Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 September 2016

Data

Court: Court of Justice

Case date: 29 september 2016

Verdict

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 September 2016 — Investigación y Desarrollo en Soluciones y Servicios IT v Commission

(Case C‑102/14 P)^(*)

"Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Contracts in respect of EU financial support for projects in the research and development field - Audit report identifying irregularities - Decision to recover advances paid by the European Commission - Action for annulment - Decision to suspend payments - Action to establish non-contractual liability - Decision not to conclude a contract - Action for damages - Inadmissibility)"

1. Actions for annulmentAction relating in reality to a contractual disputeAnnulment of a debit note issued by the CommissionLack of jurisdiction of the EU judicatureInadmissibility (Arts 263 TFEU and 299 TFEU) (see paras 55, 58, 59)

2. Fundamental rightsRight to effective judicial protectionLimitsCompliance with the conditions governing the admissibility of an action (Art. 6(1), third para., TEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Arts 47, first para and 52(7)) (see para. 63)

3. AppealGroundsOrder of the General Court dismissing an action for annulment as manifestly inadmissiblePleas raised in support of the appeal relating to substantive issuesPleas which are manifestly unfounded (Art. 256 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 181) (see paras 70, 71, 91)

4. Actions for damagesAutonomy in relation to the action for annulmentAction seeking the withdrawal of an individual decision which has become definitiveInadmissibility (Art. 268 TFEU) (see para. 80)

5. Actions for damagesJurisdiction of the EU judicatureLimitsCharacter of the liability pleadedVerification by the courtAction involving assessment of rights and obligations of a contractual nature (Art. 340 TFEU) (see para. 98)

6. Judicial proceedingsApplication initiating proceedingsFormal requirementsBrief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is basedReview by the Court of its own motion (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)(c)) (see para. 113)

7. AppealGroundsMere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General CourtInadmissibilityChallenge to the interpretation or application of the General Court’s assessment of EU lawAdmissibility (Art. 256(1), second para., TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 168(1)(d)) (see paras 117, 118)

Operative part

1) The appeal is dismissed.

2) Investigación y Desarrollo en Soluciones y Servicios IT SA shall pay the costs relating to the appeal.