Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62014TN0477

    Case T-477/14: Action brought on 26 June 2014  — Caamaño Sistemas Metálicos and Others v Commission

    OJ C 261, 11.8.2014, p. 50–50 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    26/06/2014
    Date lodged:
    26/06/2014
    Author:
    General Court
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    Spanish
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    11.8.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 261/50

    Action brought on 26 June 2014 — Caamaño Sistemas Metálicos and Others v Commission

    (Case T-477/14)

    2014/C 261/78

    Language of the case: Spanish

    Parties

    Applicants: Caamaño Sistemas Metálicos, SL (Coruña, Spain); Blumaq, SA (Castellón, Spain); Grupo Ibérica de Congelados, SA (Vigo, Spain); and Inversiones Rentaragon, SA (Zaragoza, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero, and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicants claim that the General Court should:

    —

    annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;

    —

    in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as the beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;

    —

    in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid;

    —

    annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of private contracts between the investors and other entities; and

    —

    order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    The pleas in law and main arguments are those raised in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.

    Top