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-269/25: Action brought on 25 April 2025 – Mozer Belux v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62025TN0269

62025TN0269

April 25, 2025
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C series

C/2025/3310

24.6.2025

(Case T-269/25)

(C/2025/3310)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mozer Belux (Liège, Belgium) (represented by: C. Manneback, V. Marcelle and S. Rixhon, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

annul the contested decision;

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action for annulment of the Decision of the European Parliament of 19 February 2025 informing the applicant that its tender for the public service contract for removal, handling and related services in Brussels (EP-INLO/LUX/2024/OP/0024) was not accepted, the applicant relies on a single plea in law. That plea alleges infringement of the provisions concerning abnormally low tenders, a manifest error of assessment, infringement of the special tender specification and of the duty to state reasons.

The applicant criticises the Parliament for failing to have regard to point 23 of Annex I of the Financial Regulation by not examining the price of the tenders received. The applicant states that the contested decision does not contain any grounds relating to a verification of the prices, which infringes the duty to state reasons. The applicant claims that if the Parliament had carried out that examination, it would have inevitably noted that the price of the successful tender was abnormally low. The price of the successful tender is lower than the minimum salary of a removal person, which excludes any profit margin. It follows that by awarding the tender to a tenderer who had submitted an abnormally low price, the Parliament made a manifest error of assessment. According to the applicant, that abnormally low price appears to suggest that the tenderer does not intend to respect Belgian fiscal and social law and, in particular, Joint Committee 140.05.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3310/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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