Order of the Court of First Instance (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2017 — Pilla v Commission and EACEA

(Case T‑784/16)

(Action for annulment and damages — Provisional measures — Application for legal aid submitted after an action had been brought — Creative Europe Programme (2014-2020) — Call for proposals on support for a preparatory action — Decision rejecting candidature due to failure to respect an eligibility criterion — Grants available only to legal persons — Disregard of the formal requirements — Acts not attributable to EACEA — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

1. Judicial proceedings—Application initiating proceedings—Formal requirements—Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute—Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based—Unambiguous wording of the form of order sought by the applicant (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d) and (e)) (see paras 34-36)

2. Judicial proceedings—Legal basis of an action—Choice for the applicant and not the EU judicature (see para. 37)

3. Action for annulment—Jurisdiction of the EU judicature—Claims seeking an injunction to adopt specific measures—Inadmissibility (Art. 263 TFEU) (see para. 48)

4. Action for annulment—Admissibility criteria—Action against the author of the contested measure—Claim for annulment of a Commission measure formed against an EU organ—Inadmissibility (Art. 263 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulations No 966/2012, Arts 54(2) and 84(2) No 1295/2013, Art. 13; Council Regulation No 58/2003, Art. 6) (see paras 54, 58, 60, 63, 68)

5. EU institutions—Exercise of powers—Delegation—Conditions—Requirement for an express decision from the delegating authority (see para. 64)

6. Action for damages—Subject-matter—Claim for damages not attributable to the defendant institution or body—Inadmissibility (Art. 268 TFEU) (see para. 70)

7. Judicial proceedings—Admissibility of actions—Application for interim measures—Application submitted in the same document as the main action—Inadmissibility (Art. 278 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 156(5)) (see paras 75, 76)

8. Commission—Powers—Implementation of the EU budget—Award of grants—Establishment of rules on applicants’ elegibilty criteria—Discretion of the Commission (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 966/2012, Arts 54(2) and 131(2)) (see para. 97)

9. Non-contractual liability—Conditions—Unlawfulness—Injury—Causal link—One of the conditions not satisfied—Claim for compensation dismissed in its entirety (Art. 340, second para., TFEU) (see paras 110, 111)

Re:

First, APPLICATION based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 2 September 2016 rejecting the candidature submitted by the applicant in the call for proposals ‘EAC/S05/2016 — Support for a preparatory action to create an EU Festival Award and an EU Festival Label in the field of Culture: EFFE (Europe for Festivals — Festivals for Europe)’ of 26 April 2016, secondly, application seeking, principally, a declaration by the Court that the applicant’s candidature is admissible or, in the alternative, annulment of the ‘selection procedure itself’, thirdly, application seeking suspension of the selection procedure and, fourthly, application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant by reason of the rejection of his candidature.

Operative part

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible in so far as it is directed against the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA).

2. The action is dismissed in part as manifestly inadmissible and in part as manifestly lacking any foundation in law in so far as it is directed against the European Commission.

3. The application for legal aid is rejected.