Assessment of liability of an executor of will for public benefit purposes.

Assets transferred by will for public benefit purposes are liquidated by executors of wills, who hold a public office and are subject to the supervision of the Minister of Finance. The obligation on that executor includes the collection of dividends from shares constituting a claim in succession against their issuer, as well as the immediate deposit of the proceeds of those shares into an interest-bearing bank account, which is available in the event of damage caused by the breach of its obligations expressly laid down in Compulsory Law No. 2039/1939, for any degree of fault, including slight negligence. The concept of negligence is a legal concept, therefore, the classification of the facts -as determined conclusively by the court of merit in a specific case- is amenable to review on appeal (cassation). In the present case, there is no fault even to the degree of slight negligence, on the part of the appellant. Minority opinion: Slight negligence is objectively established.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Bequests

Download the file

Support from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development to investment plans for the improvement of agricultural holdings. 

Failure to complete the project due to the failure of the contracting supplier to provide the investment assets as required. Transactions, even fraudulent ones, committed by the beneficiary's counterparties fall within the ordinary commercial risks assumed by the entrepreneur and are not considered to be beyond their control, whereas it is for the beneficiary to choose carefully the persons with whom they transact and to bind them sufficiently by contract to ensure compliance with contractual terms. Furthermore, the beneficiary must diligently supervise the progress of their affairs and respond appropriately when an anomaly is detected, and, where appropriate, find alternative suppliers and scrupulously comply with the deadlines provided by the relevant regulations. The existence of force majeure on the part of the beneficiary due to the supplier's omissions was not proven. The partial implementation of the project and, in the present case, the purchase of a single plough was not proven to have contributed to the improvement of the agricultural holding's performance or to the attainment of the program's objective; consequently, the overall recovery of the funding paid does not appear disproportionate.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Financial Corrections

Download the file

Financial correction against former general partners of a dissolved general partnership (O.E.) which has been the subject of a co-financed structural adjustment programme due, inter alia, to the transformation of the partnership into an individual undertaking in breach of the programme’s terms. The continuation of the dissolved partnership’s activity on an individual basis by its 99 % shareholder (the first appellant) was the result of the retirement of the original partner (the second appellant), as the interim participation of the third appellant in the partnership, with a stake of only 1%, was purely incidental and immaterial. It follows that the revocation of the decision to include the aforementioned partnership in the programme on that formal ground alone and the subsequent imposition of the disputed financial correction upon its former partners and current appellants are contrary to the principle of proportionality, which requires that those measures be reasonably proportionate to the severity of the established infringement. 

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Financial Corrections

Download the file

Financial correction and recovery. The principle of sound administration does not appear to be compatible with the regime of EU funding, which provides for the beneficiary to assume specific obligations and commitments, as taken into account in the inclusion decision under EU law, as well as for the recovery of the financing in the event of their breach. The principle of legitimate expectation does not apply in cases of manifest violation of EU and national legislation, regarding the terms of funding payment. Infringement of national legislation relating to the eligibility criteria for the operational programme in question. Dismissal of the appeal.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Financial Corrections

Download the file

Financial correction and recovery. The primary objective of verifications is to ensure that the expenditure declared is genuine, that the products or services have been delivered in accordance with the inclusion decision and that both the operation and the expenditure comply with national and EU law. The payment of remuneration to a research team member is not eligible because, according to the Technical Annex to the funding decision, their participation was free of charge (pro bono). The request for internal transfer of funds, via increasing one category of expenditure by the amount of unspent funds from another, is subject to prior approval by the GSRT (General Secretariat for Research and Technology) and should be justified by the legality and feasibility of the transfer. The rejection of expenditure as ineligible, due to the formal omission of nominating personnel in the Amended Technical Annex is contrary to the principle of proportionality.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Recipients of undue payments

Download the file

Financial correction for expenditure definitively deemed ineligible under the Operational Programme 'Environment and Sustainable Development' NSRF 2007-2013. The justification for the financial correction must indicate the amount unduly or unlawfully paid as well as the grounds for its recovery. The project contractor was paid using credits from the SATA (Collective Decision for Local Government Funding) rather than from the NSRF funding account. Contradiction regarding the validity or otherwise of the procedure for issuing the financial correction decision, rendering the justification deficient. Referral of the case file to the administration.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Financial Corrections

Download the file

Draft concession agreement, for the implementation of the project “Design, Construction, Financing, Operation, Maintenance and Exploitation of the Northern Road Axis of Crete (B.O.A.K.) in the Chania-Heraklion section”. The term “Contractual Consideration” has been defined as the exclusive right granted to the Concessionaire under the Concession Agreement to operate the concession project, in combination with the payment of the State Financial Contribution, the Optional Financial Contribution, the right to collect Toll Fees from users and the Shadow Toll from the State. There are no impediments to the signing of the draft agreement, noting, inter alia, that, in the event that the pending petitions for annulment filed against the relevant Environmental Impact Assessment Approvals (AEPO) are granted, the contracting parties will have to comply with environmental legislation, should a modification of the project design be required, potentially proceeding to an amendment of the Concession Agreement and its corresponding terms and conditions.

