Action brought on 2 August 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic

(Case C-337/04)

(2004/C 239/16)

An action against the French Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 August 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Gérard Rozet and Christophe Giolito, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

Considering that the attribution by the French public authorities in favour of Crédit Mutuel of the distribution right to the ‘Livret bleu’ savings scheme involved State aid incompatible with the common market, on 15 January 2002 the Commission adopted, under the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) EC, a decision requiring France to recover from Crédit Mutuel the aid granted since 1 January 1991 and to take measures to withdraw in future aid included in the ‘Livret bleu’ scheme and to improve supervision of it.

On 18 June 2003 the French authorities sent a recovery order for EUR 117,9 million to Crédit Mutuel. However, the Commission notes that to date no amount of the aid has been reimbursed by Crédit Mutuel and no further action has been taken by France to recover that aid. In the Commission's view, therefore, France has not complied with the decision and since it has not alleged that compliance with the decision was absolutely impossible, which is the only defence available to it, it must be found that it failed to fulfil its obligations under Community law.

Furthermore, the Commission does not agree regarding the simple interest method used by the French authorities to calculate interest to be paid on the amount to be recovered, nor regarding the amount of tax deducted from the amount to be recovered. It considers that only capitalisation of interest by the compound interest method will result in the neutralisation of the economic advantage from which Crédit Mutuel has benefited. Furthermore, the French authorities have not shown that the deduction of the tax from the amount to be recovered was made by application of the internal rules and in a non-discriminatory manner in comparison with similar cases governed by national law. Consequently, the amount to be recovered proposed by the French authorities does not permit the Commission decision to be implemented effectively.

Finally, the Commission considers that France has not complied with Articles 2(2), 2(3) and 2(4) of the decision of 15 January 2002, intended to ensure the withdrawal of the elements of aid involved in the ‘Livret bleu’ scheme and the better supervision of the scheme, but has merely stated that the necessary measures were being taken. The Commission has to date nothing in its possession which might lead it to conclude that the decision has been implemented effectively on those points.