Cees Dekker

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 154 - 163

On 29 April 2015, the European Commission decided on several notified measures, ruling that in none of those cases State aid was involved because, as the accompanying press release stated, they were unlikely to have a significant effect on trade between Member States. According to the press release, the decisions give additional guidance on how to determine which cases should be assessed by the Commission and which should not, to allow the Commission to focus on cases with a larger impact on the internal market. A couple of decisions in 2016 followed the same line of reasoning. This article discusses the question of how these decisions relate to the Court’s case law and the Commission’s own practice regarding the criterion ‘effect on trade between Member States’ laid down in Article 107(1) TFEU. It will also explore to what extent these decisions give actual clarity on the application of this criterion and if there is a better alternative to reduce the workload of the national authorities and the Commission. Keywords: Interstate Trade; De Minimis; Appreciable Effect; Notice on the Notion of State Aid.

Caroline Buts, Phedon Nicolaides

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 272 - 275

While many islands can be attractive tourist destinations, other parts of the economy often face serious challenges that are the direct result of natural and permanent handicaps. Small islands encounter difficulties in attracting and maintaining manufacturing activities. Additional transport costs as well as the absence of economies of scale and low connectivity can result in investment decisions on the mainland, rather than the island. Multiple policies exist to help islands balance out the disadvantage of being remote, small or sparsely populated. Nevertheless, the State aid rules treat small and remote islands differently, depending on whether they are a region or a Member State. After briefly reviewing the main difficulties encountered by islands, we study the case of Malta. Next, the relevant State aid rules are evaluated, revealing inconsistencies and the need for revisions with important consequences for Malta and Cyprus. Keywords: Regional State Aid; Peripheral Islands; Island States; Transport Costs; Industrial Base.

Kai Struckmann, Genevra Forwood, Aqeel Kadri, Adam Wallin

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 316 - 321

While the General Court considers the validity of the European Commission’s decision in the Micula case finding that “the payment of the compensation awarded by” an ICSID arbitral tribunal constitutes incompatible State aid, national courts in the EU (and the US) are also wrestling with different, but related, issues in proceedings to enforce the underlying arbitral award. The key question in these proceedings is whether the Commission Decision stands in the way of enforcement in a (Member) State which is not the addressee of the decision. In the judgment discussed here, the High Court found that the arbitral award constituted res judicata and that it had not been satisfied. However, the High Court also considered that it could not decide a number of issues (including the interpretation of the CJEU’s jurisprudence in Kapferer, the application of Article 351 TFEU and the concept of imputability) without risking a conflict with questions currently pending before the General Court. Consequently the High Court decided to stay the enforcement proceedings, pending the outcome of annulment action before the General Court. The High Court reached few firm conclusions. Underlying this case is the tension between international obligations owed under the multilateral ICSID Convention and the EU Treaties, and which take precedence. One of the most striking features of the High Court judgment is its acceptance of the contentions of Romania and the Commission that essentially any substantive finding of EU law would give rise to a significant risk of conflict with ongoing proceedings in the EU Courts to annul the Final Decision. Keywords: State Aid and Arbitration; Article 351 TFEU; Res Judicata; Article 4 TEU – Duty of Sincere Cooperation.

María del Carmen Cámara Barroso

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 327 - 330

Pablo Ibáñez-Colomo

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 330 - 331

Matt Evans

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 2, Seite 332 - 333

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 4,

Luca Rubini

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 4, Seite 643 - 644

Caroline Buts, José Luis Buendía Sierra

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 4, Seite 509 - 511

Caroline Buts, Mychal Langenus, Karen Donders

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 16 (2017), Ausgabe 4, Seite 537 - 558

By means of text analysis, this article examines the use of economic concepts and tools in State aid decisions regarding public broadcasters. We find that broad and general concepts are most frequently used and that more specific economic terms that can be found in the Broadcasting Communication surface rather seldomly in the public version of decision texts. Furthermore, we do not observe a substantial difference between the use of these terms before and after the adoption of the v2009 Broadcasting Communication suggesting that economic concepts are not more frequently used in recent years. We believe that economic analysis could bring additional clarity and support in several of the studied decisions, especially in cases where, for example, it is quite debatable which tasks fall under a public service obligation and which do not. Economic analysis would foster the evolution to a stricter and more rational State aid control in this exceptional sector preventing potential spillover-effects of aid into new activities. Keywords: State Aid; Media; Public Service Broadcasting; Economic Analysis.