CELEX: 62015TN0603
Language: en
Date: 2015-10-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-603/15: Action brought on 23 October 2015 –Frank v Commission

8.2.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 48/52
            
         Action brought on 23 October 2015 –Frank v Commission
   (Case T-603/15)
   (2016/C 048/60)
   Language of the case: German
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Regine Frank (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: W. Trautner, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision notified by letter of 5 June 2015 by which the applicant’s application No 680151 — QUASIMODO in level 1 was negatively assessed and she was not admitted to level 2;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   By the present action, the applicant contests the implicit negative decision of the Commission on the administrative complaint against the decision of ERCEA of 5 June 2015 to negatively assess the applicant’s application No 680151 — QUASIMODO in the context of the calls for proposals and related activities under the ERC Work Programme 2016 under Horizon 2020 of the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) — ‘Horizon 2020’ and the decision not to admit the applicant to level 2.
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of transparency
               The applicant claims that ERCEA’s actions infringe the principle of transparency. The assessment bases were neither set out in the ‘Guidelines for Applicants’ nor consistently stated in the decision of 5 June 2015.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of equality
               In addition, it is claimed that, as a result of its undifferentiated assessment and attacks on the applicant’s economic reputation, the Commission also infringes the principle of equality.