Andrés Martin-Ehlers

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 19 (2020), Issue 2, Page 246 - 247

Andrés Martin-Ehlers, Niels Frank

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 19 (2020), Issue 4, Page 464 - 467

Andrés Martin-Ehlers

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 13 (2014), Issue 1, Page 71 - 75

In a decision of September 2012, the German Federal High Court ruled that a national court must not suspend a State aid proceeding if, in the same case, the European Commission issued a final negative decision against which the recipient of aid has brought a case to the European courts. Therefore, the national courts cannot simply await the outcome of the European litigation, but have to continue their proceedings. This judgment puts an end to yearlong standstill in a

Andrés Martin-Ehlers

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 10 (2011), Issue 4, Page 737 - 740

I. Introduction It was about time. On 11 February 2011 the 1st Senate of the Federal High Court rendered two judgments which confirmed the private enforcement of State aid law in front of national German courts.1 From a European perspective, such enforcement is standard. This principle was developed in particular in the SFEI judgment of the European Court of Justice in 19962 and has been repeated ever since. National courts in the Member States h

Andrés Martin-Ehlers, David Rabenschlag

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 9 (2010), Issue 2, Page 5

I. Introduction A classic problem of procedural State aid law takes centre stage in the MTU Friedrichshafen-judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ).1 The legal issue arose with regard to the Commission’s competence to take a decision on the basis of the information available and to order a joint and several liability of alleged aid recipients. The ECJ dismissed the appeal brought by the Commission in its entirety. It confirmed the