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-688/19: Action brought on 8 October 2019 – VeriGraft v EASME

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0688

62019TN0688

October 8, 2019
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

23.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/59

(Case T-688/19)

(2019/C 432/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: VeriGraft AB (Göteborg, Sweden) (represented by: P. Hansson and A. Johansson, lawyers)

Defendant: Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

find and declare that EASME’s termination of the Grant Agreement (Grant Agreement No 778620 P-TEV) is invalid; and

order EASME to pay costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

1.First plea in law, alleging that the invoked ground for termination is not applicable and EASME’s termination is thus invalid:

EASME has terminated the Grant Agreement citing no other basis for its decision than a provision, according to which the Grant Agreement may be terminated if ‘the beneficiary, or a natural person who has the power to represent or take decisions on its behalf, has been found guilty of professional misconduct, proven by any means’.

As neither the beneficiary, i.e. VERIGRAFT, nor any natural person who has the power to represent or take decisions on its behalf, has been found guilty of any professional misconduct, this ground is not applicable and the termination is thus invalid.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the termination of the Grant Agreement breaches the principle of proportionality:

A termination of the Grant Agreement also breaches the principle of proportionality as it was not a suitable measure to achieve the legitimate objective pursued; it was not necessary to achieve the objective pursued; and as the termination imposed a burden on VERIGRAFT that is clearly excessive to the objective sought to be achieved.

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