Skip to content
  • «
  • 1
  • »

The search returned 6 results.

The Impact of the Cases Marinvest and Ighoga on the Notion of the Criterion “Effect on Trade Between Member States” journal article

Theresia de la Cruz Rothenfusser

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 23 (2024), Issue 2, Page 125 - 135

This article analyses the impact of the General Court’s recent caselaw on the notion of “effect on trade between member states” under Article 107(1) TFEU. While the criterion was traditionally interpreted very broadly, the Commission changed its approach and developed criteria to restrict its application, essentially excluding cases where the effect on trade was not more than marginal. In Marinvest and Ighoga, the General Court endorses this new interpretation and provides further details for the application of the new criteria. This contribution evaluates the implications of the decisions for the interpretation of “interstate trade” on the one hand and its practical application by the Commission and Member States on the other hand. It concludes that the GC decisions contribute to a higher operability of the criteria and facilitates their application by the Member States, but ultimately cannot significantly advance legal certainty. This can only be achieved by a decision of the CJEU ruling on the admissibility of the Commission’s new interpretation and more consistent decisions going forward of both the Commission and the Courts adopting the new reading that allow the Member States more confidence in applying the criterion. Keywords: interstate trade; commission practice; Marinvest; Ighoga


Ex Officio Third Country Subsidies´ Review: journal article

Similarities with and Differences to State Aid Procedure

Wolfgang Weiß

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 21 (2022), Issue 2, Page 132 - 142

In May 2021 the European Commission tabled a draft Third Country Subsidies Regulation which stands between trade and competition policy. This new instrument establishes a review of third country subsidies with a view to addressing the competition distortion resulting from foreign subsidies granted to undertakings economically active in the EU internal market. As the new tool complements EU State aid scrutiny with a view to foreign subsidies, the present contribution compares the general procedures and provisions of the new regulation with EU State aid law. It will be shown that despite many similarities with State aid law, considerable differences remain which can be explained by looking at the different procedural and substantive context. Keywords: third country subsidies; ex officio review; Commission discretion; procedural powers; rights of defence




Revisiting Some Fundamentals of Fiscal Selectivity: The ANGED Case  ∙ Case C-233/16 ANGED ∙ Annotation  by Juan Jorge Piernas López journal article

Annotation on the Judgment of the General Court of the European Union (First Chamber) of 26 April 2018 in Case C-233/16 Asociación Nacional de Grandes Empresas de Distribución (ANGED) v Generalitat de Catalunya

Juan Jorge Piernas López

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 2, Page 274 - 281

Keywords: Regional tax on large retail establishments; Freedom of establishment; Protection of the environment and town and country planning; State aid; Selective measure; Letter from the Commission stating that no further action will be taken on a complaint; Existing aid.


The NOx Case - Still Trying to Fit in a System  ∙ C-279/08 P ∙ Annotation  by Philipp Werner journal article

Annotation on the Judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 8 September 2011 in Case C-279/08 P Commission v Netherlands

Philipp Werner, Lucia Stoican

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 1, Page 101 - 109

The NOx case demonstrates that selectivity continues to be the lynchpin in the assessment of State aid measures. Even though the case has not provided much guidance, it has shown tendencies that were confirmed in later case law: a wide interpretation of selectivity; uncertainty about the application of the selectivity criterion by the Commission, the GC and the CJEU; and divergent views of the CJEU and the GC. For the sake of legal clarity, the CJEU should have clarified which factors it deemed pertinent to determine the ‘similarity’ of undertakings subject to the NOx scheme. This would have provided clarity for the determination of the correct ‘reference framework’ in future cases, which in turn would have made it easier to identify ‘comparable’ market situations. We are focusing in this note on two of the conditions for the existence of State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU, namely selectivity and State resources. Keywords: Material Selectivity; State Resources; Comparability; Reference Framework; NOx Emissions.

  • «
  • 1
  • »