EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/294/122
Case T-279/06: Action brought on 9 October 2006 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v ECB
Case T-279/06: Action brought on 9 October 2006 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v ECB
Case T-279/06: Action brought on 9 October 2006 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v ECB
IO C 294, 2.12.2006, p. 61–61
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 02/12/2006; Dáta foilsithe
- Author:
- Cúirt Chéadchéime
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Link
- Link
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Link
|
2.12.2006 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 294/61 |
Action brought on 9 October 2006 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v ECB
(Case T-279/06)
(2006/C 294/122)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and N. Keramidas, lawyers)
Defendant: European Central Bank
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the decision of the ECB to evaluate the applicant's bid as not successful and award the contract to the successful contractor; |
|
— |
order ECB to pay the applicant's legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant submitted a bid in response to a call by the defendant for a negotiated tender for the provision of IT consultancy and IT development services to the European Central Bank (ECB) (OJ 2005/S 137-135354). The applicant contests the decision to reject its bid and to commence contractual negotiations with other bidders.
In support of its application, the applicant submits that the ECB unlawfully did not disclose the weighting of criteria and sub-criteria in the tender notice and that the ECB used vague terms to evaluate negatively the applicant's bid and thereby violated the principles of transparency and sound administration and failed to state reasons. Furthermore, the applicant claims that the ECB made several errors of appreciation under the evaluation of the applicant's offer. Finally the applicant alleges that the ECB introduced a specific term in the call for tender, which favoured German established companies, and thereby violated among others Articles 12 EC and 49 EC.
