197. The exception provided in this rule does not apply to Applicants.
198. Therefore, the aforementioned rule of Article 35(d) of the Regulation is
applicable to them, in compliance with the principle of equal treatment
before the law, in relation to the other members of the community staff, who,
in an identical situation, were recognized, settled and paid the separation
allowance, as demonstrated above.
199. Thus, the Court concludes that the Defendant, by failing to pay the
separation allowance to the Applicants, has violated Article 35(d), in breach
of its contractual obligation, without any justification.
Allowance for “separation” provided for in Article 62(c) of the Staff
Regulations.
200. The Applicant, Mr. SOGOYOU Cossi, further claims that regarding the
extension of his contract which runs from January 1 to December 31, 2012,
he is still entitled to gratuity of 12.5% provided for in the contract;
201. Indeed, the letter that renewed his initial contract states the following:
“(2) Your appointment which is for a period of twelve (12) months, takes
effect from 1st January to 31st December 2012”
202. And in point 5 it reads: “In Line with Council Decision C/DEC.8/92 on
the conditions of service for contract officers of the ECOWAS Institutions,
other benefits accruable to you are the following:
(…)
d) 12,5 of annual basic salary for each year of service as gratuity payable
at the end of the contract.”
38