- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-457/20: Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — VeriGraft v Eismea (Arbitration clause — ‘Horizon 2020 — Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) — Grant Agreement ‘Personalised Tissue-Engineered Veins as the first Cure for Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency — P TEV’ — Unforeseen subcontracting costs — Simplified approval procedure — Subcontracting mentioned in the periodic technical reports — Approved periodic technical reports — Eligible costs)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TA0457
62020TA0457
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
19.9.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 359/63
(Case T-457/20) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Arbitration clause - ‘Horizon 2020 — Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) - Grant Agreement ‘Personalised Tissue-Engineered Veins as the first Cure for Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency — P TEV’ - Unforeseen subcontracting costs - Simplified approval procedure - Subcontracting mentioned in the periodic technical reports - Approved periodic technical reports - Eligible costs)
(2022/C 359/75)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: VeriGraft AB (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: P. Hansson and M. Persson, lawyers)
Defendant: European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (Eismea) (represented by: A. Galea, acting as Agent, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)
Re:
By its action based on Article 272 TFEU, the applicant, VeriGraft AB, seeks a declaration: (i) that the subcontracting costs rejected by the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) constitute eligible costs under the Grant Agreement relating to the project ‘Personalised Tissue-Engineered Veins as the first Cure for Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency — P-TEV’, with reference 778620; (ii) that debit note No 3242004635 issued by EASME in the amount of EUR 106 928,74 is unfounded; and (iii) that the recovery of the sum of EUR 109 230,19 from the guarantee fund set up by the Grant Agreement is also unfounded.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Upholds VeriGraft AB’s request seeking a declaration that the subcontracting costs rejected by the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the amount of EUR 258 588,80 constitute eligible costs under the Grant Agreement ‘Personalised Tissue-Engineered Veins as the first Cure for Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency — P-TEV’, with reference 778620;
2.Upholds VeriGraft’s request seeking a declaration that debit note No 3242004635, issued by the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the amount of EUR 106 928,74, is unfounded;
3.Upholds VeriGraft’s request seeking a declaration that the recovery of the sum of EUR 109 230,19 from the guarantee fund set up by the Grant Agreement ‘Personalised Tissue-Engineered Veins as the first Cure for Patients with Chronic Venous Insufficiency — P-TEV’, with reference 778620, is unfounded;
4.Orders the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (Eismea) to pay the costs.
* Language of the case: English.
OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
ECLI:EU:C:2022:140