# C_2015236EN.01004801.xml

| 20.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/48

---

Action brought on 26 May 2015 — Close and Cegelec v Parliament

(Case T-259/15)

(2015/C 236/63)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: SA Close (Harzé-Aywaille, Belgium) and Cegelec (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-M. Rikkers and J.-L. Teheux, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision taken on an unknown date by the European Parliament to award the public works contract concerning the ‘extension and upgrading project for the Konrad Adenauer Building in Luxembourg’ Lot 73 (energy centre), reference INLO-D-UPIL-T-14-A04, to the Association Momentanée ENERGIE-KAD (composed of the companies Mersch et Schmitz Production Sàrl and Energolux S.A.) and, accordingly, not to award the contract to the applicants. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision taken on an unknown date by the European Parliament to award the public works contract concerning the ‘extension and upgrading project for the Konrad Adenauer Building in Luxembourg’ Lot 73 (energy centre), reference INLO-D-UPIL-T-14-A04, to the Association Momentanée ENERGIE-KAD (composed of the companies Mersch et Schmitz Production Sàrl and Energolux S.A.) and, accordingly, not to award the contract to the applicants.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the duty to state reasons and of the principle of transparency, in so far as a reading of the grounds for the rejection of the applicants’ bid and the extracts from the decision awarding the contract to the Association Momentanée ENERGIE-KAD does not enable it to be ascertained whether those tenderers satisfied the requirements of qualitative selection laid down in the contract documents. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the duty to state reasons and of the principle of transparency, in so far as a reading of the grounds for the rejection of the applicants’ bid and the extracts from the decision awarding the contract to the Association Momentanée ENERGIE-KAD does not enable it to be ascertained whether those tenderers satisfied the requirements of qualitative selection laid down in the contract documents.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment and infringement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment and infringement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination.

The applicants submit that the European Parliament committed a manifest error of assessment in awarding the contract in question to the Association Momentanée ENERGIE-KAD and that the selection criteria were not applied in accordance with the tender specifications and in compliance with the principles of transparency, proportionality, equal treatment and non-discrimination required under Article 102 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (1).

1

---

(1)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012 L 298, p. 1).

1

---