Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62018TN0238

Case T-238/18: Action brought on 12 April 2018 — Netflix International and Netflix v Commission

OJ C 231, 2.7.2018, p. 28–29 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

201806150661955242018/C 231/352382018TC23120180702EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180412282921

Case T-238/18: Action brought on 12 April 2018 — Netflix International and Netflix v Commission

Top

C2312018EN2810120180412EN0035281292

Action brought on 12 April 2018 — Netflix International and Netflix v Commission

(Case T-238/18)

2018/C 231/35Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Netflix International BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands), Netflix, Inc. (Los Gatos, California, United States) (represented by: E. Batchelor, Solicitor, N. Niejahr, B. Hoorelbeke and A. Patsa, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

annul the Commission Decision of 8 November 2017 on State aid SA.48950 (2017/N) on the prolongation of the aid scheme for the digitisation of cinematographic heritage works notified by France;

annul the Commission Decision of 20 November 2017 on State aid SA.48907 (2017/N) on the prolongation of the automatic aid scheme for audiovisual work (fiction and creative documentaries) notified by France;

annul the Commission Decision of 20 November 2017 on State aid SA.48699 (2017/N) on the prolongation of the automatic aid scheme for the production and preparation of cinematographic work notified by France; and

order the Commission to bear its own costs and Netflix's costs in connection with these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law.

The applicants submit that the Commission violated Article 108(3) TFEU by not opening the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU when examining the State aid schemes notified by France which are the subject of the contested decisions. The Commission was required to open the formal investigation procedure for each of the three State aid schemes on account of the serious difficulties it encountered in assessing each of them for compatibility with the internal market. By failing to open the formal investigation procedure, the Commission infringed the procedural rights of the applicants under Article 108(2) TFEU.

The applicants submit that the existence of serious difficulties is supported by:

the circumstances and the length of the preliminary examination procedures that led to the adoption of the contested decisions; and

the content of the contested decisions, in particular as this relates to the State aid schemes' financing mechanisms and the State aid schemes' compatibility with EU law other than the State aid provisions.

Top