EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62008TN0527
Case T-527/08: Action brought on 4 December 2008 — Commission v TMT Pragma
Case T-527/08: Action brought on 4 December 2008 — Commission v TMT Pragma
Case T-527/08: Action brought on 4 December 2008 — Commission v TMT Pragma
OJ C 32, 7.2.2009, p. 46–46
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
7.2.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 32/46 |
Action brought on 4 December 2008 — Commission v TMT Pragma
(Case T-527/08)
(2009/C 32/89)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Moretto, lawyer, and A.M Rouchaud-Joët and F. Mirza, Agents)
Defendant: TMT Pragma (Rome, Italy)
Form of order sought
|
— |
Order the defendant to pay to the Commission the principal sum of EUR 30 700,23, together with default interest at the statutory legal rate in Spain from 29 August 2004 until payment in full of the amount due; |
|
— |
Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The subject-matter of the present action is a request that the defendant be ordered to repay a sum amounting to EUR 30 700,23 together with default interest. That sum represents a part of the contribution paid by the applicant in execution of contract No UR-96-SC.1105, entered into under the auspices of the Fourth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. The contract, which was concluded with other European research centres, provided for the development of a programme entitled ‘Integrated urban transport projects and market-orientated urban transport systems/on-demand urban transport systems — INTRAMUROS’.
In support of its claims, the applicant argues that it became apparent from the audit carried out in June 2000 that certain personnel expenses, the travel and accommodation expenses and the expenses in respect of consumables and information technology were not justified and therefore could not be charged to the project.
By debit note of 14 July 2004, the Commission notified the defendant that it sought reimbursement of the amount in question, together, if appropriate, with default interest in the event of non-payment.