|
7.9.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 260/25 |
Appeal brought on 19 June 2013 by the European Commission against the judgment delivered on 10 April 2013 in Case T-671/11 IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants GmbH v European Commission
(Case C-336/13 P)
2013/C 260/43
Language of the case: German
Parties
Appellant: European Commission (represented by: F. Dintilhac, G. Wilms, G. Zavvos, Agents)
Other party to the proceedings: IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants GmbH
Form of order sought
The Appellant claims that the Court should
|
— |
set aside the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 10 April 2013 in Case T-671/11; |
|
— |
dismiss the claim by IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants GmbH against the Commission of 22 December 2011 |
|
— |
order IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants GmbH to pay the costs at both instances. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Appellant argues that the judgment under appeal is legally defective in numerous respects:
|
(a) |
It fails to take account of the case-law of the Court of Justice according to which equalisation interest serves to compensate for inflation. |
|
(b) |
Contrary to the case-law of the Court of Justice, it fails to make a distinction between equalisation interest and interest for delay, and sets both interest rates at two percentage points above the main refinancing interest rate of the European Central Bank. |
|
(c) |
It contains a calculation error, in that it capitalises the equalisation interest and calculates the interest for delay from 15 April 2011. |
|
(d) |
It misinterprets the contested decision and its own judgment in Case T-297/05 (1) and distorts the facts. |
|
(e) |
It contains an insufficient statement of reasons: It is not possible to determine the reasons for the amount of the interest calculation and the beginning of the calculation of interest for delay and the reasoning is inherently contradictory. |
|
(f) |
It infringes the principles of EU law on enrichment. |
(1) [2011] ECR II-1859