# C_2013367EN.01003602.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/36

---

Action brought on 17 October 2013 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy

(Case T-553/13)

2013/C 367/65

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Ettelbrück, Luxembourg); and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: D. Mabger, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the defendant’s award decision dated 7 August 2013 in relation to the open Call for Tenders F4E-ADM-0464 (OJ 2012/S 213-352451) for the award of the Framework Service Contract in cascade entitled ‘Provision of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Projects to Fusion for Energy’ (OJ 2013/S 198-342743); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the defendant’s award decision dated 7 August 2013 in relation to the open Call for Tenders F4E-ADM-0464 (OJ 2012/S 213-352451) for the award of the Framework Service Contract in cascade entitled ‘Provision of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Projects to Fusion for Energy’ (OJ 2013/S 198-342743);

| — | Order the defendant to provide the applicants with the compensation of damages for the loss of opportunity to be awarded a contract; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to provide the applicants with the compensation of damages for the loss of opportunity to be awarded a contract;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicants exemplary damages; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicants exemplary damages;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicants’ legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicants’ legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected.

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 that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation, as it proceeded with the evaluation of tenders and the award of the contract after the expiration of the validity of tenders. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation, as it proceeded with the evaluation of tenders and the award of the contract after the expiration of the validity of tenders.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation through the infringement of the obligation to state reasons. The defendant provided the applicants with an Evaluation Report which did not contain any concrete evaluation comments concerning the applicants’ tender. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation through the infringement of the obligation to state reasons. The defendant provided the applicants with an Evaluation Report which did not contain any concrete evaluation comments concerning the applicants’ tender.

---