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-30/12: Action brought on 19 January 2012 — IDT Biologika v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012TN0030

62012TN0030

January 19, 2012
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

24.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/28

(Case T-30/12)

2012/C 89/46

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: IDT Biologika GmbH (Dessau-Roßlau, Germany) (represented by: R. Gross and T. Kroupa, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Serbia of 5 October 2011 rejecting the tender submitted in respect of Lot No 1 by IDT Biologika GmbH in response to the call for tenders, reference EuropeAid/130686/C/SUP/RS Re-launch LOT 1, for the supply of a rabies vaccine to the beneficiary Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Supply of the Republic of Serbia, and awarding the contract in question to a consortium of various companies led by ‘Biovet a. s.’;

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action the applicant alleges infringement of Article 252(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2342/2002 (1) as the applicant takes the view that the successful tender does not fulfil the technical requirements specified in the tender documents with regard to the requisite non-virulence to humans of the vaccine offered and with regard to the requisite authorisations and should not therefore have been taken into account.

Furthermore, the taking into account of the successful tender of the consortium led by ‘Biovet a. s.’ constitutes discrimination as regards price comparison since the applicant’s tender alone satisfies all the actual requirements made with regard to the technical specifications in respect of the award procedure at issue and is therefore the only tender in the procedure which is in order.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ 2002 L 357, p. 1).

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