EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2005/330/58
Case T-384/05: Action brought on 19 October 2005 — I.R.I.P.A. Abruzzo v Commission
Case T-384/05: Action brought on 19 October 2005 — I.R.I.P.A. Abruzzo v Commission
Case T-384/05: Action brought on 19 October 2005 — I.R.I.P.A. Abruzzo v Commission
OJ C 330, 24.12.2005, p. 23–24
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
24.12.2005 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 330/23 |
Action brought on 19 October 2005 — I.R.I.P.A. Abruzzo v Commission
(Case T-384/05)
(2005/C 330/58)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicant(s): Istituto Regionale per gli Interventi Promozionali in Agricoltura (Regional Institute for the Promotion of Agriculture) — I.R.I.P.A. Abruzzo (Pescara, Italy) (represented by: Gianluca Belotti, Nicola Pisani and Emanuele Dell' Elce, lawyers)
Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the Commission's decision set out in its letter of 9 August 2005 and, insofar as necessary, the decision in the Commission's letter of 12 August 2005, and declare that the Commission should award the applicant the grant in issue on the basis that it meets all of the other award criteria; |
|
— |
order the Commission to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
This action is brought against the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 9 August 2005, received by the applicant on 12 August 2005, informing the applicant that its application for financial assistance under Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 from appropriations in the 2005 budget was not selected on the ground that it was alleged to lack financial capacity.
Contrary to the reasons put forward by the Commission in support of its refusal to grant the application for funding, the applicant submits that its financial capacity and that of its partners in the initiative far exceeded that required by the call for proposals, even on a strict interpretation of the liquidity criterion laid down by the Commission.
Moreover, the applicant submits that this liquidity criterion, as interpreted by the Commission, is clearly illogical and out of proportion to the intended objectives, and thus artificially limits the number of prospective candidates. In this regard, the applicant maintains that the condition of financial capacity was fully met in that its liquidity far exceeded 100 % of the total grant applied for (EUR 263 895,50 ) and that, during each of the three financial years for which the balance sheets and annual accounts were approved and closed, the applicant's liquidity and that of its partners clearly exceeded this figure.