EStAL - European State Aid Law Quarterly

«
1
»

The search returned 6 results.

Phedon Nicolaides

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 20 (2021), Issue 1, Page 4 - 14

The article argues that the judgment of the Court of Justice in case C-594/18 P Austria v Commission, which appeared to limit the criteria that the Commission uses to determine the compatibility of State aid, may have a positive impact on State aid control if it makes the assessment of the Commission more transparent. There is a need for greater transparency in the ‘weighing’ of the positive and negative effects of State aid and the ‘balancing’ of those effects. The weighing and balancing of the effects of State aid are not easy tasks. But it will be necessary for the Commission to be more explicit about the model it relies on to conclude that aid is compatible or not. Keywords: Article 107(3)(c) TFEU; compatibility with internal market; common interest; affectation of trade; distortion of competition; Hinkley Point C

Stig Eidissen

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 19 (2020), Issue 4, Page 452 - 463

According to long-standing Commission practice, State aid must aim at or contribute to an objective of common interest to qualify as compatible with the internal market. In the recent judgment Hinkley Point C, the Court of Justice rejected the pursuit of an objective of common interest as a condition for compatibility pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) TFEU. This article takes a closer look at the origin and content of the common interest condition. Further, it discusses whether the Hinkley judgment establishes a precedent to reject a common interest condition entirely, and the possible consequences of such a precedent for State aid law and policy going forward. Keywords: State aid; compatibility; compensatory justification; common interest; judicial review

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 18 (2019), Issue 3, Page 313 - 338

Phedon Nicolaides

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 4, Page 534 - 545

Kristina Schattat, Natalia Budzynska

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 3, Page 399 - 411

The compatibility assessment of a State aid measure is about balancing its negative effects on trade and competition in the common market with its positive effects in terms of a contribution to the achievement of well-defined objectives of common interest. One key element for the Commission’s so-called ‘balancing test’ of operating aid under the 2014 Aviation Guidelines is an ex-ante business plan ensuring that the company managing the airport will be able to cover all operational costs as of 2024 at the latest. Another key element for the assessment is the analysis of the catchment area of concerned airports. This article discusses the role of financial and economic analysis and evidence in this balancing test. The Commission Decisions published so far on this type of aid have not included many technical details about the economic and financial analysis of the Commission’s assessment. Neither has the Commission published specific guidance for the Member States on these elements. This article aims to shed light on these aspects by not only reviewing the decisional practice of the Commission but by sharing the practical experience of the authors with helping Member States to receive the Commission’s approval for granting operating aid to regional airports. Keywords: Balancing Test; Compatibility Assessment; Economic and Financial Analysis; Operating Aid; Airport; Infrastructure; Aviation Guidelines 2014; Notification; Business Plan; Operating Funding Gap; Cost of Capital; Catchment Area.

Anna Nowak

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Volume 17 (2018), Issue 2, Page 212 - 221

The evidence requirements in the State aid compatibility assessment are a highly important and practical issue, which however has not been properly discussed until now. Indeed, the relevant provisions of the notification forms and of the acts of soft law do not give clear guidance as to the evidence requirements in the State aid procedure. Furthermore, the Commission is very indulgent towards the evidence provided by the notifying States, especially in the preliminary examination, and thus the evidence requirements are low. Such low evidence requirements do not properly secure the standard of ‘serious doubts’ necessary to open the formal investigation, and increase the risk of errors in State aid decisions. On the other hand, the possibility to tighten up the evidence requirements is limited, due to the ex ante character of State aid control. Keywords: Evidence; procedural law; compatibility assessment.

«
1
»

News

Current Issue