Juan Jorge Piernas López

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 19 (2020), Ausgabe 4, Seite 531 - 533

Caroline Buts, Phedon Nicolaides, Hans Pirlet

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 18 (2019), Ausgabe 4, Seite 489 - 509

Despite the improvement of the State aid rules on Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) during the past decade, stakeholders have claimed that the current rules are at points ambiguous, which results in a negative impact on innovation. By means of an exploratory case study and participatory action research, this article aims to identify the ambiguities in the RDI rules. While the rules are detailed and overall well explained, we detect three themes where ambiguities arise, ie non-economic activities, price calculation of goods or services provided by research organisations, and ancillary activities of research organisations together with the 20% threshold. For each of these categories, we discuss what constitutes a ‘safe’ interpretation of the concepts involved. This entails an interpretation that is in line with the case law as well as with the spirit of State aid control. Where appropriate and possible, we provide examples as well as suggestions for their practical implementation. Next to providing guidance regarding the detected ambiguities, this article aspires a contribution to the forthcoming revision of the State aid rules for RDI. Keywords: State aid policy; Research, Development and Innovation; GBER; RDI Framework.

Svein Terje Tveit

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 18 (2019), Ausgabe 2, Seite 186 - 191

On 5 March 2019, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJ) issued an important ruling clarifying the scope of the national authorities’ obligation to recover unlawful State aid and the test for ‘incentive effect’ — a requirement for an aid measure to benefit from the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER). The CJ confirms that national authorities must recover unlawful State aid also in cases where the aid is granted (wrongfully) under the GBER as regional investment aid and the Commission has not adopted any Decision. The aid beneficiary may not rely on the principle of protection of legitimate expectations even if the granting authority had recommended the aid beneficiary to apply for aid knowing that work on the project had begun before the aid application was submitted. In cases where the EU rules on limitation period and interests are not directly applicable, national rules apply, so that the national authorities must seek full recovery of the unlawful aid and thereby ensure the effectiveness of State aid rules. Keywords: GBER; Recovery; National enforcement; Unlawful aid; National legal basis.

Sarah Beeston, Pim Jansen, Kiek Brink

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 17 (2018), Ausgabe 3, Seite 328 - 337

The European Commission sees the ports sector as a driving force for economic growth and regional development in Europe. It has recently developed various policy initiatives in this sector and taken measures whereby State aid control forms the key element. The Commission has opted for an approach based on two interlinked pillars. First, the Commission intends to create a (more) level playing field among European Union Member States, by using State aid rules to curb tax benefits for (public) companies in the ports sector. Second, further to the State Aid Modernisation Programme, the Commission is, to an increasing extent, pursuing an active European economic policy in the ports sector by means of exemptions from the prohibition of State aid. As a result, certain aid measures targeting market failures and objectives of a common European interest are permissible. In this article we will provide an analysis of recent developments and place them in their legal and policy-related context. We will specifically discuss the impact of these developments on seaports in the Netherlands.

Hans Arno Petzold

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 17 (2018), Ausgabe 2, Seite 250 - 258

EU State aid law does frequently refer to the term ‘local’: firstly in Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) when asking whether trade between Member States is affected, in the sense of a cross-border effect of the respective measure, secondly in the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER) as from 1 July 2014, which exempts certain ‘local’ aids, falling under Article 107(1) TFEU, from prior notification. In this essay the attempt is made, by analysing Commission decisions and the GBER, to come to a definition of the term ‘local’ suitable for use in day-to-day funding practice. Keywords: Effects on Trade; Local Character; Article 107(1) TFEU; GBER.

Péter Staviczky

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 4, Seite 559 - 566

The issues highlighted in the present paper were presented at the 15th Experts’ Forum on the New Developments in European State aid Law in Brussels in cooperation with Mr. Antonios Bouchagiar (Legal Service, EC). The main aim of the presentation was to draw attention to some of the difficulties MS face when granting regional aid to projects where large undertakings and/or relocation of economic activities might be involved. Keywords: Regional Aid; SAM; RAG; GBER; Relocation.