do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-33/18: Order of the General Court of 3 October 2018 — Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA (Action for annulment and for damages — Public service contracts — Administrative appeal before the Commission — Purely confirmatory act — Deadline for bringing an appeal — Act not open to challenge — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-10-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, indemnification, rights of the defence, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_2018436EN.01005102.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/51






Order of the General Court of 3 October 2018 — Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA
(Case T-33/18) (1)

((Action for annulment and for damages - Public service contracts - Administrative appeal before the Commission - Purely confirmatory act - Deadline for bringing an appeal - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility))
(2018/C 436/73)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Pracsis SPRL (Brussels, Belgium) and Conceptexpo Project (Wavre, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin, A Katsimerou and I. Rubene, acting as Agents), Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (initially represented by: H. Monet and A. Kisylyczko, then by: H. Monet and N. Durand, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 13 November 2017 dismissing the administrative appeal brought against the decisions of EACEA of 17 July and 11 August 2017 and, ‘in so far as is necessary’, the annulment of those decisions of EACEA and its ‘decision’ to sign a contract with the tenderer ranked in first position, inasmuch as those decisions rank the tender of the applicants’ consortium in second position according to the cascade mechanism in the call for tenders EACEA/2017/01, regarding event organisation services and promotional campaigns in the audiovisual field and, second, application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicants allegedly suffered due to those decisions.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Pracsis SPRL and Conceptexpo Project are ordered to bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission and by the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA).






(1)  OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.