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-765/20: Action brought on 31 December 2020 — The Floow v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TN0765

62020TN0765

December 31, 2020
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

15.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/33

(Case T-765/20)

(2021/C 88/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Floow Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Howard, Barrister, and J. Berry, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul, in whole or part, the decision of the Commission C(2020) 8138 final, dated 17 November 2020, ordering the recovery of Horizon 2020 grant monies amounting to EUR 161 990,80 plus interest, in respect of the audited period, and set aside the debit note referred to in Article 1 of the decision; or

in the alternative, remit the matter to the Commission to reconsider and restate the lower level of any deduction (if any) that may properly arise in light of the principles established by the Court; or

in the further alternative, exercise the Court’s own jurisdiction to restate the applicable adjustment that should apply in the light of any changes made to eligible direct and indirect costs, as the General Court considers appropriate; and

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed serious errors of law, assessment of fact, appreciation, lack of reasoning and procedural irregularities in assessing the compliance of applicant with the time-recording requirements in the Grant Agreement.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed errors of law, appreciation and reasoning in failing to ensure that the adjustments made to the declared costs were fair and proportionate in the light of all the circumstances.

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