CELEX: 62010TN0109
Language: en
Date: 2010-03-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-109/10: Action brought on 5 March 2010 — Luxembourg v Commission

22.5.2010   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 134/39
            
         Action brought on 5 March 2010 — Luxembourg v Commission
   (Case T-109/10)
   2010/C 134/67
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C. Schiltz, Agent, and P. Kinsch, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the contested decision in so far as it applies to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The applicant seeks the annulment, in so far as it applies to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, of Commission Decision C(2009) 10712 of 23 December 2009 reducing the assistance granted to the Community Initiative Interreg II/C ‘Rhine/Meuse Flooding*’ in the Kingdom of Belgium, Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the Kingdom of the Netherlands by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under Commission Decision C(97) 3742 of 18 December 1997 (ERDF No. 970010008).
   In support of its action, the applicant puts forward two pleas in law.
   By the first plea in law, the applicant claims that if the actions for annulment brought by the Dutch and German authorities are upheld, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg should benefit as a result. If it is found that the errors and weaknesses, allegedly systematic, which the Commission’s audit was thought to have revealed in the functioning of the program in question in the Netherlands and Germany, do not in reality exist, the very basis of the decision’s reasoning fails and with it the linear financial correction applied to the projects implemented in Luxembourg.
   The second plea in law alleges the illegality of the extension, to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, of a financial adjustment* that might be justified only in respect of other Member States. No anomalies have been found in the operation* of the program in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The fact that Luxembourg agreed to participate in a joint project with Germany, Belgium, France and the Netherlands does not justify the negative effects, in terms of financial adjustment* of its own projects, of errors or weaknesses that were discovered during the audit of Dutch or German projects, and which consist almost exclusively in alleged breaches of provisions of the procedure for awarding public contracts. Despite the fact that this is a matter of joint participation by five Member States in the same program, procedures for public procurement* awarding public contracts come within the exclusive responsibility of the national authorities of the Member States concerned.