Category:
• Pre-contractual Audit

Download the file

Imputation of liability against a military physician who resigns prematurely from the service. “Specialization period” shall be understood solely as the period required for obtaining a primary medical specialty and does not include any further postgraduate training (fellowships) abroad, even if such training pertains to the same scientific field.

The obligation of military medical officers to remain in service for a period twice the duration of their training abroad and the non-inclusion of the aforementioned time served towards the fulfillment of the undertaking to remain in the armed forces, as well as the obligation to pay compensation based on the remaining period in the event of premature resignation, do not infringe upon human dignity (Article 2 par. 1 of the Constitution) and is not contrary to the constitutional principles of equality (Article 4 par.1 of the Constitution), the free development of personality (Article  5 par. 1 of the Constitution), prohibition of forced labour (Article 22 par. 4 of the Constitution) and proportionality (Article 25 par. 1 of the Constitution), nor the supranational provisions of the European Security Charter and the ECHR on freedom to freely choose and change profession. Moreover, the obligation to pay compensation does not constitute a penalty or a general sanction imposed on the resigning officer, as its establishment is not punitive in nature; rather, it is restorative of the financial burden incurred by the State due to the non-fulfillment of the officer’s undertaking to remain in the armed forces and provide their services. It serves as a financial offset for the State's investment in the individual for the training of a specialized officer whose replacement is difficult. In view of this restorative nature, the imposition of compensation is not contrary to the provisions of Article 1 of the First Additional Protocol (P1-1) to the ECHR, regarding the protection of property. Dissenting opinion, regarding the appellant's claim that the Chamber failed to examine whether a fair balance was maintained concerning the method of calculating the compensation.
 

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Early retirement military personnel

Download the file

Issue regarding the application of the provisions of Articles 105 of the Introductory Law to the Civil Code (Eis.N.A.K.) and 932 of the Civil Code (A.K.) in an appeal joined with a claim (action), and the alleged violation of Article 20 par. 1 of the Constitution and Article 6 par. 1 of the ECHR. In the event that a claim is joined with an appeal and the appeal is granted, full and effective judicial protection of the pension and property rights of civil pensioners is provided under Article 20 par. 1 of the Constitution and Article 6 par. 1 of the ECHR. This is because legality within the pension relationship is reconstituted and restored, removing any element that had affected the disputed right, thereby safeguarding the property rights arising from the pension relationship. The provisions of Article 20 par. 1 of the Constitution and Article 6 par. 1 of the ECHR do not preclude the common legislature from establishing procedural requirements for the grant of judicial protection, provided that such rules are linked to the functioning of the courts, as well as the need for the effective administration of justice, and do not exceed those limits beyond which they would result in the direct or indirect abrogation of the individual right to judicial protection.

Category:
• Pension disputes
• Civil Pensioners

Download the file

Finalization of pension data pursuant to the application of Article 2, paragraph 5a of Law No. 4151/2013 and the issue regarding the application of the principle of legitimate expectation (Rule of Law, Art. 25 par. 1 of the Constitution). 

The presumed implied rejection of an objection filed before the Pension Cases Audit and Claims Committee (E.E.P.K.S.), presumed by legal fiction upon the fruitless lapse of a three-month period, is equated to an express act of rejection. The starting point of the deadline for filing an appeal against it is fully predictable and depends not on random events but on the actions of the beneficiary themselves, as it is determined based on the lapse of three months from the submission of the objection. In cases where the deadline for filing an appeal against the implied rejection had expired prior to the publication of Law 4151/2013 (29.4.2013), and the pension data were finalized before the law’s entry into force, the case is not considered pending before the Committee, nor does it fall within the provisions of Article 2 paragraph 5a of the said law, due to the absence of an express provision allowing for the re-examination of definitively concluded pension cases. The principle of legitimate expectation is not infringed when any supplementary or informative documents are submitted or notified after the deadline for filing an appeal against the implied rejection has already expired. 

Category:
• Pension disputes

Download the file