Parliament stung by legal set-back

Date: 01/05/1997

THE European Parliament faces an unexpected bill for hundreds of thousands of ecu after a lengthy legal battle with a former employee in its accounts department.

Henri de Compte, who was severely disciplined almost ten years ago after the discovery of accounting irregularities involving more than 100,000 ecu, won his case this month that he was forced to retire from the Parliament because of ill health caused by his work.

Overturning a judgement from the Court of First Instance, the European Court of Justice ruled that the Parliament did not have the right to revoke an earlier decision in which it accepted that De Compte's illness was work-related.

The judges ordered the institution to pay him 228,000 ecu, with an annual 8&percent; rate of interest backdated to 1991.

The decision was received by the Parliament with a mixture of surprise and disbelief. It ran totally contrary to the view expressed by Advocate-General Guiseppe Tesauro, who concluded that the institution had been right not to pay out the compensation since the stress and depression were not due to De Compte's normal parliamentary duties in the accounting department.

“The judgement overturns previous case law. It is also staggering that the Court said that the circumstances of the case, in which 102,500 ecu of public money was at stake, did not raise public interest issues which impinged on those of the individual,” said one legal source.

The Parliament will now have to decide how to pay the award to De Compte since its insurance company, which normally provides the compensation to officials retiring early on grounds of ill health, refused to do so in this particular case in 1991.

The ECJ's ruling brings to an end a complex and lengthy legal saga which began in late 1982 when disciplinary proceedings were opened against De Compte. The action was taken after the discovery of an unauthorised interest-bearing account with the Midland Bank in London, the failure to record certain financial transactions and the absence of proper supporting documentation authorising items of expenditure.

Six years later, De Compte was demoted from his 'A3' post to 'A7' - a decision he later unsuccessfully challenged before the Luxembourg-based Court.

Five months after his demotion, De Compte applied to leave the Parliament on the grounds of occupational ill health - a request which the first doctor to examine him concluded was ill-founded and turned down.

Challenging the verdict, the former official was finally diagnosed by a medical panel in 1991 as suffering from work-related depression and paranoia, and was awarded 228,000 ecu.

The Parliament overturned the decision less than three months later on the grounds that De Compte's illness was not due to his normal professional functions, but to the allegations against him which had led to the disciplinary action.

Despite De Compte's protests, the Court of First Instance sided with the Parliament in a judgement it delivered in 1995.