Hiya,
Harsh asked me to review a bunch of text in the next day or so, and I'll do that.
My first, and very strong, reaction was to the proposed project name: "EURO-CyberPERFECTiON" is just awful. It's maybe 15 years since I evaluated EU proposals but if I saw that title, my immediate reaction would be that there's bullshit afoot. Sorry to be so blunt, but I worry that all your significant effort could be damaged by that. I'd also worry that any good project results would be tainted by such a name.
Reasons:
1) "EURO-*" isn't right: I don't believe the goal is at all to develop some solely-European technology. nor would such make sense. (It might for legal matters, but not for tech.) It's also redundant as the EU are the funders and they know where they're based already;-)
2) cyber - despite the EU using the term in the call, use of that term IMO exposes the user to a valid charge of using a well-known-to-be-terribly badly defined term.
3) perfection - what? really? that's just setting the project up for a pile of prat-falls.
All in all that's the worst proposal for a project name I've encountered and I've been doing EU-funded stuff since ESPRIT back in the late 1980's. (Again, sorry to be blunt.)
I don't really mind what the project might be called but frankly I'd be embarrassed to be associated with something with that title.
My suggestion is that two or three of the most involved people change that to something deliberately bland but without calling for an all-in discussion which'd waste time. (I'm happy to be involved in that discussion since I'm bringing this up late, but I'm also fine if it just happens with no further input from me.)
Cheers, and apologies a 3rd time for bluntness, S.