Help us make the FRA website better for you!

Take part in a one-to-one session and help us improve the FRA website. It will take about 30 minutes of your time.

YES, I AM INTERESTED NO, I AM NOT INTERESTED

Greece / Council of State / 660/2016 ΣΤΕ

Natural persons v Unified Auxiliary Insurance Fund
Policy area
Employment and social policy
Deciding body type
National Court/Tribunal
Deciding body
Council of State
Type
Decision
Decision date
07/03/2016

Харта на основните права на Европейския съюз

Title IV: Solidarity

Article 34 - Social security and social assistance

VIEW FULL CASE
  • Greece / Council of State / 660/2016 ΣΤΕ

    Key facts of the case:

     The applicants requested that the Unified Auxiliary Insurance Fund is obliged to pay a compensation for the amount of pensions cut during the months of January and February 2013 that were not paid based on the provisions of para. IA.6 of art. 1 of Law 4039/2012.

    Outcome of the case: 

    The interruption of payment of pensions to representatives of trade unions is not against the principle of human dignity, given that they receive, besides the supplementary pension they receive due to their position as trade unionists which was abolished, other pension benefits related to their employment. Protection of the freedom of association does not include the provision of pension to representatives of trade unions due to their position.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    24. Because, with this application being judged it is presented that the interruption of the payment of pernsion to the applicants is contrary to the provisions of articles 12 para. 3 of the European Social Charter and 34 para. 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. To the extent that it refers to art. 12 para. 3 of the European Social Charter, this argument is rejected because the measure of interruption of the payment of pension to representatives of trade uinons aims mainly to the rationalization of the social insurance system and, taking into account the previous arguments, does not contravene the provision above as the applicants have argued (cf. ΣτΕ 1464/1995 Plenary, point. 5, 278/2007 point. 6, 3258/2013 point. 6). Moreover, to the extent that the above argument refers to the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, it is also rejected because the provisions of this document concern actions of the member states only when they apply to the law of the EU and do not concern the adoption by member states of purely internal policy measures (ΣτΕ 1286/2012 Plenary, point. 21), as in this case.

     

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)

    24. Επειδή, με την κρινόμενη αγωγή προβάλλεται ότι η διακοπή καταβολής της ως άνω συντάξεως στους ενάγοντες είναι αντίθετη στις διατάξεις των άρθρων 12 παρ. 3 του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινωνικού Χάρτη και 34 παρ. 1 του Χάρτη των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της Ε.Ε. Ο λόγος αυτός, κατά το μέρος που αναφέρεται στο άρθρο 12 παρ. 3 του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινωνικού Χάρτη, είναι απορριπτέος ως αβάσιμος, διότι το επίμαχο μέτρο της διακοπής καταβολής της συντάξεως στους εκπροσώπους συνδικαλιστικών οργανώσεων αποσκοπεί, κατά τα ήδη εκτεθέντα, κυρίως στον εξορθολογισμό του ασφαλιστικού συστήματος και, επομένως, λαμβανομένων υπ’ όψιν και όσων προαναφέρθηκαν, δεν παραβιάζει την ως άνω διάταξη, όπως ισχυρίζονται οι ενάγοντες (πρβ. ΣτΕ 1464/1995 Ολομ., σκ. 5, 278/2007 σκ. 6, 3258/2013 σκ. 6). Εξάλλου, ο ανωτέρω λόγος, και κατά το μέρος που αναφέρεται σε παράβαση διατάξεως του Χάρτη Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της Ε.Ε., είναι επίσης απορριπτέος, διότι οι διατάξεις του κειμένου αυτού διέπουν τις δράσεις των κρατών μελών μόνο όταν εφαρμόζουν το δίκαιο της Ενώσεως και δεν αφορούν, συνεπώς, τη λήψη από το κράτος μέλος μέτρων αμιγώς εσωτερικής πολιτικής (ΣτΕ 1286/2012 Ολομ, σκ. 21), όπως εν προκειμένω.