13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/39

(Case T-446/09)

2010/C 37/54

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra (Bencanta, Portugal) (represented by: J. Pais do Amaral, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

—Annulment of Commission Decision D(2009)224268 of 9 September 2009;

—Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Lack of reasoning in relation to the requirement of reimbursement of the amount stipulated in point 8 of the letter of 12 August 2009.

Infringement of points 21.2 and 22 of the administrative framework provisions in relation to the other amounts, since a system was in place to record the time dedicated by each of the participants to the project, which indicated the name of the person and the time, in real time, which that person dedicated to the project.

Error of fact since the administration can act only if sure that the facts are correct. Mere doubt on the part of the administration as to whether the time recorded on the timesheets was actually dedicated to the project or not is not sufficient since the burden of proof is on the Commission.

Misassumption on the part of the Commission since there is no written obligation to adopt a specific type of system to record the duration of work carried out which is more rigorous than the recording of information on timesheets. Thus, while the contract is being executed and when it is no longer possible to alter the previous legitimate procedure for registering time dedicated to the project, namely by means of timesheets, the Commission cannot legitimately require more than what was originally stated and set out in the contract. In addition, it is inappropriate to make such an onerous demand that time dedicated to the project be recorded photographically.

The contested act infringes the principles of good faith, legitimate expectations, transparency, proportionality, and good and reasonable administration since the rules in place for recording time dedicated to the project are new, which is corroborated by the fact that those rules feature explicitly and clearly in subsequent versions of the program at issue.

Error in the assessment of the facts in so far as the size and the content of the refund ordered by the Commission is disproportionate to the content and nature of the alleged irregularities, given that it was not possible to attain the results reflected in being classed in tenth position out of 200 projects, without dedicating significantly more time to the project than actually paid for (once the refund ordered has been deducted).