This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62009CA0001
Case C-1/09: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 March 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF), in liquidation, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d’édition (State aid — Article 88(3) EC — Unlawful aid declared compatible with the common market — Annulment of the Commission decision — National courts — Application for recovery of unlawfully implemented aid — Proceedings stayed pending the adoption of a new Commission decision — Exceptional circumstances liable to limit the obligation to repay)
Case C-1/09: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 March 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF), in liquidation, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d’édition (State aid — Article 88(3) EC — Unlawful aid declared compatible with the common market — Annulment of the Commission decision — National courts — Application for recovery of unlawfully implemented aid — Proceedings stayed pending the adoption of a new Commission decision — Exceptional circumstances liable to limit the obligation to repay)
Case C-1/09: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 March 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF), in liquidation, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d’édition (State aid — Article 88(3) EC — Unlawful aid declared compatible with the common market — Annulment of the Commission decision — National courts — Application for recovery of unlawfully implemented aid — Proceedings stayed pending the adoption of a new Commission decision — Exceptional circumstances liable to limit the obligation to repay)
OJ C 113, 1.5.2010, p. 13–14
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
1.5.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 113/13 |
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 11 March 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF), in liquidation, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d’édition
(Case C-1/09) (1)
(State aid - Article 88(3) EC - Unlawful aid declared compatible with the common market - Annulment of the Commission decision - National courts - Application for recovery of unlawfully implemented aid - Proceedings stayed pending the adoption of a new Commission decision - Exceptional circumstances liable to limit the obligation to repay)
2010/C 113/18
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Conseil d'État
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF), in liquidation, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication
Defendant: Société internationale de diffusion et d’édition
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d'État (France) — State aid — Export aid in the book trade — Obligation to repay aid unlawfully put into effect — Possibility of suspending repayment of the aid pending a final decision of the Commission on the compatibility of the aid with the Treaty — Admissibility of the obligation to repay the aid being limited on the ground of an exceptional circumstance
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
A national court before which an application has been brought, on the basis of Article 88(3) EC, for repayment of unlawful State aid may not stay the adoption of its decision on that application until the Commission of the European Communities has ruled on the compatibility of the aid with the common market following the annulment of a previous positive decision; |
|
2. |
The adoption by the Commission of the European Communities of three successive decisions declaring aid to be compatible with the common market, which were subsequently annulled by the Community judicature, is not, in itself, capable of constituting an exceptional circumstance such as to justify a limitation of the recipient’s obligation to repay that aid, in the case where that aid was implemented contrary to Article 88(3) EC. |