CELEX: C2007/117/45
Language: en
Date: 2007-05-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-89/07: Action brought on 23 March 2007 — VIP Car Solutions v Parliament

26.5.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 117/29
            
         Action brought on 23 March 2007 — VIP Car Solutions v Parliament
   (Case T-89/07)
   (2007/C 117/45)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: VIP Car Solutions (Hoenheim, France) (represented by G. Welzer, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Parliament
   Form of order sought
   The Court is asked to:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the European Parliament not to award the contract PE/2006/06/UTD/1 — transport for Members of the European Parliament during sessions in Strasbourg, notified on 24 January 2007;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul all subsequent acts;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Parliament to pay the sum of EUR 500 000 as damages;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Parliament to pay the costs of the legal proceedings;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Parliament to pay one-off costs amounting to EUR 5 000
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant challenges the decision of the European Parliament rejecting its tender in tender procedure PE/2006/06/UTD/1 — transport for Members of the European Parliament during sessions in Strasbourg (1).
   In support of its action, the applicant relies, first, on an infringement of the award criteria contained in the call for tenders, particularly, concerning price inasmuch as it claims to have offered the lowest price and that that criteria should have accounted for 55 % in the award of the contract.
   Moreover, the applicant asserts that the contested decision breached Article 100 of the Financial Regulation (2), under which certain details need not be disclosed where disclosure would harm the legitimate business interests of private undertakings or could distort fair competition between those undertakings. According to the applicant, the information which it requested, namely the price offered by the successful tenderer, does not fall within the scope of the Article and, consequently, the refusal to disclose it to the applicant is improper.
   
      (1)  Contract notice ‘Chauffeur-driven car and minibus service for Members of the European Parliament during part sessions in Strasbourg’, OJ 2006 S 177-187988.
   
      (2)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.