This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019TN0233
Case T-233/19: Action brought on 9 April 2019 — Infineon Technologies Dresden v Commission
Case T-233/19: Action brought on 9 April 2019 — Infineon Technologies Dresden v Commission
Case T-233/19: Action brought on 9 April 2019 — Infineon Technologies Dresden v Commission
OJ C 213, 24.6.2019, p. 52–52
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
24.6.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 213/52 |
Action brought on 9 April 2019 — Infineon Technologies Dresden v Commission
(Case T-233/19)
(2019/C 213/51)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Infineon Technologies Dresden GmbH & Co. KG (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: L. Assmann and M. Peiffer, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the defendant’s decision, notified under document C(2018) 3166 (OJ 2019 L 14, p. 1), of 28 May 2018 on aid scheme SA.34045 (2013/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for baseload consumers under Paragraph 19 of the Stromnetzentgeltverordnung (Regulation on electricity network charges, ‘the StromNEV’); and |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The application is based on one plea in law, arguing that the contested decision is unlawful because the exemption from the network charges under the second sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV is not State aid within the meaning of Article 107 et seq. TFEU.
In this regard, the applicant first argues that the exemption from network charges granted on the basis of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV was not granted through State resources within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU but was financed through German electricity grid operators which are organised under private law and are not attributable to the State. Neither does the effect of the disputed surcharge equate to a levy on electricity consumption in Germany. In addition, the Federal Republic of Germany has no control over the transmission system operators which are entrusted with the management of these resources.
It is further claimed that the exemption from network charges on the basis of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV differs in significant aspects from the underlying circumstances in Cases C-206/06, Essent Netwerk Noord and Others and C-262/12, Vent De Colère!. The disputed case is comparable, however, with the surcharge in Case C-405/16 P, Germany v Commission, and therefore not classifiable as aid.