The grant (sponsorship) of elected Presidents of a local community regarded as a pension, under the regime of Laws 1205/1981 and 1518/1985, was calculated as a percentage of the representation expenses paid monthly to the President-in-Office of the community concerned. The aforementioned method of adjustment was reformed by Article 10 of Law No. 2703/1999, with retroactive effect from January 1, 1998, and its increase was henceforth linked to the salary policy followed each time regarding civil service pensions. That reform is contrary to the provisions of Article 1 of the First Additional Protocol (P1-1) to the ECHR insofar as it amends the said system retroactively from January 1, 1998, thereby restricting the right to adjust the grants of retired community presidents -a right already vested and judicially enforceable at the time of the law’s entry into force, i.e., as of April 8, 1999-, without it being proven that this restriction was dictated by specific reasons of general public interest.

Category:
• Pension disputes
• Civil Pensioners

Download the file

A financial correction and recovery decision, based on a national regulatory provision incompatible with EU law, lacks a legal basis. Review of an appeal on points of law (cassation) following a decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union on the questions referred to it for a preliminary ruling.

Financial correction and recovery, due to non-compliance with the obligation not to transfer theundertaking’s fixed assets for a period of five years from the date of the decision completing the investment. Jurisdictionof the Hellenic Court of Audit. Reference to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU. Once the judgment of the CJEU has been delivered and the case has been reopened before the Plenum of the HCA, there is no stage for the re-assessment of the grounds of appeal (cassation).The CJEU has held that a national regulatory provision which imposes -without exception- upon the beneficiary of a subsidy granted within the framework of an investment operation co-financed by the Union's Structural Funds, the obligation not to transfer, for a period of five years from the decision completing the respective investment, a unit included in the operation, under the threat of a financial correction involving the total or partial recovery of said subsidy, is incompatible with EU law. In the light of that interpretation, the contested financial correction and recovery decision, being based on a provision incompatible with EU law and therefore inapplicable, lacks a legal basis.Sustains the appeal (cassation), retains the case and adjudicates it, sustains the appeal [on the merits], and annuls the financial correction decision.

Category:
• Financial Liability
• Financial Corrections

Download the file