Official Journal of the European Union

Series C

C/2023/64

9.10.2023

(Case T-504/23)

(C/2023/64)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Terminal Ouest Provence (Paris, France) (represented by: P. de Bandt, R. Gherghinaru, L. Panepinto and Z. Irusta Ortega, lawyers)

Defendant: European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—declare that all the costs invoiced by Charmade to Terminal Ouest Provence SAS are subcontracting costs within the meaning of Article 9.3 of the grant agreement ‘Grant Agreement — Project 101079655 — 21-FR-TG-TOP’ and are therefore fully eligible as such, including:

—the ‘delegated project management remuneration’ equivalent to 5 % of the final cost of building the Ouest Provence Terminal, i.e. EUR 1 173 000 excluding tax;

—remuneration to compensate for the risks taken as the developer, equivalent to 8 % of the final cost of building the terminal, i.e. EUR 1 735 000 excluding tax;

—order CINEA to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, in five parts, alleging that the costs invoiced by Charmade, the majority shareholder in the applicant company Terminal Ouest Provence SAS, to the latter company under the property development contract, are fully eligible as subcontracting costs.

1.First plea in law, alleging that Charmade is in fact acting as a subcontractor.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the principle of best value for money was observed when Charmade was appointed as a subcontractor.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that all the measures necessary to avoid a possible conflict of interest were taken when Charmade was appointed as a subcontractor.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that Charmade’s costs are directly linked to the implementation of the project for a new combined railroad transport terminal, Terminal Ouest Provence, and correspond to the market price.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) offers no viable and feasible alternative to its refusal to designate Charmade as a subcontractor.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/64/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)