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-510/23: Action brought on 18 August 2023 — RHEA Group Technologies v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0510

62023TN0510

August 18, 2023
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

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

Series C

C/2023/65

9.10.2023

(Case T-510/23)

(C/2023/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rhea Group Technologies (Machelen, Belgium) (represented by: S. Gerber, M. Werner and I. Kampouridi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology of 23 March 2023; (1)

order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant in connection with the application for annulment of the contested decision.

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 the infringement of the essential procedural requirement to provide reasons.

The Commission’s decision dated 23 March 2023 infringes the duty to provide reasons pursuant to Article 296 TFEU, Article 200(7) of the EU Financial Regulation (2) and Article 41(2) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. A breach of this principle constitutes a violation of an essential procedural requirement for the purposes of judicial review pursuant to Article 263, paragraph 2, TFEU.

2.Second plea in law, alleging the infringement of the Treaties or any rule of law relating to their application.

Further, or alternatively, and to the extent necessary, in support of its action the applicant alleges that the Commission has misapplied its Guidance on participation in EU restricted calls and has therefore infringed a rule of law relating to the application of the Treaties pursuant to Article 263(2) TFEU. By misapplying this Guidance, the Commission has also violated the general EU law principles of non-discrimination/ equal treatment and legal certainty.

(1) The contested decision is a rejection decision relating to the tender procedure DIGITAL-2021-QCI-01-EUROQCI-QKD (‘Coordinate the first deployment of national EuroQCI projects and prepare the large-scale QKD testing and certification infrastructure’).

(2) Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ 2018 L 193, p. 1).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/65/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

* * *

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