CELEX: 62005TN0297
Language: en
Date: 2005-07-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-297/05: Action brought on 29 July 2005 by IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants v Commission

15.10.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 257/13
            
         Action brought on 29 July 2005 by IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants v Commission
   (Case T-297/05)
   (2005/C 257/26)
   Language of the case: German
   Parties:
   
      Applicant(s): IPK International — World Tourism Marketing Consultants GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by H.-J. Prieß, lawyer, M. Niestedt, lawyer, and C. Pitschas, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought:
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Commission's decision of 13 May 2005 (ENTR/01/Audit/RVDZ/ss D(2005) 11382) to cancel the decision to grant financial assistance to the applicant in the sum of ECU 530 000 within the framework of the ECODATA-Project of 4 August 1992 (003977/XXIII/A3 — S92/DG/ENV8/LD/kz);
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments:
   The Commission granted the applicant financial assistance in the sum of ECU 530 000 on 4 August 1992 in order to set up a database for ecological tourism in Europe. That decision was cancelled by the defendant by the contested decision of 13 May 2005.
   The applicant submits that the contested decision is unlawful. The applicant states in the grounds of its complaint that the conditions for cancelling a decision have not been met, since the factors relied on by the Commission in order to justify its decision are unfounded in law and moreover it is no longer possible to cancel the decision to grant financial assistance on account of the amount of time that has elapsed. The applicant further asserts that the contested decision is in breach of the principle of good administration and the principle of the duty to state reasons pursuant to Article 253 EC. Finally, the applicant complains that there has been an infringement of the prohibition on reissuing decisions which have been declared void.