CELEX: C2005/006/90
Language: en
Date: 2005-01-08 00:00:00
Title: Case T-463/04: Action brought on 2 December 2004 by Danish Management A/S against the Commission of the European Communities

8.1.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 6/46
            
         Action brought on 2 December 2004 by Danish Management A/S against the Commission of the European Communities
   (Case T-463/04)
   (2005/C 6/90)
   Language of the case: English
   An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 2 December 2004 by Danish Management A/S, Viby J, Denmark, represented by C. Kennedy-Loest and C. Thomas, Solicitors.
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Commission's decisions of 18 November 2004 and 30 November 2004 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in tender procedure service contract for a monitoring system of the implementation of projects and programmes of external co-operation financed by the European Community — lot 2: ACP, South Africa and Cuba — EuropeAid 119453/C/SV/Multi;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the applicant's costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant submitted a tender for a service contract for a monitoring system of the implementation of projects and programmes of external co-operation financed by the European Community — lot no. 2 covering ACP, South Africa and Cuba, which was published the 26 May 2004 (1).
   The Commission rejected the tender by decision of 18 November 2004 on the grounds that there was a discrepancy between the applicants financial offer and technical offer as to the number of man/days required. The Commission upheld its decision by letter of 30 November 2004.
   The applicant submits that the Commission's decision is based on an error of fact since, according to the applicant, there was no such discrepancy between the two parts of the companies tender.
   The applicant further alleges that the Commission ought to have sought to clarify the alleged disrepancy and that in not having done so before rejecting the applicants tender the Commission has taken a disproportionate action and failed to exercise due diligence, whereby it infringed its duty of care.
   
      (1)  OJ S 102-081573.