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-488/21: Action brought on 10 August 2021 — Tralux and Others v Parliament

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0488

62021TN0488

August 10, 2021
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

18.10.2021

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/20

(Case T-488/21)

(2021/C 422/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Tralux, Société Générale de travaux — Luxembourg Sàrl (Leudelange, Luxembourg), Eric Soldermann, René-Pierre Ortiz, Rodrigue Thiemann, Richard Lang, Marie Real, Olivier Lingelser, Architectes Associés, Aea Architectes (Mulhouse, France), Energie & Environnement — Ingénieurs Conseils (Niederanven, Luxembourg), Edeis (Ivry-sur-Seine, France) (represented by: G. Krieger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

find the present action to be admissible;

on the substance, find the action to be justified and well founded;

and accordingly,

annul the decision of the European Parliament of 20 July 2021 to reject the applicants’ tender of 16 April 2021.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the decision to reject their offer filed in response to tender procedure No 06D10/2020/SI2KAD-01 for the design and construction of a ‘Europa Experience’ space and a conference centre in Luxembourg, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 51 of Regulation 2018/1046. (1) The applicants rely on several arguments in support of that plea. Firstly, they submit that they met the selection criteria and, in particular, the minimum staffing requirement. Secondly, the applicants argue that the tender specifications did not require the production of supporting documents, failing which the tender would be disregarded. Finally, they added that clarifications to the tender could have been submitted, at the request of the contracting authority, after the submission of their tender. In any event, according to the applicants, those clarifications were not such as to substantially alter the documents submitted.

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).

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