Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62020TN0649

    Case T-649/20: Action brought on 27 October 2020 — Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking v NG

    IO C 433, 14.12.2020, p. 65–65 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    14.12.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 433/65


    Action brought on 27 October 2020 — Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking v NG

    (Case T-649/20)

    (2020/C 433/80)

    Language of the case: Italian

    Parties

    Applicant: Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer, and B. Mastantuono, acting as Agent)

    Defendant: NG

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the General Court should:

    order the defendant to pay Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking the sum of EUR 168 062,23 in relation to Grant Agreement No 632420 ‘FIMAC, FAST impact cross-analysis methodology for Composite leading edge Structures’ under the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Union, plus interest at the rate of 3,5 % applied by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations, as from 13 July 2019 until the date of actual payment;

    order the defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following plea in law:

    The defendant has failed to fulfil its contractual obligations by failing to reimburse the amount relating to staff costs, held not to be eligible for funding. As a result, the applicant issued, on 12 July 2019, a debit note for the amount of EUR 168 062,23 already paid to Alpha Consulting Service Srl, which has been removed from the commercial register. Pursuant to Italian law, the defendant is liable for Alpha Consulting Service Srl’s failure to fulfil its contractual obligations since it took over the role of shareholder, liquidator and representative of Alpha Consulting Service Srl, which has been removed from the commercial register. The objections made by the company after the debit note was issued are generic, incomplete and not supported by evidence and, therefore, appear to be entirely unfounded. As a result, the applicant is entitled to seek recovery and reimbursement of the amount paid, plus default interest.


    Top