Official Journal of the European Union

EN

C series

—

C/2024/6445

(Case T-479/24)

(C/2024/6445)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stowarzyszenie Edukacja, Nauka, Kultura (Szczecin, Poland) (represented by: R. Jakubowski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Research Executive Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—declare that the letter requesting repayment (letter of the European Commission, European Executive Agency of 16 July 2024) and the Debit note of the European Research Executive Agency No. 3242409862 of 16 July 2024, are null and void, unlawful, annulled or in any event ineffective;

—declare that the excluded costs are eligible costs for the purposes of the Grant Agreement 734602-TICASS and, accordingly, that the applicant is entitled to have those costs taken into account for the purpose of determining the total amount of the subsidy provided for in that agreement and, in any event, that the Agency is not entitled to recover those sums;

—order the defendant to bear its costs as well as the applicant’s costs for the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the REA has misinterpreted the provisions of the Grant Agreement No. 734602-TICASS regarding eligibility of costs by making the assumption that eligibility criteria include requirements relating to the type of legal relationship between the beneficiary and seconded staff members.

—In regard to the first plea in law, the applicant claims that the Grant Agreement No. 734602-TICASS does not specify the type of legal relationship that is required for making the costs eligible. The Grant Agreement does not exclude any type of such a legal relationship in this context.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that rights and obligations of the beneficiary and seconded staff members arising from the association’s membership relationship and contracts concluded were not taken into account by the REA.

—The applicant claims in this regard that the Agency did not examine the content of the legal relations between the beneficiary and the researchers. The Agency in particular did not indicate which provisions (or lack of such provisions) of contractual documentation between the applicant and participating researchers breached the Grant Agreement requirements.

3.Third plea in law, alleging misapplication by the REA of the provisions of the Grant Agreement No. 734602-TICASS by deriving ineligibility of costs from Article 6.2 thereof.

—In this regard, the applicant states that the Agency applied Article 6.2 of the Grant Agreement as a basis for its position referring to the declaration of ineligibility of costs which is inconsistent with the content of the Grant Agreement, while the provisions of the agreement imposing sanctions should be understood and applied strictly instead of extensively.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of the applicant’s legitimate expectations and the principle of equality by applying different criteria regarding the eligibility of the seconded staff costs to the beneficiaries of the TICASS action.

—The applicant claims, in relation to this plea, that the Agency applied different criteria to individual beneficiaries of the TICASS action.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6445/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—