Paula Riedel, Thomas Wilson, Shane Cranley

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 19 (2020), Issue 2, Page 115 - 126

Against the background of the COVID-19 outbreak and the effects of public health measures on Member State economies, the Commission has acted impressively quickly to prevent State aid rules becoming a block to necessary interventions. The Commission has published a Temporary Framework under Article 107(3)(b) TFEU, which has been amended twice including to allow for recapitalisation of firms in return for State participation. Aid under this Temporary Framework along with a wide range of measures approved under Article 107 TFEU has allowed billions in aid to be granted, ensuring that liquidity is available to companies. This liquidity has avoided mass bankruptcies but comes with the risk of distortions of competition across the internal market; a risk augmented by the differences in approach of the Member States. As Member States exit the initial phase of the response to the crisis focused on liquidity, and move to more structural measures such as recapitalisations, we can expect the design of aid to be monitored even more closely to minimise market distortions. The Commission’s initial response has been flexible, swift and pragmatic and is to be lauded but many potential pitfalls remain as the crisis moves to the next phase.  Keywords: COVID-19, Temporary Framework, recapitalisation, distortion of competition

Thomas Wilson

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 13 (2014), Issue 1, Page 24 - 27

I. Introduction In one of its last judgments of 2012, the Court of Justice (“CJEU”) ruled that public financing provided for the construction of a new runway at the State-owned Leipzig-Halle airport is subject to State aid rules.1 In its decision, the CJEU confirmed the ruling of the General Court2 in all material points. The CJEU held that operating the airport runway constituted an economic activity which was inseparable from its construction. The operation of the runway was seen as