Action brought on 23 May 2012 - Elitaliana v Eulex Kosovo and Starlite Aviation Operations
(Case T-213/12)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicant: Elitaliana SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: R. Colagrande, lawyer)
Defendants: Eulex Kosovo - European Union Rule of Law Mission (Pristina, Republic of Kosovo) and Starlite Aviation Operations (Dublin, Ireland)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
Annul the measures adopted by Eulex - the content and date of which are unknown to the applicant - which resulted in the award of the contract in tendering procedure 'EuropeAid/131516/D/SER/XK - Helicopter Support to the EULEX Mission in Kosovo (PROC/272/11)' to the company Starlite Aviation Operations, communicated by Eulex by letter of 29 March 2012 (received on that date by e-mail), and all previous and subsequent measures, whether related or subordinate, in particular, if appropriate, Note 2012-DAS-0392 of 17 April 2012, by which Eulex refused to grant the applicant access to the tendering documents requested on 2 April 2012;
Order Eulex to pay to the applicant compensation for the loss suffered (in a specific form or commensurate amount) as set out at paragraphs 37 et seq. [of the application];
Order Eulex to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The present action is brought principally against the measures adopted by Eulex which resulted in the award of the contract in tendering procedure 'EuropeAid/131516/D/SER/XK - Helicopter Support to the EULEX Mission in Kosovo (PROC/272/11)' to the company Starlite Aviation Operations and all previous and subsequent measures, whether related or subordinate. The applicant claims compensation for the resulting loss.
The applicant relies on a single plea in law in support of its claim, alleging infringement and/or misapplication of the Notice published on 18 October 2011, with reference to Articles 46 et seq. of Directive 18/2004/EC; infringement of the general principles of transparency, proportionality and equal treatment, laid down in the 'Practical Guide to contract procedures for EU external actions' (Prag), to which the tendering procedure was subject; and infringement of the general principle that effective competition should be guaranteed with regard to the standards to be laid down for the service to be procured.
It is submitted in that regard that the contract was awarded to a tenderer that did not posses the technical requirements stipulated in the Notice.
____________1 - Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts.