This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62000CJ0280
Judgment of the Court of 24 July 2003.#Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht.#Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesverwaltungsgericht - Germany.#Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 - Operation of urban, suburban and regional scheduled transport services - Public subsidies - Concept of State aid - Compensation for discharging public service obligations.#Case C-280/00.
Hotărârea Curții din data de 24 iulie 2003.
Altmark Trans GmbH și Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg împotriva Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, în prezența Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht.
Cerere având ca obiect pronunțarea unei hotărâri preliminare: Bundesverwaltungsgericht - Germania.
Regulamentul (CEE) nr. 1191/69.
Cauza C-280/00.
Hotărârea Curții din data de 24 iulie 2003.
Altmark Trans GmbH și Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg împotriva Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, în prezența Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht.
Cerere având ca obiect pronunțarea unei hotărâri preliminare: Bundesverwaltungsgericht - Germania.
Regulamentul (CEE) nr. 1191/69.
Cauza C-280/00.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2003:415
«(Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 – Operation of urban, suburban and regional scheduled transport services – Public subsidies – Concept of State aid – Compensation for discharging public service obligations)»
|
I - 0000 | |||
|
I - 0000 | |||
|
I - 0000 | |||
(Council Regulation No 1191/69, Art. 1(1), second subpara.)
(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC); Commission Regulation No 69/2001; Commission Notice 96/C 68/06)
(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))
(EC Treaty, Art. 77 (now Art. 73 EC); Council Regulations Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
24 July 2003 (1)
((Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 – Operation of urban, suburban and regional scheduled transport services – Public subsidies – Concept of State aid – Compensation for discharging public service obligations))
In Case C-280/00, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between Altmark Trans GmbH, Regierungspräsidium Magdeburgand
Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, third party: Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht, on the interpretation of Article 92 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87 EC), Article 77 of the EC Treaty (now Article 73 EC), and Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 of the Council of 26 June 1969 on action by Member States concerning the obligations inherent in the concept of a public service in transport by rail, road and inland waterway (OJ, English Special Edition 1969 (I), p. 276), as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1893/91 of 20 June 1991 (OJ 1991 L 169, p. 1),THE COURT,,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of Altmark Trans GmbH, represented by M. Ronellenfitsch; Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, represented by L.-H. Rode; Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, represented by C. Heinze; and the Commission, represented by M. Wolfcarius and D. Triantafyllou, at the hearing on 6 November 2001,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 19 March 2002,having regard to the order reopening the oral procedure of 18 June 2002,after hearing the oral observations of Altmark Trans GmbH, represented by M. Ronellenfitsch; Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg, represented by S. Karnop, acting as Agent; Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, represented by C. Heinze; the German Government, represented by M. Lumma, acting as Agent; the Danish Government, represented by J. Molde, acting as Agent; the Spanish Government, represented by R. Silva de Lapuerta, acting as Agent; the French Government, represented by F. Million, acting as Agent; the Netherlands Government, represented by N.A.J. Bel, acting as Agent; the United Kingdom Government, represented by J.E. Collins, acting as Agent, and E. Sharpston QC; and the Commission, represented by D. Triantafyllou, at the hearing on 15 October 2002,after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 14 January 2003,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT,
in answer to the question referred to it by the Bundesverwaltungsgericht by order of 6 April 2000, hereby rules:
Rodríguez Iglesias |
Puissochet |
Wathelet |
Schintgen |
Timmermans |
Gulmann |
Edward |
La Pergola |
Jann |
Skouris |
Macken |
Colneric |
von Bahr |
Cunha Rodrigues |
Rosas |
R. Grass |
G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias |
Registrar |
President |