# C_2013336EN.01002701.xml

| 16.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 336/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/27

---

Action brought on 6 September 2013 — Systran v Commission

(Case T-481/13)

2013/C 336/57

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Systran SA (Paris, France) (represented by: J. Hoss, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decisions of 5 July 2013 and 21 August 2013 taken by the European Commission, alternatively, by the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decisions of 5 July 2013 and 21 August 2013 taken by the European Commission, alternatively, by the European Union;

| — | order the European Commission and the European Union to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission and the European Union to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decisions of the Commission by which, following the judgment of the Court of Justice of 18 April 2013 in Case C-103/11 P Commission v Systran and Systran Luxembourg [2013] ECR I-0000, it recovers compensatory interest, plus interest for delay from 19 August 2013, on the amount that the Commission had paid to the applicant by way of damages following the judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 in Case T-19/07 Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission [2010] ECR II-6083, annulled by the judgment of the Court of Justice.

Commission

Systran and Systran Luxembourg

Systran and Systran Luxembourg

Commission

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging the Commission's lack of competence to take the contested decisions, in so far as the Commission lacks competence to grant compensatory interest to itself, since such interest may be granted solely by a by a court where the interest is intended to compensate for damage resulting from a party’s failure to carry out its obligations. The applicant claims that the grant of compensatory interest is not part of the realisation of the effects of a judgment of the Court of Justice. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging the Commission's lack of competence to take the contested decisions, in so far as the Commission lacks competence to grant compensatory interest to itself, since such interest may be granted solely by a by a court where the interest is intended to compensate for damage resulting from a party’s failure to carry out its obligations. The applicant claims that the grant of compensatory interest is not part of the realisation of the effects of a judgment of the Court of Justice.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of general principles of European law, both in the light of the grant of interest and the general principle of the prohibition of unjust enrichment. The applicant claims that:






  — | the Commission infringed the general principle of European law, alternatively, the principle common to the Member States relating to the grant of compensatory interest, by granting compensatory interest to itself, in the absence of any harmful event attributable to the applicant; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of general principles of European law, both in the light of the grant of interest and the general principle of the prohibition of unjust enrichment. The applicant claims that:

—

the Commission infringed the general principle of European law, alternatively, the principle common to the Member States relating to the grant of compensatory interest, by granting compensatory interest to itself, in the absence of any harmful event attributable to the applicant;

| — | the Commission infringed the general principle of the prohibition of unjust enrichment by imposing on a legal person governed by private law an obligation not provided for by the Treaties and, in any event, in the light of the calculation of the amount of interest, by granting an amount of flat-rate interest increased by 2 % in respect of inflation. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission infringed the general principle of the prohibition of unjust enrichment by imposing on a legal person governed by private law an obligation not provided for by the Treaties and, in any event, in the light of the calculation of the amount of interest, by granting an amount of flat-rate interest increased by 2 % in respect of inflation.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission misused its powers, in so far as it may not rely on Article 299 TFEU in order to seek payment of compensatory interest in the absence of a legal basis conferring that power on it and of a judicial decision ordering the applicant to pay it. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission misused its powers, in so far as it may not rely on Article 299 TFEU in order to seek payment of compensatory interest in the absence of a legal basis conferring that power on it and of a judicial decision ordering the applicant to pay it.

---