this historic merchant from Champ-de-Mars was no match for Anne Hidalgo in court

See my news
Follow Paris News

New snub for the former operator of the chalet installed on the Champ-de-Mars, at the foot of the Eiffel Tower. There cour administrative d’appel of Paris has disavowed a trader who claimed nearly 44,000 euros in compensation from the City of Paris following his eviction from the location he had occupied for thirty-three years.

Chosen Marais restaurateurs

The man was carrying out “an activity selling food products” at the corner of Allée Thomy-Thierry and Avenue Octave-Gréard in the 7th arrondissement of the capital when he learned in November 2018 that his candidacy was not had not been retained at the end of a “call for proposals” launched by the mayor (PS) of Paris, Anne Hidalgo.

It was restaurateurs from the 3rd arrondissement of Paris, united within the company Comptoir Paris Marais, who won the bid; Rémy Lellouche is co-manager there with Rachel Bohbot, the wife of Paris advisor (LR) Jack-Yves Bohbot, who is himself a partner in the structure.

The ousted trader, for his part, had appealed to the Paris administrative court of appeal after having been rejected at first instance by the Paris administrative court in November 2022. “If MX maintains that his offer was better than the one accepted and that the choice of the beneficiary is thus tainted by a manifest error of assessmentit limits itself to producing the analysis report of the offers and even refrains from producing its own application file,” noted the first judges.

“The applicant did not lodge an appeal for the annulment of the said agreement until June 15, 2020, i.e. beyond the two-month appeal period,” states the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal in a judgment dated 7 November 2024, which has just been made public. “The circumstance that an email from the City of Paris […] indicated that the latter would only be concluded when the beneficiary of the state occupation authorization can[it] starting the operation of its activity has no influence on the enforceability against MX of the appeal period. »

The irregularity of the procedure not proven

“MX maintains that the City of Paris added a sub-criterion taken from the candidates’ forecast results without notifying them […]but the production of forecast income statements was required to apply for the allocation of the location,” the judges also add.

“If MX maintains that the agreement would be tainted by defects such as to render it null and void since it had been signed by another beneficiary of the call for proposals and that there would be commitments different from those in the call for proposals, proposals, such defects relate to the agreement itself,” finally concludes the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal.

In fact, “they are therefore not likely to result in the irregularity of the call for proposals procedure. » The ousted trader has until January 7, 2025 to contact the Council of State.

/GF (PressPepper)

Follow all the news from your favorite cities and media by subscribing to Mon Actu.