EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017TN0320
Case T-320/17: Action brought on 25 May 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v EIF
Case T-320/17: Action brought on 25 May 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v EIF
Case T-320/17: Action brought on 25 May 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v EIF
OJ C 256, 7.8.2017, p. 31–32
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 25/05/2017
- Date lodged:
- 25/05/2017
- Author:
- General Court
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- English
- Type of procedure:
- Action for annulment, Action for damages
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
|
7.8.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 256/31 |
Action brought on 25 May 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v EIF
(Case T-320/17)
(2017/C 256/37)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: M. Sfyri and C-N. Dede, lawyers)
Defendant: European Investment Fund (EIF)
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the defendant’s award decision disclosed to the applicants on 16 March 2017 regarding the tender filed by the applicants in response to the open procurement procedure (reference 2016-MIBO_IPA_PPI-002) by which they were informed that their bid had not been ranked as the most economically advantageous tender; |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay the applicants exemplary damages reaching the amount of EUR 100 000 (one hundred thousand Euros); and |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay the applicants’ legal fees and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging that the the defendant infringed the EU law on public procurement, the principles of transparency and the provisions of the directives on public procurement, together with the EIF Practical Guide, by not communicating to the applicants the scores awarded in each award criterion to the winning tender and a detailed analysis of the strong and weak points of their tender in relation to those of the winning tender. The applicants argue that the defendant acted in breach of the principle of sound administration by adversely affecting the applicants’ right to an effective remedy against the contested decision.
