This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TN0034
Case T-34/20: Action brought on 20 January 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission
Case T-34/20: Action brought on 20 January 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission
Case T-34/20: Action brought on 20 January 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission
OJ C 77, 9.3.2020, p. 58–59
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
9.3.2020 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 77/58 |
Action brought on 20 January 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission
(Case T-34/20)
(2020/C 77/79)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Datenlotsen Informationssysteme GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: T. Lübbig, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
— |
annul the European Commission’s decision of 20 September 2019 on the measure SA.34402 — 2015/C (ex 2015/NN) implemented by Germany for Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH (Commission document C(2019) 6836 final); |
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.
1. |
Infringement of Article 107(1) TFEU in applying a test to determine whether the activities of Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH (‘HIS’) are economic in nature that is incompatible with the case-law, since the Commission failed to have regard to the content of the ‘inseparability’ criterion and the autonomous significance of the ‘connection’ criterion. |
2. |
Infringement of Article 107(1) TFEU in characterising HIS’ activities for German public universities as non-economic. |
3. |
Infringement of Article 107(1) TFEU in failing to differentiate between HIS’ various fields of activity. |
4. |
Infringement of Article 108(3) TFEU and Article 1(b)(v) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1) in classifying the direct funding as ‘existing aid’ on the basis that a market existed in 1976. |
5. |
Infringement of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU in failing to state sufficient reasons for the applicability of Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation 2015/1589 to situations not involving liberalisation. |
6. |
Infringement of Article 108(3) TFEU and Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation 2015/1589 in classifying the direct funding as ‘existing aid’ on the basis that the measures underwent significant change. |
7. |
Infringement of Article 108(3) TFEU and Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation 2015/1589 in classifying the direct funding as an ‘aid scheme’, since there was in fact a series of individual aid awards approved annually. |
8. |
Infringement of the right to have one’s case heard within a reasonable period of time as part of the right to ‘good administration’ under Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
(1) Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9).