14.4.2012

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/15

Action brought on 6 January 2012 — Provincie Groningen and Others v Commission

(Case T-15/12)

2012/C 109/34

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicants: Provincie Groningen (Groningen, Netherlands); Provincie Friesland (Leeuwarden, Netherlands); Provincie Drenthe (Assen, Netherlands); Provincie Overijssel (Zwolle, Netherlands); Provincie Gelderland (Arnhem, Netherlands); Provincie Flevoland (Lelystad, Netherlands); Provincie Utrecht (Utrecht, Netherlands); Provincie Noord-Holland (Haarlem, Netherlands); Provincie Zuid-Holland (The Hague, Netherlands); Provincie Zeeland (Middelburg, Netherlands); Provincie Noord-Brabant (’s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands); and Provincie Limburg (Maastricht, Netherlands) (represented by: P. Kuypers and N. van Nuland, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

—

Annul the Commission’s decision of 13 July 2011 in Case N308/2010, or, in the alternative, annul that decision in so far as nature conservation societies are beneficiaries of the subsidy scheme, or, in the further alternative, annul that decision in so far as land management organisations are beneficiaries of the subsidy scheme;

—	order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging misapplication of Article 107(1) TFEU and infringement of European Union law.

—	Nature conservation in the Netherlands is a service of general interest within the meaning of Article 2 of Protocol No 26 on services of general interest. European Union competition law is therefore inapplicable;

—	Nature managers, nature conservation societies or land management organisations are wrongly categorised as undertakings within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU;

—	The subsidy scheme does not, in view of the conditions associated with that scheme, lead to an economic advantage for the beneficiaries for the purposes of Article 107(1) TFEU;

—	The Commission erred in its application of the fourth condition referred to in the judgment in Case C-280/00 Altmark Trans and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg [2003] ECR I 7747;

—	The subsidy scheme does not have the effect of affecting trade between Member States.

2.	Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU.