CELEX: 62015TN0441
Language: en
Date: 2015-07-31 00:00:00
Title: Case T-441/15: Action brought on 31 July 2015 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v European Medicines Agency

5.10.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 328/26
            
         Action brought on 31 July 2015 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v European Medicines Agency
   (Case T-441/15)
   (2015/C 328/24)
   Language of the case: Greek
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Evropaiki Dinamiki — Proigmena Sistimata Tilepikinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Αthens, Greece), European Dynamics Belgium SA (Βrussels, Βelgium) (represented by: I. Ambazis and M. Sfyri, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Medicines Agency
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicants claim that the General Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the European Medicines Agency (ΕMA) which was notified to the applicants by means of an e-mail of 04/06/2015 from the IT Resource Manager, whereby the EMA rejected two of the candidates whom the applicants had proposed in relation to Request Form for Services No SC001 in the context of the ΕΜΑ/2012/10/ICT framework-agreement;·
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the EMA to pay compensation to the applicants for the loss of opportunity to conclude individual Project Manager contracts under Request Form for Services No SC001, which the applicants estimate ex aequo et bono at eight thousand euros (EUR 8  000), with interest from the date of delivery of the judgment or such other sum as the General Court deems appropriate, and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the EMA to pay all the costs of the applicants.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In the opinion of the applicants, the contested decision should be annulled under Article 263 TFEU, because it is in breach of the principle of proportionality which governs public procurement. More specifically, the contested decision rejected the applicants’ candidates due to the absence of certification in the PRINCE2 methodology, a criterion which is neither appropriate nor necessary and is therefore in breach of the principle of proportionality in public procurement.
   Accordingly, the EMA committed a clear infringement of a specific rule of law (Article 102(1) of the Financial Regulation) which confers rights on individuals, and caused harm to the applicants, since they lost the opportunity to conclude individual Project Manager contracts, and consequently the conditions for the payment of compensation to the applicants are satisfied.