22.6.2013

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/5

—

(Case C-197/13 P)

2013/C 178/10

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, agent)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

—Declare, in any event, that the present appeal is well founded and set aside the judgment of the General Court of 31 January 2013 in Case T-540/10 Spain v Commission.

—Annul Commission Decision C (2010) 6154 of 13 September 2010 reducing the assistance granted from the Cohesion Fund to the project stages: ‘High Speed Line Madrid-Zaragoza-Barcelona-French border. Section Lleida-Martorell (Platform). Subsection IX-A’ (CCI No 2001.ES.16.C.PT.005); ‘High Speed Line Madrid-Zaragoza-Barcelona-French border. Section Lleida-Martorell (Platform). Subsection X-B (Avinyonet del Penedés-Sant Sadurní d’Anoia)’ (CCI No 2001.ES.16.C.PT.008); ‘High Speed Line Madrid-Zaragoza-Barcelona-French border. Section Lleida-Martorell (Platform). Subsections XI-A and XI-B (Sant Sadurní d’Anoia-Gelida)’ (CCI No 2001.ES.16.C.PT.009) and ‘High Speed Line Madrid-Zaragoza-Barcelona-French border. Section Lleida-Martorell (Platform). Subsection IX-C’ (CCI No 2001.ES.16.C.PT.010);

—Order, in any event, the respondent to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Error of law with respect to the effects of the period of time referred to in Article H(2) of Annex II to Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund. After the expiry of the period referred to, the Commission may no longer adopt any financial correction measures and, therefore, it is obliged to make payment and the correction applied is unlawful.

Error of law in relation to the concept of an award of a contract within the meaning of Council Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors. Points (e) and (f) of Article 20(2) of Directive 93/38 do not apply generally to any amendments whatsoever to public contracts agreed during their execution stage, but to substantive amendments only. A substantive amendment such as to constitute a new award of a contract can be regarded as having arisen only when the conditions laid down in the judgment in Pressetext Nachrichtenagentur are met.

—

(1) OJ 1994 L 130, p. 1

—

(2) OJ 1993 L 199, p. 84

—

(3) Case C-454/06 Pressetext Nachrichtenagentur [2008] ECR I-4401

—

* * *