This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62009CA0322
Case C-322/09 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 November 2010 — NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Complaint by a competitor — Admissibility — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Articles 4, 10, 13 and 20 — Commission decision not to examine the complaint further — Classification by the Commission of measures as partially not constituting State aid and partially as existing aid compatible with the common market — Article 230 EC — Concept of an act open to challenge )
Case C-322/09 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 November 2010 — NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Complaint by a competitor — Admissibility — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Articles 4, 10, 13 and 20 — Commission decision not to examine the complaint further — Classification by the Commission of measures as partially not constituting State aid and partially as existing aid compatible with the common market — Article 230 EC — Concept of an act open to challenge )
Case C-322/09 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 November 2010 — NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Complaint by a competitor — Admissibility — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Articles 4, 10, 13 and 20 — Commission decision not to examine the complaint further — Classification by the Commission of measures as partially not constituting State aid and partially as existing aid compatible with the common market — Article 230 EC — Concept of an act open to challenge )
OJ C 13, 15.1.2011, p. 14–14
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
15.1.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 13/14 |
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 November 2010 — NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB v European Commission
(Case C-322/09 P) (1)
(Appeal - State aid - Complaint by a competitor - Admissibility - Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 - Articles 4, 10, 13 and 20 - Commission decision not to examine the complaint further - Classification by the Commission of measures as partially not constituting State aid and partially as existing aid compatible with the common market - Article 230 EC - Concept of ‘an act open to challenge’)
2011/C 13/22
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB (represented by: M. Merola and L. Armati, avvocati)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)
Re:
Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 9 June 2009 in Case T-152/06 NDSHT v Commission by which the Court of First Instance declared inadmissible the action seeking the annulment of the Commission’s decision, included in letters of 24 March and 28 April 2006, not to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, in consequence of the applicant’s complaint concerning aid allegedly granted to Stockholm Visitors Board AB by the Swedish authorities, in the form of various types of subsidy granted by the City of Stockholm — Acts which may be challenged
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 9 June 2009 in Case T-152/06 NDSHT v Commission; |
|
2. |
Dismisses the objection of inadmissibility raised by the Commission of the European Communities before the General Court; |
|
3. |
Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for judgment on the claim of NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB for annulment of the decision of the Commission of the European Communities, contained in its letters of 24 March and 28 April 2006, not to continue its examination of the complaint that that company had lodged concerning allegedly unlawful State aid granted by the City of Stockholm to Stockholm Visitors Board AB; |
|
4. |
Orders that the costs be reserved. |
(1) OJ C 233, 26.6.2009, p. 12.