# C_2022207EN.01005001.xml

| 23.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/50

---

Action brought on 31 March 2022 — Telefónica de España v Commission

(Case T-170/22)

(2022/C 207/66)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Telefónica de España, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: F. González Díaz, lawyer, P. Stuart, Barrister-at-Law and J. Blanco Carol, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the European Commission of 21 January 2022 relating to the Call for Tenders DIGIT/A3/PR/2019/RP/010 — Trans-European Services for Telematics between Administrations (TESTA); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the European Commission of 21 January 2022 relating to the Call for Tenders DIGIT/A3/PR/2019/RP/010 — Trans-European Services for Telematics between Administrations (TESTA);

| — | grant any other relief that the Court considers appropriate in the circumstances; |
| --- | --- |

—

grant any other relief that the Court considers appropriate in the circumstances;

| — | and, in any event, order the Commission to pay the applicant’s legal costs and other fees and expenses incurred in connection with this application. |
| --- | --- |

—

and, in any event, order the Commission to pay the applicant’s legal costs and other fees and expenses incurred in connection with this application.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, by penalising the consortium (1) for failing to provide information that was never requested in the tender specifications, in breach of the principle of transparency. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, by penalising the consortium (1) for failing to provide information that was never requested in the tender specifications, in breach of the principle of transparency.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to score the offer (2) in accordance with the tender specifications, in breach of the principles of transparency and legal certainty. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to score the offer (2) in accordance with the tender specifications, in breach of the principles of transparency and legal certainty.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to set out clear, unambiguous award criteria, and failed to provide the information necessary to assess the scoring of the offer, in breach of the principles of transparency and certainty and the rights of defence. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to set out clear, unambiguous award criteria, and failed to provide the information necessary to assess the scoring of the offer, in breach of the principles of transparency and certainty and the rights of defence.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to seek clarifications when possible and useful, in breach of the principles of good administration and procedural fairness. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law, and committed errors of fact and assessment, in failing to seek clarifications when possible and useful, in breach of the principles of good administration and procedural fairness.

| 5. | Fifth plea in law, alleging that the procurement procedure was vitiated by a series of breaches of fundamental principles of EU law. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law, alleging that the procurement procedure was vitiated by a series of breaches of fundamental principles of EU law.

| 6. | Sixth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law in failing to impose any measures to safeguard Member States’ rights under Article 346 TFEU not to disclose information contrary to the essential interests of their security, and breached the principle of equal treatment. |
| --- | --- |

6.

Sixth plea in law, alleging that the defendant erred in law in failing to impose any measures to safeguard Member States’ rights under Article 346 TFEU not to disclose information contrary to the essential interests of their security, and breached the principle of equal treatment.

---

(1)  The ‘consortium’, as defined in the application, is composed of Telefonica de España, the applicant, plus two other entities.

(2)  By ‘the offer’ is meant the consortium’s tender offer.

---