Case T-80/25: Action brought on 29 January 2025 – Xpand Consortium and Others v Commission
Date: 2025-01-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, consortium, equal treatment, invitation to tender, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, public procurement, services contract, tendering








C_202502092EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2092


14.4.2025






Action brought on 29 January 2025 – Xpand Consortium and Others v Commission


(Case T-80/25)

(C/2025/2092)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Xpand Consortium (Brussels, Belgium), NTT Data Belgique (Brussels), Sopra Steria Benelux (Brussels), Fujitsu Technology Solutions (Brussels) (represented by: M. Troncoso Ferrer and L. Lence de Frutos, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


Annul the European Commission’s decision of 19 November 2024 cancelling the procurement procedure with reference BUDG19/PO/04;










—


Order the defendant to pay all the legal fees and costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the duty to state reasons and a manifest error of assessment committed by the European Commission when annulling the procurement procedure with reference BUDG19/PO/04 for considering that the service level agreement was not a valid selection criterion.










—


The applicant claims that, in view of the large margin of discretion enjoyed by contracting authorities when organising procurement procedures, the Commission could define the service level agreement as a selection criterion.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations, on the grounds that the Commission (i) limited itself in its interpretation of the service level agreement as a selection criterion during the ‘Questions and Answers’ session held during procurement procedure with reference BUDG19/PO/04 and then changed its position regarding the validity of the service level agreement as a selection criterion and (ii) led Xpand Consortium to entertain justified expectations about the legality of the service level agreement as a selection criterion.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of sound administration on the grounds that the European Commission (i) did not communicate the cancellation of procurement procedure with reference BUDG/PO/04 as soon as possible, as required by Article 174 of the Financial Regulation (1) and (ii) has not yet explained to Xpand Consortium the reasons for adopting the contested decision










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principles of proportionality and equal treatment on the grounds that (i) by cancelling procurement procedure with reference BUDG19/PO/04 the Commission adopted the most onerous and disadvantageous measure whereas there were other proportionate measures and (ii) by launching a new procurement procedure with the same object, the European Commission gave an undue competitive advantage to Xpand Consortium’s rivals in the new tender.






(1)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L 2024/2509).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2092/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)