EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-376/21: Action brought on 2 July 2021 — Instituto Cervantes v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0376

62021TN0376

July 2, 2021
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

23.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/28

(Case T-376/21)

(2021/C 338/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Instituto Cervantes (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. van Nuffel d’Heynsbroeck, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

declare the action inadmissible;

annul the decision of the European Commission to award lot 3 (Spanish language) of the contract relating to framework contracts for language training for the institutions, bodies and agencies of the European Union (No HR/2020/OP/0014), in first place to the consortium CLL Centre de Langues-Allingua and in second place to the applicant;

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging a failure to give sufficient reasons in the contested decision with regard to the assessment of the relative merits of the tenders.

2.Second plea in law, alleging failure to compare the relative merits of the tenders.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed a manifest error of assessment by rejecting, without verifying their validity, the parts of the tender which were accessible via a hypertext link incorporated in the tender.

4.Fourth plea in law, raised in the alternative, alleging, first, that there was no link between the assessment of the intrinsic qualities of the applicant's tender and its scoring under sub-criteria 1.1 and 1.2 set out in the contract notice and, second, that there was a breach of the principle of transparency.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the objective of opening up public contracts to competition as widely as possible.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia