This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62018TA0561
Case T-561/18: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission (State aid — Postal sector — Compensation for the discharge of the universal service obligation — Decision not to raise any objections — Calculation of the compensation — Net avoided cost methodology — Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service — Use of funds granted as compensation — State guarantee of redundancy payments in the event of bankruptcy — VAT exemption for certain transactions carried out by the universal service provider — Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities — Capital contribution from a public undertaking in order to avoid the bankruptcy of its subsidiary — Complaint from a competitor — Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage — Existing aid — Advantages granted on a periodic basis — Whether imputable to the State — Private investor test)
Case T-561/18: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission (State aid — Postal sector — Compensation for the discharge of the universal service obligation — Decision not to raise any objections — Calculation of the compensation — Net avoided cost methodology — Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service — Use of funds granted as compensation — State guarantee of redundancy payments in the event of bankruptcy — VAT exemption for certain transactions carried out by the universal service provider — Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities — Capital contribution from a public undertaking in order to avoid the bankruptcy of its subsidiary — Complaint from a competitor — Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage — Existing aid — Advantages granted on a periodic basis — Whether imputable to the State — Private investor test)
Case T-561/18: Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission (State aid — Postal sector — Compensation for the discharge of the universal service obligation — Decision not to raise any objections — Calculation of the compensation — Net avoided cost methodology — Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service — Use of funds granted as compensation — State guarantee of redundancy payments in the event of bankruptcy — VAT exemption for certain transactions carried out by the universal service provider — Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities — Capital contribution from a public undertaking in order to avoid the bankruptcy of its subsidiary — Complaint from a competitor — Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage — Existing aid — Advantages granted on a periodic basis — Whether imputable to the State — Private investor test)
OJ C 242, 21.6.2021, p. 19–20
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
21.6.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 242/19 |
Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission
(Case T-561/18) (1)
(State aid - Postal sector - Compensation for the discharge of the universal service obligation - Decision not to raise any objections - Calculation of the compensation - Net avoided cost methodology - Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service - Use of funds granted as compensation - State guarantee of redundancy payments in the event of bankruptcy - VAT exemption for certain transactions carried out by the universal service provider - Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities - Capital contribution from a public undertaking in order to avoid the bankruptcy of its subsidiary - Complaint from a competitor - Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage - Existing aid - Advantages granted on a periodic basis - Whether imputable to the State - Private investor test)
(2021/C 242/25)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S (Padborg, Denmark), Danske Fragtmænd A/S (Åbyhøj, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the applicants: Jørgen Jensen Distribution A/S (Ikast, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch and M. Honoré, lawyers), Dansk Distribution A/S (Karlslunde, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch and J. Buendía Sierra, lawyers)
Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: J. Nymann-Lindegren and M. Wolff, acting as Agents, and by R. Holdgaard, lawyer)
Re:
Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018, State aid SA.47707 (2018/N) on State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018, State aid SA.47707 (2018/N) on State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark, in so far as it found, at the end of the preliminary examination phase, that, first, the exemption from value added tax (VAT) introduced by Administrative Decision No 1306/90 and Administrative Regulation F 6742/90, adopted by the Danish tax authorities, and, secondly, the capital increase of DKK one billion made to Post Danmark A/S by PostNord AB on 23 February 2017, did not constitute State aid; |
|
2. |
Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
|
3. |
Orders ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S to bear half of their own costs, with the rest of their costs being borne by the European Commission; |
|
4. |
Orders the Commission, the Kingdom of Denmark, Jørgen Jensen Distribution A/S and Dansk Distribution A/S to bear their own costs. |