Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 March 2015 —
Evropaïki Dynamiki v AESA

(Case T‑297/09)

Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Supply of IT services — Classification of a tenderer in second or third position in the cascade procedure — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Non-contractual liability

1.                     Actions for annulment — Interest in bringing proceedings — Action against a decision which has been implemented — Action by a tenderer, in the context of a public contract award procedure, against an award decision in favour of competitors — Admissibility (Art. 230, fourth para., EC) (see paras 41-43)

2.                     EU public contracts — Conclusion of a contract following a call for tenders — Discretion of the institutions — Judicial review — Limits (Council Regulation No 1605/2002; Commission Regulation No 2342/2002) (see paras 72, 134)

3.                     Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Decision, in the procedure for the award of a public service contract, not to accept a tender — Obligation to communicate, following a written request, the characteristics and relative advantages of the tender accepted and the name of the tenderer — Obligation on the awarding authority to provide a statement of reasons showing clearly and unequivocally the legal and factual elements justifying the rejection of the tender and acceptance of another tender — Scope (Art. 296, second para., TFEU; Council Regulation No 1605/2002, Art. 100(2); Commission Regulation No 2342/2002, Art. 149(2)) (see paras 73-78, 85-89, 98, 142, 149-151)

4.                     Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Simple reference to annexes — Inadmissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)) (see para. 113)

5.                     Non-contractual liability — Conditions — Unlawfulness — Damage — Causal link — Absence of one of those conditions — Claim for compensation dismissed in its entirety (Art. 288, second para., EC) (see paras 180, 181)

Re:

APPLICATION, first, for annulment of EASA’s decisions to classify the applicant’s tenders in second or third position according to the cascade mechanism in call for tender EASA.2009.OP.02 relating to ‘ICT Services’ in the field of information technology and communications (OJ 2009/S 22‑030588) and, second, for damages for the harm alleged to have been suffered on account of the tendering procedure in question.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) of 6 July 2009 ranking the tender submitted by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE third in the cascade mechanism for lot 2 (client-server applications, development and maintenance) of call for tenders EASA.2009.OP.02;

2. Annuls EASA’s decision of 10 July 2009 ranking the tender submitted by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis second in the cascade mechanism for lot 3 (system, database, and network administration) of call for tenders EASA.2009.OP.02;

3. Annuls EASA’s decision of 14 July 2009 ranking the tender submitted by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis second in the cascade mechanism for lot 5 (enterprise content management (‘ECM’), enterprise records management, document management implementation, maintenance and support) of call for tenders EASA.2009.OP.02;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

5. Orders Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis to bear 25% of its own costs and pay 25% of the costs incurred by EASA, and EASA to bear 75% of its own costs and pay 75% of those incurred by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis.