This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013TN0719
Case T-719/13: Action brought on 30 December 2013 — Lico Leasing and Pequeños y Medianos Astilleros Sociedad de Reconversión v Commission
Case T-719/13: Action brought on 30 December 2013 — Lico Leasing and Pequeños y Medianos Astilleros Sociedad de Reconversión v Commission
Case T-719/13: Action brought on 30 December 2013 — Lico Leasing and Pequeños y Medianos Astilleros Sociedad de Reconversión v Commission
OJ C 52, 22.2.2014, p. 48–49
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
22.2.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 52/48 |
Action brought on 30 December 2013 — Lico Leasing and Pequeños y Medianos Astilleros Sociedad de Reconversión v Commission
(Case T-719/13)
2014/C 52/93
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicants: Lico Leasing, SA (Madrid, Spain) and Pequeños y Medianos Astilleros Sociedad de Reconversión, SA (Madrid) (represented by: M. Sánchez and M. Merola, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the General Court should:
— |
annul the Decision on the ground that it is vitiated by errors in that it finds that the STLS [Spanish Tax Lease System] is a State aid scheme that benefits the EIGs [Economic Interest Groupings] and their investors, and also by defects in reasoning; |
— |
in the alternative, annul the order for recovery of the aid granted through the STLS on the ground that it is contrary to the general principles of the European Union legal order; |
— |
in the further alternative, annul the point in the order for recovery concerning the calculation of the amount of incompatible aid to be recovered in so far as it prevents Spain from determining the formula for calculating that amount in accordance with the general principles applicable to the recovery of State aid, and |
— |
award the applicants all the costs incurred by them in connection with this action. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Decision contested in the present proceedings is the same as that in Case T-515/13 Spain v Commission (OJ 2013 C 336, p. 29).
In support of their action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 107(1) TFEU and 296 TFEU
In addition, in the second part of this plea for annulment, the applicants submit that the Decision is vitiated by a defect in reasoning, in that it does not explain why the benefit retained by the alleged beneficiaries constitutes State aid when those beneficiaries merely shared the benefit obtained by the shipowners, which, as the Commission itself recognises, does not constitute State aid. |
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999
|
3. |
Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the general principles applicable to recovery of State aid
|