- 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-348/16: Action brought on 27 June 2016 — Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis v European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TN0348
62016TN0348
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
C 296/39
(Case T-348/16)
(2016/C 296/49)
Language of the case: Greek
Parties
Applicant: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)
Defendant: European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA) (Brussels, Belgium)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the General Court should:
—Declare that the demand made by the defendant in debit note numbered 3241606289 of 26/05/2016 that the Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis repay part of the grant which it received for the MINATRAN project, a sum of EUR 245 525.43, is unfounded, and declare that that sum constitutes eligible costs; and
—order the European Research Council Executive Agency to pay the applicant’s legal costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant claims that the General Court of the European Union, under Article 272 TFEU, should declare that the sum disputed by ERCEA constitutes eligible costs.
In support of the action, the applicant argues that the costs disputed by ERCEA and, in particular, the staff costs, travel costs and indirect costs are eligible costs. That argument is supported by the evidence which the applicant submitted to ERCEA during the on-the-spot audit and in subsequent correspondence and, above all, by the comprehensive analysis of the evidence submitted.