Case T-570/24: Action brought on 4 November 2024 – Modul University Vienna v Commission and HADEA
Date: 2024-11-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU budget, Hungary, equal treatment, legality, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, public procurement, rights of the defence, rule of law, trust








C_202500269EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/269


20.1.2025






Action brought on 4 November 2024 – Modul University Vienna v Commission and HADEA


(Case T-570/24)

(C/2025/269)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Modul University Vienna GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: V. Łuszcz and G. Illés, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission, European Health and Digital Executive Agency

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of HADEA and the Commission to apply, to the applicant, Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 of 15 December 2022, (1) a decision embodied in the HADEA’s email message of 23 August 2024 sent to the applicant’s Research and Knowledge Transfer Support Manager;










—


declare, under Article 277 TFEU, that Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 is invalid and inapplicable in so far as the applicant is concerned;










—


as an alternative claim to claim 1, annul the decision of HADEA and the Commission to apply, to the applicant, Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 as regards the DEPLOYTOUR project, a decision embodied in HADEA’s email message of 23 August 2024 sent to the applicant’s Research and Knowledge Transfer Support Manager;










—


as an alternative claim to claim 2, declare, under Article 277 TFEU, that Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 is inapplicable in so far as the applicant is concerned;










—


order HADEA and the Commission and any intervener opposing the present application to bear the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, by which the applicant raises a plea of illegality against a Commission document, of unknown date, published on the Funding and Tenders Portal as FAQ 22172, entitled ‘What are the entities maintained by public interest trusts concerned by the Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506?’ (hereinafter ‘FAQ 22172’). The applicant submits that FAQ 22172 is either a non-existent act or an illegal act, and relies on breach of the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations, breach of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 (‘the Conditionality Regulation’) (2) and breach of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506. It also submits that the contested decision is illegal because it is based on the illegal FAQ 22172.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that Mathias Corvinus Collegium Alapítvány and the applicant are not government entities within the meaning of Article 2(b) of the Conditionality Regulation. The applicant relies on breaches of the Conditionality Regulation, of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 (‘the Financial Regulation’), (3) essential procedural requirements, rights of defence, the duty to provide adequate reasons and lack of competence. It also relies on pleas of illegality directed against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506 and FAQ 22172.










3.


Third plea in law, by which the applicant raises a plea of illegality against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506 and submits that the Commission and the Council have failed to establish the relevance of the breach of rule of law and the genuine link between the breach and the serious risk of affecting the sound financial management of the EU budget or the protection of the EU’s financial interests. It also relies on errors of assessment, breach of the Conditionality Regulation and the duty to provide adequate reasons, essential procedural requirements and lack of competence.










4.


Fourth plea in law, by which the applicant raises a plea of illegality against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506. It submits that the Commission and the Council have failed to establish the proportionality of the measure, committed manifest errors of assessment, breaches of the Conditionality Regulation, breaches of the principle of proportionality, breaches of the duty to provide adequate reasons, breaches of Articles 14 and 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and breaches of the Financial Regulation. The applicant also submits that the HADEA and the Commission breached all these rules in the contested decision as well.










5.


Fifth plea in law, based on the breach of the principle of presumption of innocence, the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination. The applicant also raises a plea of illegality against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging the breach of the right to operate on an undistorted market (Article 16 and 20-21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, in conjunction with Articles 101, 102 and 107 TFEU). The applicant also raises a plea of illegality against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506.










7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging the infringement of the principles of legal certainty, legitimate expectations and infringement of essential procedural requirements. The applicant also raises a plea of illegality against Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506.










8.


Eighth plea in law, alleging that the contested decision breaches the disputed FAQ, the contested provision, (4) Council Regulation 58/2003, (5) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/173, (6) Commission Decision C(2021) 9343 of 14 December 2021, (7) Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 (8) and Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015, (9) and alleging in this connection lack of competence.






(1)  Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 of 15 December 2022 on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary (OJ 2022 L 325, p. 94).

(2)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ 2020 L 433, p. I/1).

(3)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ 2018 L 193, p. 1).

(4)  Defined in the application as Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision 2022/2506.

(5)  Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (OJ 2003 L 11, p. 1).

(6)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/173 establishing the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency, the European Health and Digital Executive Agency, the European Research Executive Agency, the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency, the European Research Council Executive Agency, and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency and repealing Implementing Decisions 2013/801/EU, 2013/771/EU, 2013/778/EU, 2013/779/EU, 2013/776/EU and 2013/770/EU (OJ 2021 L 50, p. 9).

(7)  Commission Decision C(2021) 9343 of 14 December 2021amending Decision C(2021) 948 delegating powers to the European Health and Digital Executive Agency with a view to the performance of tasks linked to the implementation of Union programmes in the field of EU4Health, Single Market, Research and Innovation, Digital Europe, Connecting Europe Facility –Digital, comprising, in particular, implementation of appropriations entered in the general budget of the Union

(8)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ 2004 L 24, p. 1).

(9)  Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ 2015 L 141, p. 73).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/269/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)