Marek Rzotkiewicz

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 21 (2022), Ausgabe 3, Seite 310 - 315

In cases before the EU Courts, parties who challenge the legal acts of EU institutions, eg Commission decisions, frequently raise many different pleas claiming violations concerning both EU law and the factual assessment. But it is for the EU Courts to adjudicate on those claims. When a party dissatisfied with the General-Court judgment appeals to the Court of Justice, in the appeal, the party cannot simply repeat the pleas raised in the action for the annulment before the General Court. An appeal to the Court of Justice must be limited to points of law and the appraisal of the facts by the General Court does not constitute, save where the clear sense of the evidence produced before it is distorted, a question of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice. In State aid cases, case law frequently refers to the concept of the private operator to assess whether an action by public bodies can be compared to those of a comparable private operator, and if a State granted an advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU. But the concept of the private operator has many variations which cannot all be reduced to the private investor or to private creditor formulas.

Marek Rzotkiewicz

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 19 (2020), Ausgabe 2, Seite 205 - 211

The granting of State support for entities is a politically sensitive subject. Member States often grant aid and then, when questioned by the Commission, defend it vigorously claiming that there was no aid at all, or that such aid was compatible with internal market rules. Different situations, ie in which Member States admit granting aid and also confirm that such aid was incompatible with internal market rules, are rare occasions. In the exceptional cases where Member States may have opposing interests to those of an entity, it is particularly important for the Commission to give the entity the opportunity to submit meaningful comments to defend its rights.

Marek Rzotkiewicz

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 12 (2013), Ausgabe 3, Seite 464 - 477

I. Introduction According to the Article 14.1 of Regulation 659/1999,1 “the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of EU law”.2 Resorting to the general principles of EU law is a most significant instrument for Member States and aid beneficiaries as it can bar the Commission from imposing a recovery order on a Member State. However, despite all its significance, the term “the general principle