16.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/27

(Case T-409/09)

2010/C 11/54

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athenes, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and M. Dermitzakis, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

—order the Commission to pay to the applicant the amount of EUR 2 000 000, corresponding to the gross profit of the applicant (50 % of the contract value);

—order the Commission to pay the amount of EUR 100 000 corresponding to the damage suffered because of the missed opportunity to execute contract;

—order the Commission to pay the applicant’s legal costs and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application even if the current application is dismissed.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case, the applicant is bringing an action for non-contractual liability arising from the damages it claims to have incurred as a result of the Commission’s decision of 15 September 2004 to reject the applicant’s bid submitted in response to a call for an open tender FISH/2004/02 for the provision of computer and related services linked to the information systems of the Directorate — General for Fisheries (1) and to award the contract to the successful contractor. In its judgment of 10 September 2008 (2) the Court of First Instance found that, when adopting the said decision the Commission, has failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 100 of the Financial Regulation (3) and Article 149 of the Implementing Rules to state reasons. The Court did not rule on the other pleas in law relied on by the applicant.

The applicant states in support of its contentions that through the above judgment the Court recognized that the evaluation committee confused award and selection criteria and valuated wrongly the tender of the applicant rejecting it unfoundedly.

Furthermore, the applicant raises additional irregularities in the above tendering procedure which were submitted in Case T-465/04 that were not examined and commented by the Court. The applicant argues that the Commission infringed the principle of non-discrimination and free competition and the principle of good administration and diligence and that it committed evident errors of appreciation. It claims that in such circumstances, the infringement of Community law establishes a sufficiently serious breach of law.

The applicant submits that since the Court annulled the Commission decision after the contract awarded based on the annulled decision was fully executed, the applicant requests compensation for the non awarding of the said contract as well as for loss of opportunity.

(1) OJ 2004/S 73 — 061407.

(2) Case T-465/04, Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission, ECR 2008, p. II-00154.

(3) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ 2002 L 248, p. 1).