Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CA0135

    Case C-135/16: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Georgsmarienhütte GmbH, Stahlwerk Bous GmbH, Schmiedag GmbH, Harz Guss Zorge GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Reference for a preliminary ruling — State aid — Scheme for the support of renewable electricity sources and energy-intensive users — Decision (EU) 2015/1585 — Validity in the light of Article 107 TFEU — Admissibility — Failure by the applicants in the main proceedings to bring an action for annulment)

    OJ C 328, 17.9.2018, p. 4–4 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    17.9.2018   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 328/4


    Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Georgsmarienhütte GmbH, Stahlwerk Bous GmbH, Schmiedag GmbH, Harz Guss Zorge GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland

    (Case C-135/16) (1)

    ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - State aid - Scheme for the support of renewable electricity sources and energy-intensive users - Decision (EU) 2015/1585 - Validity in the light of Article 107 TFEU - Admissibility - Failure by the applicants in the main proceedings to bring an action for annulment))

    (2018/C 328/04)

    Language of the case: German

    Referring court

    Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicants: Georgsmarienhütte GmbH, Stahlwerk Bous GmbH, Schmiedag GmbH, Harz Guss Zorge GmbH

    Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

    Operative part of the judgment

    The request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main (Administrative Court, Frankfurt am Main, Germany), by decision of 23 February 2016, is inadmissible.


    (1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.


    Top