Judgment No. 1032

• Organization: European Patent Organisation (EPO)
• Date: 26.06.1990
• Original: English
• Judges: Ducoux, Carroll, Douglas
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Consideration 2

Extract:

"The complainant points out inconsistencies between the English, French and German texts of [Article 12(1) of the EPO Pension Scheme Regulations and Rule 12.1/1(i)(b) of the Implementing Rules]. The three language versions, being equally authentic, shall be deemed to bear the same meaning. Where there are inconsistencies the Tribunal will apply the construction which, having regard to the purpose of the provisions, best reconciles the various versions."

Reference(s)

Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 12(1) OF THE EPO PENSION SCHEME REGULATIONS; RULE 12.1/1(I)(B) OF THE IMPLEMENTING RULES

Keywords

staff regulations and rules; authentic version; interpretation; language of rule; criteria; difference; purpose

Summary

Extract:

The complainant left employment in a private company to join the staff of the EPO and applied for the transfer of his pension rights to the organisation's retirement scheme. The company agreed to refund the contributions he had made but would not transfer the actuarial equivalent of his pension rights. Inasmuch as Article 12(1) of the EPO Pension Scheme Regulations and Implementing Rule 12.1/1(i)(b) only allow the transfer of those rights with the consent of the previous retirement scheme and that in such cases the amount must be certified by that scheme to be the actuarial equivalent of the official's pension rights, the organisation's retirement scheme was not empowered to accede to the complainant's request.

Reference(s)

Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 12(1) OF THE EPO PENSION SCHEME REGULATIONS; RULE 12.1/1(I)(B) OF THE IMPLEMENTING RULES

Keywords

pension; actuarial equivalent; transfer of pension rights; condition