Case C-376/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 May 2018 — European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) v European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Appeal — Public service contracts — Provision of external services for programme and project management and technical consultancy in the field of information technologies — Cascade procedure — Article 21 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union — Article 76 and Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Ruling ultra petita prohibited — Weighting of sub-criteria within award criteria — Manifest errors of assessment — Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 — Article 100(2) — Decision rejecting a tender — Failure to state reasons — Loss of opportunity — Non-contractual liability of the European Union — Claim for damages)

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 May 2018 — European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) v European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE

(Case C-376/16 P) ( 1 )

‛(Appeal — Public service contracts — Provision of external services for programme and project management and technical consultancy in the field of information technologies — Cascade procedure — Article 21 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union — Article 76 and Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Ruling ultra petita prohibited — Weighting of sub-criteria within award criteria — Manifest errors of assessment — Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 — Article 100(2) — Decision rejecting a tender — Failure to state reasons — Loss of opportunity — Non-contractual liability of the European Union — Claim for damages)’

Parties

Appellant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: N. Bambara, acting as Agent, and by P. Wytinck and B. Hoorelbeke, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and V. Alevizopoulou, dikigoroi)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside points 2 to 5 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 27 April 2016, European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EUIPO (T-556/11, EU:T:2016:248);

2. Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;

3. Dismisses the claim for damages brought by European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE in Case T-556/11;

4. Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to bear their own costs in relation to both the appeal proceedings and the proceedings at first instance.

( 1 ) OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.