# C_2007211EN.01004202.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/42

---

Action brought on 9 July 2007 — Pathé Distribution v EACEA

(Case T-239/07)

(2007/C 211/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Pathé Distribution (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Deprez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency (EACEA)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that the contract No 2006-09120304D1021001FD1507 has not been validly terminated by the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency and remains in force; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that the contract No 2006-09120304D1021001FD1507 has not been validly terminated by the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency and remains in force;

| — | Order the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 9 737 remaining payable to it under the contract. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 9 737 remaining payable to it under the contract.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action based on an arbitration clause, the applicant requests that the defendant be ordered to make payment of a sum equivalent to the balance remaining payable to it in implementation of contract No 2006-09120304D1021001FD1507 in relation to Community financial support of a project for videographic distribution of a film within the ‘MEDIA Plus’ programme adopted by Council Decision 2002/821/EC (1).

1

The contract was signed by the parties on 27 June 2006 and an advance was paid by the defendant to the applicant as provided for by the contract. On 8 May 2007, the defendant sent a letter to the applicant purporting to terminate the contract on the ground that the real total costs were lower than the project's provisional budget and that no written explanation had been provided in the submitted financial report on the project, and requesting repayment of the sum paid as an advance. The applicant considers, however, that, as provided for in the contract, the defendant's contribution to the project was to be as high as 50 % of the real costs of videographic distribution, and accordingly requests payment of a sum still due in addition to the sum paid in advance.

In support of its action, the applicant claims that termination of the contract by the defendant is irregular and unfounded, since it has disregarded the terms of the contract as to the procedure for termination, and in particular, it has not allowed the applicant any period in which to respond on the implementation of the contract. According to the applicant, the Court should rule that the contract remains in force.

Further, the applicant disputes the grounds of termination of the contract which are relied on by the defendant, namely failure to perform its contractual obligations.

---

(1)  2000/821/EC: Council Decision of 20 December 2000 on the implementation of a programme to encourage the development, distribution and promotion of European audiovisual works (MEDIA Plus — Development, Distribution and Promotion) (2001-2005), OJ L 336, p. 82.

1

---