CELEX: 62013TN0695
Language: en
Date: 2013-12-31 00:00:00
Title: Case T-695/13: Action brought on 31 December 2013 — ENAC v Commission and TEN-T EA

22.2.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 52/44
            
         Action brought on 31 December 2013 — ENAC v Commission and TEN-T EA
   (Case T-695/13)
   2014/C 52/83
   Language of the case: Italian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Ente nazionale per l’aviazione civile (ENAC) (Rome, Italy) (represented by: P. Garofoli, lawyer, and G. Palmieri, Agent)
   
      Defendants: Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency (TEN-T EA), European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the European Commission’s note of 23 October 2013, ref. Ares (203) 3321778, concerning the ‘Study for developing the intermodality of Bergamo-Orio al Serio Airport’, in which the Commission announced both the launch of the procedure for obtaining reimbursement of part of the financial assistance granted for the carrying-out of that study and the issuing of a debit note for a total of EUR 158 517,54;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of 18 March 2013 adopted by the Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency (TEN-T EA), referred to in the Commission’s note of 23 October 2013, concerning the ‘Closure of Action 2009-IT-91407-S — Study for developing the intermodality of Bergamo-Orio al Serio Airport — Commission Decision C(2010) 4456’, in so far as it found that the costs related to activities 1, 2.1, 4, 5, 6 and 7, which had already been carried out, could not be identified, and, thus, could not be subsidised, and requested repayment of EUR 158 517,54.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The decisions at issue in the present case are the same as those contested in Case T-270/13 and Case T-692/13 SACBO v Commission and TEN-T EA.
   The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to the ones raised in those cases.