This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TB0178(01)
Case T-178/14: Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss v Commission (State aid — Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings — Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU — Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought — No need to adjudicate)
Case T-178/14: Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss v Commission (State aid — Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings — Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU — Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought — No need to adjudicate)
Case T-178/14: Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss v Commission (State aid — Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings — Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU — Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought — No need to adjudicate)
OJ C 294, 7.9.2015, p. 55–56
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
7.9.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 294/55 |
Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss v Commission
(Case T-178/14) (1)
((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 294/66)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss GmbH (Mülheim-an-der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: H. Höfler, C. Kahle and V. Winkler, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by C. Renner, lawyer)
Intervener in support of the defendant: EFTA Surveillance Authority (represented by: initially X. Lewis, M. Schneider and J. Kaasin, then X. Lewis, M. Schneider, M. Moustakali and C. Perrin, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).
Operative part of the order
|
1. |
There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
|
2. |
There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications for intervention submitted by Flachglas Torgau GmbH and Saint-Gobain Isover G+H AG, by Kronotex GmbH & Co. KG and Kronoply GmbH, by Bayer MaterialScience AG, by Sabic Polyolefine GmbH, by Ineos Manufacturing Deutschland GmbH, Ineos Phenol GmbH and Ineos Vinyls Deutschland GmbH, and by Advansa GmbH, Akzo Nobel Industrial Chemicals GmbH, Aurubis AG, CBW Chemie GmbH, CFB Chemische Fabrik Brunsbüttel GmbH & Co. KG, Clariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH, Dralon GmbH, Hahl Filaments GmbH, Messer Produktionsgesellschaft mbH Siegen, Messer Produktionsgesellschaft mbH Salzgitter, Nabaltec AG, Siltronic AG and Wacker Chemie AG. |
|
3. |
Friedrich Wilhelms-Hütte Eisenguss GmbH shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures. |
|
4. |
The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs. |