Case T-272/06: Action brought on 29 September 2006 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Court of Justice
Date: 2006-12-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, action for annulment (EU), award of contract, information technology industry, invitation to tender, maintenance, tendering

2.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/57

Fourthly, the applicant contends that the Commission violated
its rights of defence by denying it
full access to the file,
including communications between the Commission, on the
one hand, and its experts, on the other.

Finally, the applicant suggests that the amount of the periodic
penalty payment
is excessive and disproportionate as the
Commission failed to take into account the complexity of the
compliance obligation, while it completely disregarded the
applicant's substantial good faith efforts to comply with the
Commission's previous decisions.

Moreover, the applicant submits that the contracting authority's
decision contains evident errors of assessment in the frame-
work of the evaluation of its offer, exceeding, thus, the discre-
tion that European Institutions dispose in procurement proce-
dures.

Action brought on 11 September 2006 — ISD Polska and
Industrial Union of Donbass v Commission

Action brought on 29 September 2006 — Evropaïki Dyna-
miki v Court of Justice

(Case T-272/06)

(2006/C 294/116)

Language of the case: English

Parties

(Case T-273/06)

(2006/C 294/117)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepi-
koinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece)
(represented by: N. Korogiannakis and N. Keramidas, lawyers)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Communities

ISD Polska sp. z.o.o.

(Częstochowa, Poland) and
Applicants:
Industrial Union of Donbass Corp. (Donetsk, Ukraine) (repre-
sented by: C. Rapin and E. Van den Haute, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

— Annulment of the decision of the Court of Justice to eval-
uate the applicant's bid as not successful and award the
contract to the successful contractor;

— order the Court of Justice to pay the applicant's 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

By means of its application, the applicant seeks annulment of
the decision of the Court of Justice of 20 July 2006, rejecting
its bid filed in response to the open Call for Tenders AM CJ
13/04 for
the maintenance, development and support of
computer applications (OJ 2005/S 127-125162 & 2005/S 171-
169521) and awarding the same Call for Tender to another
bidder.

— declare this action admissible;

— annul Article 3 of the Commission decision of 5 July 2005
concerning the aid granted by Poland to Huta Częstochowa
SA (notified under C(2005) 1962);

— in the alternative, declare that on the date of this action
there is no obligation on Poland to recover the aid and
interest referred to in Article 3 of the decision and therefore
that the amounts of that aid and interest is not payable;

— in the further alternative, annul the second subparagraph of
Article 3(2) of the decision and refer the question of the
interest to the Commission for a new decision in accord-
ance with Annex A to this application, or with such other
consideration as the Court may indicate in the grounds of
the judgment;

The applicant claims that the contested decision was taken in
violation of the Financial Regulation (EC) No 1605/2002 (OJ L
its Implementing Rules and Directive
248, 16/09/02, p. 1),
2004/18/EC, through an alleged misinterpretation of the selec-
tion criteria, violation of the principles of transparency and
equal treatment of the participants.

— in any event, order the Commission to pay all of the costs;

— if the Court should decide that there is no need to adjudi-
cate, order the Commission to pay the costs pursuant to
the combined provisions of Article 87(6) and Article 90(a)
of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance.