Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62018TN0561

Case T-561/18: Action brought on 20 September 2018 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission

OJ C 427, 26.11.2018, p. 90–91 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

26.11.2018   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/90

Action brought on 20 September 2018 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission

(Case T-561/18)

(2018/C 427/119)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S (Padborg, Denmark) and Danske Fragtmænd A/S (Åbyhøj, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

—

annul Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018 in State aid case SA.47707 (2018/N) — State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark; (1)

—

order the Commission to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging failure by the Commission to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU, despite the serious difficulties arising in the assessment of the measures at issue. This plea based on two series of arguments relating to the length and circumstances of the preliminary investigation procedure as well as to the content of the contested decision.

—

As regards the content of the contested decision, the applicants claim, in particular, that: (i) the universal service obligation compensation is not compatible with the internal market; (ii) the State guarantees do not constitute existing aid; (iii) the VAT exemption is imputable to the State; (iv) the misallocation of costs involves the transfer of State resources and is imputable to the State; and (v) the capital injection of 23 February 2017 is imputable to the State and confers an economic advantage on Post Danmark.

(1)  OJ 2018 C 360, p. 3.

Top