Case T-104/05: Action brought on 28 February 2005 by CEGELEC SA against European Parliament
Date: 2005-04-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, action for annulment (EU), award of contract, invitation to tender, security services, supplies contract, video surveillance

C 106/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2005

— Infringement of Articles 4(2) and (3), 20 and 21 of Direc-
tive 92/43 aforesaid, Articles 5(2) and 7(1) of Council Deci-
sion 999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the proce-
dures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on
the Commission, Article 8 of the rules of procedure of the
‘habitats’ committee, Article 9 of
the standard rules of
procedure adopted in Decision 2001/C 38/03 under Article
7(1) aforesaid, as well as the general principles of sound
administration and audi alteram partem. In that regard the
applicant asserts that the opinion of the habitats committee
was not sought in accordance with the ordinary procedure
applicable in that regard but under the procedure for a
written procedure, even though there was no apparent need
for recourse to that procedure, recourse thereto did not
form the subject-matter of a reasoned opinion and the habi-
tats committee was not enabled to express its views on all
the technical aspects of the file.

— The Commission adopted its decision on the basis of a
proposal for a list of sites founded on factual information
which was inaccurate and/or irrelevant
the
in light of
criteria laid down in Annex III to Directive 92/43/EEC.

Action brought on 28 February 2005 by CEGELEC SA
against European Parliament

(Case T-104/05)

(2005/C 106/83)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the European Parliament was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28
February 2005 by CEGELEC SA, whose registered office is in
Brussels,
represented by André Delvaux and Véronique
Bertrand, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

— declare the action for annulment admissible;

— annul the decision of 15 December 2004, by which the
European Parliament
submitted by
CEGELEC SA and awarded to GROUP 4 Technology SA the

rejected the tender

three components making up the contract for the supply
and commissioning of video surveillance systems for the
three main workplaces of the European Parliament, which
was the subject of a contract notice published in Official
Journal of the European Union S 61 of 26 March 2004, and
for which the reasons were notified to CEGELEC SA by
letter of 16 December 2004;

— order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Please in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks annulment of the Parliament's decision to
reject the applicant's tender in the call-for-tenders procedure
concerning the provision of video surveillance systems at the
European Parliament's three main workplaces and to award the
contract to another tenderer.

In support of its application, the applicant describes a number
of alleged infringements of the tendering conditions and of
Regulations Nos 1605/2002 (1) and 2432/2002 (2) and of
Directives 92/50 (3), 93/36 (4) and 2004/18 (5), which consist
more particularly of:

— inadequate statement of the reasons for the contested deci-

sion notified to the applicant;

— failure to apply the rules for awards of contract and the
weighting system provided for in the tendering specifica-
tions;

— the fact that, in the light of its size, the tender accepted was
not in conformity with the obligation to submit a tender in
writing in one of the official languages of the Union;

— the fact that the Parliament, in breach of the principle of
equal treatment for tenderers, awarded the contract on the
basis of cameras which had not been demonstrated at the
‘photos-tests’ session;

— the alleged belatedness of the tender that was accepted.

(1) OJ L 248, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 357, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 209, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 199, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 134, p. 114.