CELEX: 62015TN0477
Language: en
Date: 2015-08-20 00:00:00
Title: Case T-477/15: Action brought on 20 August 2015 — European Dynamics Luxembourg e.a. v ECHA

3.11.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 363/40
            
         Action brought on 20 August 2015 — European Dynamics Luxembourg e.a. v ECHA
   (Case T-477/15)
   (2015/C 363/49)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), European Dynamics Belgium SA (Brussels, Belgium), Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: M. Sfyri, lawyer)
   
      Defendants: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicants claim that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the defendant’s award decision regarding Phase 2 of the restricted procurement procedure ECHA/2014/86 communicated to the applicants in its letter of 25 June 2014, by which they were informed that their bid had not been successful and that the contract was awarded to another consortium;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to provide the applicants with the compensation of damages for the loss of opportunity to be awarded a contract, for the amount of 5 20  000 euros; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the applicants’ legal fees and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging that ECHA infringed the obligation to state reasons within the evaluation of their tender by not providing the relative advantages of the winning tender.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging that ECHA committed several manifest errors of assessment within the evaluation of their offer and subsidiarily that it introduced new and unknown criteria at the stage of the evaluation of the offers.