Orders nº T-252/10 R of The General Court, July 29, 2010

• Resolution Date: July 29, 2010
• Issuing Organization: The General Court
• Decision Number: T-252/10 R

In Case T‑252/10 R,

Cross Czech a.s., established in Prague (Czech Republic), represented by T. Schollaert, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Commission, represented by R. Lyal and W. Roels, acting as Agents,

defendant,

APPLICATION for suspension of operation of the Commission’s letter of 12 March 2010 confirming the findings of the audit of financial statements submitted by the applicant for the period from 1 February 2005 to 30 April 2008 in respect of the eMapps.com, CEEC IST NET and Transfer-East projects,

THE PRESIDENT OF THE GENERAL COURT

makes the following

Order

The facts, procedure and forms of order sought by the parties

1 The applicant, Cross Czech a.s., entered into several contracts with the Commission of the European Communities, acting on behalf of the European Community, under the Sixth Framework Programme of the Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities contributing to the creation of the European Research Area and to innovation (2002-2006) established by Decision No 1513/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 (OJ 2002 L 232, p. 1), namely contract No 028051 in relation to the eMapps.com project, contract No 015942 in relation to the CEEC IST NET project and contract No 027767 in relation to the Transfer-East project. The contracts in question all include an arbitration clause which provides that the Court of First Instance of the European Communities is to have jurisdiction to hear any disputes between the parties as regards the validity, the application or any interpretation of those contracts.

2 By letter of 12 March 2010, the Commission informed the applicant that it was confirming the findings of the audit of financial statements for the period from 1 February 2005 to 30 April 2008 in respect of the eMapps.com, CEEC IST NET and Transfer-East projects, and detailed the measures to be taken, in particular the corrections to be made.

3 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 28 May 2010, the applicant brought an action for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 12 March 2010 (‘the contested measure’).

4 By a separate document, lodged at the Court Registry on 18 June 2010, the applicant submitted the present application for interim measures, in which it claims that the President of the General Court should suspend application of the contested measure.

5 In its written observations, lodged at the Court Registry on 9 July 2010, the Commission contends that the President of the...