Case T-492/25: Action brought on 22 July 2025 – WM v EIB
Date: 2025-07-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, disability insurance, equal treatment, fundamental rights, indemnification, labour law, legality, principle of legal certainty, termination of employment, working conditions








C_202505965EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5965


17.11.2025






Action brought on 22 July 2025 – WM v EIB


(Case T-492/25)

(C/2025/5965)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: WM (represented by: B. Maréchal, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the EIB’s decision dated 12 May 2025 upholding the principle of a prorated invalidity pension, suspending the payment of sums due upon the applicant’s departure, and putting the applicant’s request for the convening of a new Invalidity Committee on hold (‘the first contested decision’);










—


annul the EIB’s decision dated 24 June 2025, confirming the principle of a pro-rated invalidity pension and refusing to make a full and complete application of the provisions held in the EIB Pension Scheme Regulations, specifically Articles 20-1, 50-1, and 59-3 (‘the second contested decision’);










—


annul the EIB’s decision dated 24 June 2025, confirming the suspension of payments due upon the applicant’s departure, confirming the EIB intention to put on hold the applicant’s Invalidity Committee request (‘the third contested decision’);










—


declare illegal and discriminatory the defendant’s pro-rata calculation of the invalidity pension;










—


declare illegal the defendant’s retention of sums due to the applicant upon departure;










—


declare illegal the defendant’s refusal to reconvene an Invalidity Committee;
and, in the alternative,










—


amend the aforementioned contested decisions (‘the contested decisions’);










—


declare illegal the defendant’s application of a prorated invalidity pension;










—


declare illegal the defendant’s retention of sums due to the applicant upon departure;










—


declare illegal the defendant’s refusal to reconvene an Invalidity Committee;
and, in any case,










—


order the defendant to be sentenced to pay to the applicant the sums due upon his departure;










—


grant compensation for the material damage suffered by the applicant;










—


grant compensation for the non-material damages and distress that the applicant suffered as a result of multiple irregularities and continuous infringements of the applicant’s fundamental rights directly relating to the contested decisions;










—


grant compensation for costs incurred as a result of the illegal behaviour, actions and omissions of the defendant and suffered by the applicant;










—


order the defendant to be sentenced to pay the legal fees for the current 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, alleging the illegality of the disputed decisions following the defendant’s wrongful actions and/or omissions in breach of the principle of legality and legal certainty, the applicant’s fundamental rights of equal treatment and non-discrimination, social security, property, fair working conditions, and good administration, and respect by the defendant of its duty of care towards the applicant.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the liability of the defendant for damages suffered by the applicant as a result of the contested decisions and the related violation of his fundamental and employment rights.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5965/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)