Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 62017TN0716

    Case T-716/17: Action brought on 18 October 2017 — Germanwings v Commission

    OJ C 412, 4.12.2017, p. 39–40 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    201711170321555902017/C 412/567162017TC41220171204EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20171018394022

    Case T-716/17: Action brought on 18 October 2017 — Germanwings v Commission

    Top

    C4122017EN3920120171018EN0056392402

    Action brought on 18 October 2017 — Germanwings v Commission

    (Case T-716/17)

    2017/C 412/56Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Germanwings GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: A. Martin-Ehlers, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Commission

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul the decision of the European Commission of 29 July 2016 ( 1 ) in Case SA.33983 (ex 2012/NN) (ex 201l/NN) — Compensation to Sardinian airports for public service obligations (services of a general economic interest — SGEI) and, specifically:

    —

    Article 1(2), in so far as it refers to Germanwings GmbH; and

    —

    Article 2(1), in so far as the repayment claimed therein relates to Germanwings GmbH; and

    —

    order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law:

    1.

    First plea in law, alleging that there is no aid element

    The defendant has neither shown nor proved that the payment made to the applicant contained aid. Consequently, the defendant departs significantly from the case-law and from its own decision-making practice.

    2.

    Second plea in law, alleging that, if it is established that aid is involved, that aid would neither interfere with trade between Member States nor distort competition.

    The defendant has provided an inadequate statement of reasons for its claim that the alleged aid affects trade between Member States and competition. In the alternative, the applicant argues that it would be de minimis aid within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006. ( 2 )

    ( 1 ) Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1861 of 29 July 2016 on State aid SA33983 (2013/C) (ex 2012/NN) (ex 2011/N) — Italy — Compensation to Sardinian airports for public service obligations (SGEI) (notified under document C(2016) 4862) (OJ 2017 L 268, p. 1).

    ( 2 ) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid (OJ 2006 L 379, p. 5).

    Top