EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/223/07
Case C-334/07 P: Appeal brought on 18 July 2007 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 3 May 2007 in Case T-357/02 Freistaat Sachsen v Commission of the European Communities
Case C-334/07 P: Appeal brought on 18 July 2007 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 3 May 2007 in Case T-357/02 Freistaat Sachsen v Commission of the European Communities
Case C-334/07 P: Appeal brought on 18 July 2007 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 3 May 2007 in Case T-357/02 Freistaat Sachsen v Commission of the European Communities
OJ C 223, 22.9.2007, p. 6–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.9.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 223/6 |
Appeal brought on 18 July 2007 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 3 May 2007 in Case T-357/02 Freistaat Sachsen v Commission of the European Communities
(Case C-334/07 P)
(2007/C 223/07)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: Kilian Gross, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings: Freistaat Sachsen
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul the contested judgment of the Court of First Instance of 3 May 2007 in Case T-357/02 Freistaat Sachsen v Commission of the European Communities in its entirety; |
|
— |
give final judgment on the matter and dismiss the action as unfounded; |
|
— |
order the applicant at first instance to bear the costs of the appeal proceedings and the costs incurred at first instance in Case T-357/02. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
According to the Commission, the contested judgment infringes Articles 88(2) and (3) EC, the second paragraph of Article 249, Article 254(2) EC, Article 3 et seq. of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 (1) and Article 10(1) of the Regulation exempting SMEs, since the Court of First Instance failed to recognise that the examination of the legality of the contested decision (2003/226/EC) (2) was to be carried out solely in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation exempting SMEs (Regulation (EC) No 70/2001) (3).
The Regulation exempting SMEs entered into force before the contested decision was issued and was thus directly applicable. Consequently, it was the only applicable legal framework. According to the Commission, the Court wrongly denies the applicability of the Regulation exempting SMEs since it erroneously assumed that the Regulation exempting SMEs would have to be applied retroactively in the case of the contested decision.
The Commission claims, in the alternative, that the contested judgment also infringes Article 2(2) and Article 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 because the Court misconceived the criterion of assessment and the requirements of completeness of a notification.