Error! Reference source not found.
Action brought on 8 December 2008 - Evropaïki Dynamiki/Commission
(Case T-554/08)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki - Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athènes, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, P. Katsimani and M. Dermitzakis, lawyers)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
annul DG TAXUD's decision to reject the bid of the applicant, filed in response to the open Call for Tender TAXUD/2007/AO-005 (TIMEA) for the "Provision of services for the Community computer applications in the customs, excise and taxation areas" (OJ 2008/S 203-268728) which was communicated to the applicant by letter dated 26 September 2008 and all further related decisions of the Commission including the one to award the contract to the successful contractor;
order DG TAXUD to pay the applicant's damages suffered on account of the tendering procedure in question for an amount of EUR 7 638 125;
order DG TAXUD to pay the applicant's legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected.
Pleas in law and main arguments
By means of its application the applicant seeks the annulment pursuant to Article 230 EC of the European Commission's (DG TAXUD) decision to reject the bid filed by the applicant in response to the open Call for Tenders TAXUD/2007/AO-005(TIMEA) for the "Provision of services for the Community computer applications in the customs, excise and taxation areas" (OJ 2008/S 203-268728) which was communicated to the applicant by letter dated 26 September 2008, as well as the award of damages pursuant to Article 235 EC.
The applicant claims that the Evaluation Committee committed various manifest errors of assessment with regards to the evaluation of the tender. According to the applicant, the Evaluation Committee deviated from the standard policy of the Commission and ignored the provisions included in the tender specifications of TIMEA, which suggest that the contracting authorities should contact the tenderer in the context of the selection phase of a Call for Tenders, and ask for additional information or clarifications. It is further submitted that Article 100 of the Financial Regulation and the principles of good administration and of legitimate expectations were breached by the contracting authority. In addition, the applicant claims that the contracting authority misused its powers and violated the principles of transparency and equal treatment provided for in Article 93(1) of the Financial Regulation.
The applicant claims that the defendant failed to provide the applicant with an adequate analysis of the outcome of the verifications carried out further to the applicant's comments on the evaluation report.
The applicant contends that the defendant used abusively the selection criteria in order to de-select the applicant's tender. By doing so, it infringed Articles 134(2) and 148(3) of Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002
1, as well as Article 32(2) of Directive 92/50
2.