Skip to content

The search returned 11 results.




An Illustration of a Textbook Case or Rather of the Principle That the Devil Is in the Detail? · Cases T-607/17 Volotea, T-716/17 Germanwings and T-8/18 easyJet · Annotation by Marianne Clayton, Maria Segura and Lara Manuel journal article

Annotation on the Judgments of the General Court of the European Union (First Chamber) of 13 May 2020 in Cases T-607/17 Volotea v Commission, T-716/17 Germanwings v Commission and T-8/18 easyJet v Commission

Marianne Clayton, Maria Segura, Lara Manuel

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 19 (2020), Issue 3, Page 372 - 377

On 13 May 2020, the General Court of the EU rendered three judgments on the actions brought by Volotea, easyJet and Germanwings seeking the annulment of Commission Decision SA.33983. In this Decision, the Commission had inter alia concluded that the aid scheme ‘Compensation to Sardinian airports for public service obligations’ entailed the grant of incompatible aid to several airlines that had concluded commercial agreements with airport operators for the development of the island as a tourist destination. The General Court analysed in these judgments each of the criteria of the notion of State aid on its own merits and provided particularly worth-noting reasoning on concepts such as imputability, indirect advantage, the application of the MEOP or the definition of aid scheme.





Brexit, the EEA and the EU State aid Rules journal article open-access

The Future of State aid Control in Turmoil?

Maria Segura, Egill Olafsson, Marianne Clayton

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 18 (2019), Issue 1, Page 3 - 14

One of the many and still unresolved questions raised by the discussions surrounding Brexit is that of its implications on State aid rules. The consequences for the UK and for both the EU and the European Economic Area are still unknown. The options are diverse and still open to much speculation. In this article, we will focus on the EEA model. Because it is not that well-known, the scope of the EEA agreement and the way it functions will firstly be presented. Indeed, some specificities of the EEA framework, amongst which the principle of homogeneity, deserve explanations as a cornerstone for the application of State aid rules within the EU and the EEA. Finally, the actual different options regarding State aid control post-Brexit within the UK, EU and EEA will be discussed. To conclude, attention will be devoted to the concerns regarding the continuation of the EEA Agreement as it stands and the future homogeneous application of State aid rules. Keywords: State aid control; Brexit; Homogeneity principle.



‘Prior in Tempore, Potior in Jure’ Does Not Exclude State Aid to Users of Infrastructure · Case T-108/16 Naviera Armas · Annotation  Marianne Clayton, Egill Olafsson and Maria Segura journal article

Annotation on the Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2018 in Case T-108/16 Naviera Armas SA

Marianne Clayton, Egill Olafsson, Maria Segura

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 2, Page 282 - 289

On 15 March 2018, the General Court annulled a Commission Decision which considered that the Spanish authorities had not granted state aid in favour of Fred Olsen through some measures relating to the port of Puerto de Las Nieves in the Canary Islands. A competitor, who had complained to the Commission about the said measures, applied for annulment of the Commission’s Decision on the grounds that the Commission should have opened the formal investigation procedure resulting from the fact that it had encountered serious difficulties. Even though the Decision had been appealed on the grounds of procedure, by its nature, the Court had to go into the substance of the case. The line between procedure and substance can be a fine one. Keywords: Opening Formal Investigation; Serious Difficulties; Use of State-Owned Infrastructure.