Skip to content
  • «
  • 1
  • »

The search returned 4 results.

Recovery Of State Aid journal article

The Obligations of Member States, National Courts and National Authorities in State Aid Recovery and Recent Developments in the Case-Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Lucyne Ghazarian

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 15 (2016), Issue 2, Page 228 - 234

The recovery of unlawful State aid is a core instrument of the effective enforcement of the standstill obligation and State aid control. The obligations of Member States, national courts and national authorities are broad and have been subject to extensive case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. While the cornerstones of State aid recovery and the obligations of Member States are set, the specifics are still evolving. This essay gives an overview over the status quo under current case-law and focuses on the new developments introduced by selected judgments of the year 2015. Keywords: The Procedure before National Courts, State Aid Recovery, Recovery Procedure in Member States, Standstill Obligation, Infringement Procedures.


Commerz Nederland NV v Havenbedrijf Rotterdam NV ∙ Case C-242/13 ∙ Annotation by Lucyne Ghazarian journal article

Annotation on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 17th September 2014 in Case C-242/13, Commerz Nederland NV v Havenbedrijf Rotterdam NV

Lucyne Ghazarian

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 14 (2015), Issue 1, Page 174 - 177

In essence, the CJEU confirmed its case-law regarding the imputability of measures taken by publicly controlled undertakings, ie the Stardust Marine judgment (C-482/99), and in addition gave some guidance in regard to the indication assessment. The breach of internal statutes does not, of itself, preclude the imputability of an undertakings measure to the controlling public authority. Although the imputability to the State may not be inferred from the controlling position, it may be inferred from the circumstances and the facts of the case and need not be proven on the basis ‘of a precise inquiry’. Ultimately, the imputability has to be assessed case to case, while the high threshold of ‘unlikely involvement’ points towards a presumption of involvement. Keywords: Banking, Definition of aid, Guarantees, Imputability.


Pollmeier Massivholz v European Commission  ∙ Case T-89/09   ∙ Annotation by  Lucyne Ghazarian journal article

Annotation on the Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of March 17th 2015 in Case T-89/09, Pollmeier Massivholz v European Commission

Lucyne Ghazarian

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 14 (2015), Issue 4, Page 536 - 540

The General Court (GC) clarified that the judgement of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on December 11th 2008 in Freistaat Sachsen/Commission does not apply to existing State aid according to Article 1 (b) (ii) of Regulation 659/1999. Therefore, the European Commission (EC) has to apply the law that was valid at the time the measure was granted. Further, the judgment contributes to the assessment of the ratione temporis and ratione materiae of the de minimis Regulations No (EC) 1998/2006 and No (EC) 69/2001 and the method to determine the gross grant equivalent. In absence of an approved general State aid scheme and if an applicable Notice orders a specific method to determine the gross grant equivalent, this method is binding both to the Commission and to the Member State. Finally, the GC held that a hypothetical mitigation of future burden is not similar to subsidies in the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU. Keywords: Advantage, General Issues, New Aid v Existing Aid, Procedure before the Commission


Flughafen Frankfurt-Hahn journal article

Lucyne Ghazarian

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 13 (2014), Issue 1, Page 106 - 114

Request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Oberlandesgericht Koblenz (Germany), brought to the Court by decision of 30 May 2012. Court of Justice (Second Chamber), Judgment of the 21 November 2013: 1. The need to provide an interpretation of European Union law which will be of use to the national court, makes it necessary that the national court defines the factual and legal context of the questions it is asking or, at the very least, explain the fa

  • «
  • 1
  • »