The General Court of the EU, by two judgments published on 12 December 2013, held admissible two actions submitted by the company ANCO SA against the European Commission. The defense of these two cases was entrusted to Christianos and Partners Law Firm.<\/p>\n
More specifically, in cases T-117\/12 and T-118\/12, the company requested the General Court, firstly, to recognise that the suspension of payment, on behalf of the Commission, of the costs incurred by the company for the execution of the projects under the contracts signed with the Commission, constitutes a breach of contractual obligations by the latter and, secondly, to order the Commission to pay to the company the amounts of the suspended payments.<\/p>\n
The General Court accepted the applicant\u2019s argument that the Commission, in suspending the payments, had breached certain provisions of the relevant grant agreements, because it did not correctly apply the conditions set out in the said provisions.<\/p>\n
In light of the unlawful character of the suspension of payments to the applicant, the General Court held that the Commission is obliged to pay the relevant amounts to the company, with interest.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The General Court of the EU, by two judgments published on 12 December 2013, held admissible two actions submitted by the company ANCO SA against the European Commission. The defense of these two cases was entrusted to Christianos and Partners Law Firm. More specifically, in cases T-117\/12 and T-118\/12, the company requested the General Court,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-157","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news","category-4","description-off"],"yoast_head":"\n