reduced daily subsistence allowance of EUR 28.78;
order that the defendant pay the applicant, for the period of 16 November 2006 until 31 October 2008, the full daily subsistence allowance of EUR 115.09 provided for by the Commission Decision laying down rules on the secondment of national experts to the Commission (C(2006) 2003) of 1 June 2006 less the amount of the daily subsistence allowances already received by the applicant, plus an additional monthly allowance of EUR 542.55;
order that the defendant reimburse the applicant her incurred removal expenses;
order the defendant to bear the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant, who is working as a seconded national expert for the Commission, wishes to receive i) full daily subsistence allowance instead of the reduced daily subsistence allowance granted by the Commission, and ii) a further monthly allowance instead of removal expenses.
In support of her application, the applicant firstly submits that the Commission committed an error of assessment since it deemed the applicant's residence to be in Brussels because her husband has his residence there. The applicant submits that her stay in Brussels is only of a temporary character and that she is to the same extent as any other seconded national expert exposed to the same inconveniences and disadvantages resulting in the temporary nature of the secondment.
Furthermore, the applicant alleges that the Commission infringed the principle of equal treatment and Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union since Article 20(3)(b) of the Commission's decision laying down the rules on the secondment of national experts to the Commission discriminates against married seconded national experts compared to unmarried seconded national experts living together with someone in a relationship.
Moreover, the applicant contends that this discrimination as well as the, in comparison with the applicant's allowance, higher allowance given to unmarried male seconded national experts (whether living in a relationship or not) leads to an infringement of Article 141 EC and the principle of equal pay for men and women as well as of Directive 2000/78/EC
1 and of the principle of proportionality.