Judgment;Information — ECLI:EU:T:2023:785
Date: 2023-12-06
Language of the case: Czech
Subject matter: Financial provisions;Own resources
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for annulment - inadmissible
Origin: Czechia

summary of the reasons leading the Commission to conclude that there was no documentary evidence that the claimed costs had actually been incurred – Whether permissible (Art. 296, second para., TFEU) (see paragraphs 41-44) 4. EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Financing covering only expenses actually incurred – Demonstration that the costs have actually been incurred – Staff costs – General conditions – Requirement to have a reliable and verifiable system for recording working time – Infringement (Art. 317 TFEU) (see paragraphs 53, 54, 61, 64-69, 100) 5. Judicial proceedings – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based – Similar requirements for submissions made in support of a plea – Abstract statement – Inadmissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d)) (see paragraphs 72, 106) 6. EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Financing covering only expenses actually incurred – Demonstration that the costs have actually been incurred – Staff costs – Proof that those expenses have actually been incurred and of their connection with the grant agreement at issue – Allocation of the burden of proof (Art. 317 TFEU) (see paragraphs 82-84, 88-91) 7. EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Financing covering only expenses actually incurred – Demonstration that the costs have actually been incurred – Staff costs – Non-compliance with an obligation to produce reliable timesheets in order to justify the staff costs declared by way of implementation of the agreements – Ineligible costs (Art. 317 TFEU) (see paragraphs 101, 102) 8. EU budget – EU financial assistance – Obligation on the beneficiary to comply with the conditions for grant of the assistance – Justification of costs incurred – Proceedings by the Commission for recovery of advances paid – Recovery of financing of costs found to be ineligible – No breach of the principle of proportionality (Art. 317 TFEU) (see paragraphs 121, 123-125) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Kopřiva – Horák v.o.s. to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings. 1 OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.