Alvarez y Bejarano and Others v Commission (Judgment) French Text [2021] EUECJ C-517/19P (25 March 2021)

Alvarez y Bejarano and Others v Commission (Judgment) French Text [2021] EUECJ C-517/19P (25 March 2021)

The Court held that the legislator did not breach the principles of equality or proportionality by limiting annual travel reimbursement and additional leave to those entitled to expatriation/depaysement allowances. The differentiation is objectively justified by the aim to target benefits to those least integrated...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] EUECJ C-517/19P
Parties
Appellants: María Álvarez y Bejarano and Others; Respondent: Commission européenne; Respondent/intervener: Conseil de l’Union européenne; Intervener: Parlement européen
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
25 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (pourvoi) From General Court (tribunal) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Equality of Treatment, Proportionality, EU Staff Regulations, Expatriation Allowance, Travel Expenses, Judicial Review
European Union Law Public Service Law Statutory Interpretation Equality of Treatment Proportionality EU Staff Regulations Expatriation Allowance Travel Expenses +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

María Álvarez y Bejarano and Others

Appellants

Commission européenne

Respondent

Conseil de l’Union européenne

Respondent/intervener

Parlement européen

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (pourvoi) From General Court (tribunal) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amendments to the EU Staff Regulations linking annual travel reimbursement and additional leave to expatriation/depaysement status violate the principles of equality and proportionality.
  2. 2 Whether the General Court erred in its standard of judicial review regarding the legislator's discretion.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the legislator did not breach the principles of equality or proportionality by limiting annual travel reimbursement and additional leave to those entitled to expatriation/depaysement allowances. The differentiation is objectively justified by the aim to target benefits to those least integrated in the host state, and the rules are not manifestly inappropriate. The General Court applied the correct standard of review, given the legislator's broad discretion in staff matters.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed.
  • The appellants are ordered to pay the costs.