Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 26 April 2004 by TQ3 Travel Solutions against the Commission of the European Communities

Case T-148/04

Language of the case: French

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 26 April 2004 by TQ3 Travel Solutions, established in Mechelen (Belgium), represented by Rusen Ergec and Kim Möric, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

--    Annul the Commission's decision of 24 February 2004, informing the applicant of the rejection of its tender for Lot 1 (Brussels) of Contract No ADMIN/D1/PR/2003/131;

--    Annul the Commission's decision awarding Lot 1 to Carlson Wagonlit Travel, notified to the applicant by a letter from the Commission of 16 March 2004;

--    Hold that the unlawful action by the Commission constitutes a fault capable of rendering it liable to the appliant;

--    Send the applicant back to the Commission for the loss suffered to be assessed;

--    Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Following a restricted invitation to tender for "travel agency services" issued on 20 October 2003 and the tendering procedure, the Commission took the decision not to award the contract to the applicant and to award it to Carlson Wagonlit Travel.

The applicant makes two identical pleas in law challenging those decisions, alleging obvious error by the Commission in assessing the tenders.

In its first plea, the applicant claims that the Commission made an obvious error of assessment by holding that the tender of Carlson Wagonlit Travel was not abnormally low; it also claims that the Commission acted unlawfully by failing to comply with the obligation under Article 146(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002, requiring it to ask for appropriate clarifications as to the composition of the tender.

The second plea alleges obvious error by the Commission in assessing the quality of the tenders, giving the tender by Carlson Wagonlit Travel the highest mark for the quality of the services offered, whereas that tender was unable to allow sufficient quality for the services concerned to be guaranteed.

____________