Weiter zum Inhalt
  • «
  • 1
  • »

Die Suche erzielte 9 Treffer.

The Approaching Sunset of the Marketing Agreement Loophole · Case T‑79/21 Ryanair DAC and Others v European Commission · Annotation by Tamás Kende and Gábor Puskás Journal Artikel

Annotation on the Judgment of the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Ninth Chamber) of 14 June 2023 in Case T‑79/21 Ryanair DAC and Others v European Commission

Tamás Kende, Gábor Puskás

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 3, Seite 329 - 336

On 14 June 2023, the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its judgment on the latest Ryanair case involving Montpellier airport.1 The applicants had challenged the European Commission's decision that the State provides illegal State aid not only when it orders a service at a price other than the market price, but also when it has no real need for that service, no matter how much it pays for it. The scope of application of the ‘real need’ test and criteria of the Commission’s assessment of the real needs of state entities may become a new battleground, and soon.




A Setback for Competition (and State Aid) in the Railway Sector · Case C‑515/18 AGCM · Annotation by Roberto Caranta and Benedetta Biancardi Journal Artikel

Annotation on the Judgment of the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) of 24 October 2019 in Case C‑515/18 Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato v Regione Autonoma della Sardegna

Roberto Caranta, Benedetta Biancardi

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 19 (2020), Ausgabe 2, Seite 185 - 192

In a case concerning a direct award of passenger railways services to the old State owned monopolist, the Court of Justice opts for a literal interpretation of Regulation (EC) 1370/2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road limiting transparency and competition in the choice of the service provider.


The Thin Red Line Between Existing and New Aid: The Buonotourist Case · Case T-185/15 Buonotourist Srl v European Commission · Annotation by Davide Guadagnino Journal Artikel

Annotation on the Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2018 in Case T-185/15 Buonotourist Srl v European Commission.

Davide Guadagnino

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 18 (2019), Ausgabe 2, Seite 192 - 197

This note offers a detailed overview on the Buonotourist Case (T-185/15), where the General Court confirmed Commission Decision 2015/575 ordering the recovery of the beneficiary’s extra compensation regime. It provides an in-depth analysis of the application of Regulation (EC) 659/1999, highlighting the procedural and substantive aspects relating to the notions of ‘existing aid’ and ‘new aid’. First, the note provides a description of the background to the dispute, focusing on the compensation granted to Buonotourist Srl for the costs occurred in the fulfilment of its public service obligations, as well as the related Commission Decision. Then, the Court’s reasoning is underlined, namely the assessment of the compensatory regime in the light of the exemption established under Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) 1191/69 and the Altmark judgment. The annotation highlights the controversial aspects of the measure, such as the ex post calculation of the compensation and the absence of unilaterally imposed public service obligations, which led to its classification as ‘new aid’. Finally, the author’s opinion is given, focusing on the nature of public service obligations and the applicability of Article 93 TFEU in the case at hand. Keywords: Public transport; SGEI; Compensation; Altmark; New aid.



Public Aid to Airports as a Compensation for the Provision of Services of General Economic Interest Journal Artikel

Michele Giannino, Federich Romby

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 17 (2018), Ausgabe 3, Seite 338 - 352

The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the European Commission’s approach in assessing whether compensation awarded to airports for the provision of Services of General Economic Interest (SGEIs) complies with the EU State aid rules. The article analyses the defensive strategies open for national authorities to claim that airports public service compensation packages are compatible with the internal market. In that regard, the article considers the Altmark doctrine and the compatibility conditions for the application of the SGEI exception in Article 106 TFEU. Then it critically compares the strong and weak points of each of these strategies and also dwells on which factors national authorities have to adduce to prove the compatibility of airport aid. Bearing in mind the difficulties for national authorities to satisfy all the conditions for the application of the Altmark doctrine, the article suggests that the SGEI exception should be the optimal strategy to obtain regulatory clearance of public service compensation to airport.


ARTICLES - STATE AID AND NATIONAL JURISDICTIONS ∙ The Altmark Case Revisited: Local and Regional Subsidies to Public Services Journal Artikel

Erika Szyszczak

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 3, Seite 395 - 407

The evolution of the State aid rules has made incursions into the sovereignty of the Member States to identify, fund and operate public services (SGEI). This sensitive issue tends to be managed by the European Commission with few cases brought before the national courts or referred to the CJEU. Nevertheless, national courts may be faced with a growing number of challenges in understanding and applying the European Commission policy and the European Courts’ case law in this area. The article provides an overview of some of the recent policy developments and case law to highlight the legal complexities of applying State aid to public services. Keywords: SGEI; Altmark; Public Services; National Courts.


France/SNCM v European Commision  ∙ Cases T-366/13 and T-454/13 ∙ Annotation by Adrien Giraud Journal Artikel

Adrien Giraud

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 3, Seite 482 - 486

On 1 March 2017, the General Court confirmed a decision by which the European Commission ordered France to recover €220 million from SNCM. In practice, the judgment has little consequences because of SNCM’s bankruptcy. From a legal standpoint however, the judgment is significant because it refuses to endorse the Commission’s thesis according to which Member States must in all cases evidence a market failure in order to correctly define a SGEI. In other words, the Commission attempted to increase the scope of the control it performs on the definition of SGEIs and the GC – as it has sometimes in the past – refused to condone this approach. Keywords: Altmark; SGEI; Market Failure; Public Service.

  • «
  • 1
  • »