CELEX: 62017TN0812
Language: en
Date: 2017-12-15 00:00:00
Title: Case T-812/17: Action brought on 15 December 2017 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament

12.2.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 52/39
            
         Action brought on 15 December 2017 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament
   (Case T-812/17)
   (2018/C 052/51)
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: Seco Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) and Vinçotte (Vilvoorde, Belgium) (represented by: A. Delvaux and R. Simar, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Parliament
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicants claim that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               declare the action for annulment admissible;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decision, the date of which is unknown, whereby the European Parliament decided to award Contract [06D20/2017/M005 — Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels (OJ 2017/S 118-236114)] to [another tenderer];
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Parliament to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 of the ‘Technical specifications’ annex to the Tender Specification relating to Contract Notice 06D20/2017/M005 — Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels (OJ 2017/S 118-236114), a manifest error of assessment, infringement of general principles of EU law, breach of the duties of care and scrutiny, infringement of the principles of equal treatment and transparency, failure to fulfil the duty to state reasons deriving from, inter alia, Article 113 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012 L 298, p. 1) and Article 161 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29 October 2012 on the rules of application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ 2012 L 362, p. 1), infringement of the right to an effective remedy, and infringement of some of the provisions governing the award of the contract in question.