CELEX: 62017TN0664
Language: en
Date: 2017-09-27 00:00:00
Title: Case T-664/17: Action brought on 27 September 2017 — eSlovensko v Commission

11.12.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 424/45
            
         Action brought on 27 September 2017 — eSlovensko v Commission
   (Case T-664/17)
   (2017/C 424/66)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: eSlovensko (Lučenec, Slovakia) (represented by: F. Branislav, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision Ref. ARES(2017)3107844-21/06/2017 of the European Commission excluding the applicant from participating in all procurement and grant award procedures governed by Regulation No 966/2012 and from the award of funds governed by Regulation 2015/323;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to conduct a new audit, reviewing its findings as to admissible costs;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      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 misuse of powers, particularly improper legal evaluation of facts and findings.
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           The applicant argues that there was no reasonable basis for the Commission’s decision.
                        
                     
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging inadequate justification of the contested decision.
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           The Commission evidently failed to properly and impartially review all circumstances of the case.