Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017TJ0189

    Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 December 2021.
    Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) v European Commission.
    Arbitration clause – Humabio contract concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme – Eligible costs – Debit note issued by the Commission for the recovery of amounts advanced – Reliability of the time records – Conflict of interests.
    Case T-189/17.

    Court reports – general

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2021:930

     Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 December 2021 –
    EKETA v Commission

    (Case T‑189/17) ( 1 )

    (Arbitration clause – Humabio contract concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme – Eligible costs – Debit note issued by the Commission for the recovery of amounts advanced – Reliability of the time records – Conflict of interests)

    1. 

    EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Justification of costs incurred – Proceedings by the Commission for recovery of advances paid – Allocation of the burden of proof

    (see para. 34)

    2. 

    EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Financing covering only expenses actually incurred – No demonstration that the costs have actually been incurred – Ineligible costs

    (see para. 45)

    3. 

    EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Funding only for expenses actually incurred – Proof of the reality of the expenses declared – Staff costs – Production of the time records – Unreliable owing to a conflict of interests between the beneficiary and his contractual partners – Production of documents requiring considerable investment on the part of the Commission in order to determine the time actually worked – Disregard of the obligation for the beneficiary to work together with the Commission in good faith

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2321/2002, Art. 14(2)(a))

    (see para. 50)

    4. 

    EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Contracts concluded under a specific research, technological development and demonstration programme – Conditions of ineligibility of costs – Conflict of interests on the part of the beneficiary – Concept – Consequences – Recovery of the sums advanced to the beneficiary

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2321/2002, Art. 18(2); Commission Regulation No 2342/2002, Art. 183)

    (see para. 62)

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis to pay the costs.


    ( 1 ) OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.

    Top