- 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-350/09: Action brought on 4 September 2009 — ICO Satellite v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009TN0350
62009TN0350
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
7.11.2009
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 267/76
(Case T-350/09)
2009/C 267/137
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: ICO Satellite Ltd (Slough, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Tupper, Solicitor)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
—order that Decision No 2009/449/EC of 13 May 2009 on the selection of operators of pan-European Systems providing mobile satellite services (MSS) is void in accordance with the provisions of Articles 230 and 231 EC;
—order that the costs of the present action be paid by the defendant and any other orders it may deem appropriate.
Pleas in law and main arguments
By means of its application, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision No 2009/449/EC of 13 May 2009 on the selection of operators of pan-European Systems providing mobile satellite services (“MSS”)(1).
It is submitted that the contested decision has the effect of depriving the applicant of property rights legitimately accrued to it under international law. The applicant further claims that the contested decision is unlawful because the Commission has:
(a) discriminated against the applicant by involving a former chairman of the Inmarsat Ventures Limited Council (“Inmarsat”) in the decision-making process, thereby infringing essential procedural requirements and breaching the principle of equal treatment; and
(b) acted unreasonably, by selecting Inmarsat and Solaris Mobile Limited over the applicant when the latter is allegedly in an objectively better position to provide MSS.
According to the applicant, by adopting the contested decision, the defendant has acted disproportionately and in a way which is discriminatory and contrary to the applicant’s legitimate expectations. The applicant further submits that the contested decision also constitutes a violation of its rights to the peaceful enjoyment of its possessions as protected by Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention of Human Rights (“ECHR”), as well as the right to enjoy its civil rights, including property rights and the right to a fair and public hearing, enshrined in Article 6 of the ECHR.
(1) 2009/449/EC: Commission Decision of 13 May 2009 on the selection of operators of pan-European systems providing mobile satellite services (MSS) (notified under document number C(2009) 3746) (OJ 2009 L 149, p. 65)