EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TN0235
Case T-235/14: Action brought on 17 April 2014 — ArcelorMittal Hamburg and Others v Commission
Case T-235/14: Action brought on 17 April 2014 — ArcelorMittal Hamburg and Others v Commission
Case T-235/14: Action brought on 17 April 2014 — ArcelorMittal Hamburg and Others v Commission
OJ C 223, 14.7.2014, p. 14–15
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
14.7.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 223/14 |
Action brought on 17 April 2014 — ArcelorMittal Hamburg and Others v Commission
(Case T-235/14)
2014/C 223/19
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicants: ArcelorMittal Hamburg GmbH (Hamburg, Germany), Bregal Bremer Galvanisierungs GmbH (Bremen, Germany), ArcelorMittal Hochfeld GmbH (Duisburg, Germany) und ArcelorMittal Ruhrort GmbH (Duisburg) (represented by: H. Janssen and G. Engel, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
— |
annul the decision of the European Commission of 18 December 2013 in State aid case SA.33995 (2013/C) — Support for renewable electricity and reduced EEG-surcharge for energy-intensive users; |
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law: Infringement of Article 107(1) TFEU
|
2. |
Second plea in law: Infringement of Article 108(1) TFEU and the principle of legal certainty
|
3. |
Third plea in law: Infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the principle of audi alteram partem
|
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty, OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1.