# C_2020255EN.01003401.xml

| 3.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/34

---

Action brought on 15 June 2020 — KM v Commission

(Case T-374/20)

(2020/C 255/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: KM (represented by: M. Müller-Trawinski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 7 October 2019 in the form of the decision of the ‘Autorité Investie du Pouvoir de Nomination (AIPN)’ No R/627/19 of 20 March 2020, whereby the defendant refuses to grant the applicant a survivor’s pension, and order the defendant, having regard to the interpretation of the law given by the General Court, to decide anew and to grant the applicant a survivor’s pension; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 7 October 2019 in the form of the decision of the ‘Autorité Investie du Pouvoir de Nomination (AIPN)’ No R/627/19 of 20 March 2020, whereby the defendant refuses to grant the applicant a survivor’s pension, and order the defendant, having regard to the interpretation of the law given by the General Court, to decide anew and to grant the applicant a survivor’s pension;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law:

| 1. | First plea in law
  In the first plea in law, the applicant alleges that it is discriminatory to require couples of the opposite sex to marry, but in respect of all other couples to allow any form of durable, registered partnership to be sufficient, in order to qualify for a pension. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law

In the first plea in law, the applicant alleges that it is discriminatory to require couples of the opposite sex to marry, but in respect of all other couples to allow any form of durable, registered partnership to be sufficient, in order to qualify for a pension.

| 2. | Second plea in law
  In the second plea in law, the applicant argues that Article 18 in conjunction with Article 20 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union are discriminatory and, therefore, null and void because in respect of an active official one year of marriage is sufficient to be regarded as a stable relationship which on the death of the official entitles his or her spouse to a survivor’s pension, whereas in respect of spouses of officials who marry those officials only after their retirement, five years of marriage must be demonstrated to benefit from a survivor’s pension. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law

In the second plea in law, the applicant argues that Article 18 in conjunction with Article 20 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union are discriminatory and, therefore, null and void because in respect of an active official one year of marriage is sufficient to be regarded as a stable relationship which on the death of the official entitles his or her spouse to a survivor’s pension, whereas in respect of spouses of officials who marry those officials only after their retirement, five years of marriage must be demonstrated to benefit from a survivor’s pension.

---