The Commission takes note of today's judgment by the General Court, which annuls two 2020 Commission decisions. In its decisions, the Commission approved the prolongation of Swedish tax exemption measures for non food-based biogas and bio propane used for heating or as motor fuel in Sweden.
The Commission will carefully study the judgment and reflect on possible next steps.

T-525/21
See also Curia's press release (in PDF format).

The General Court dismissed as inadmissible the three appeals brought against the Commission’s decisions approving aid granted by Germany to compensate for losses suffered in the context of the COVID-19 crisis.
See also:

• Curia's press release (in PDF format) for cases T-260/21 and T-306/21
• Court's judgment in Falke v Commission (T-306/21)
• Curia's press release (in PDF format) for cases T-525/21
• Court's judgment in E. Breuninger v Commission (T-525/21)

The Commission takes note of today's preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice clarifying that the Commission may decide that the incentive effect requirement of the Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020 is fulfilled in cases where support is granted as of the date of start of production, even if the application was submitted after works had started on the project concerned, provided that other factors show that the aid scheme nevertheless induces the intended change in the beneficiaries’ behaviour.
Today’s ruling is in line with the Commission’s decision of October 2014 approving the Estonian Renewable Energy support scheme under EU State aid rules.
The Commission will carefully study the judgment.

The Commission takes note of the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In its judgment, the Court clarified the scope of application of the Guidelines on regional State aid for 2014-2020 and of the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 related to the fisheries and aquaculture sector.
In particular, the Court clarified that an activity of processing of fishery and aquaculture products, such as the production of salted, frozen and desalted cod, does not fall within the scope of application of the above mentioned Guidelines and Regulation.

The Commission takes note of today's judgement of the General Court, which fully upheld two 2019 Commission State aid decisions.
In its decision of 8 January 2019, the Commission took the view that the Spanish tax regime provided ports with a selective advantage in breach of EU State aid rules. The Commission had therefore recommended Spain to align its taxation of ports with State aid rules. On 15 November 2019, the Commission decided to accept amendments by Spain to its corporate income tax legislation, allowing the Commission to close the State aid procedure.

The Commission takes note of today’s judgment by the General Court in the case CCPL Sc and Others v Commission.
The General Court fully upholds the Commission’s decision of 17 December 2020, re-adopting a cartel decision against CCPL and imposing fines on three entities of CCPL Group for their participation in three separate cartels in the retail food packaging sector.
In today’s judgment, the General Court also upholds in full the Commission’s decision rejecting the CCPL’s request for inability to pay the fine under the Commission’s Guidelines on fines.

The Commission takes note of today's judgement of the General Court, which fully upheld a 2017 Commission’s State aid decision. In its decision, the Commission found that support granted for the construction of two nuclear reactors in PAKS (Hungary) amounted to aid compatible with the internal market, subject to conditions.
In its judgment, the General Court confirmed that, when assessing the compatibility of an aid measure with the internal market, the Commission is not required to adopt a definitive position on the existence or absence of an infringement of provisions of EU law distinct from those relating to State aid, provided there is no inextricable link with the object of the aid.
In addition, the General Court clarified that the Member States are free to determine the composition of their own energy mix and to invest in nuclear energy.
See also the Court's press release (in PDF format).

The Commission takes note of the General Court’s judgment in the WDI and Others v Commission case.
By dismissing WDI’s appeal in its entirety, the General Court confirms that the Courts’ jurisdiction in respect to competition fines is limited to the fine originally imposed by the Commission, so that no autonomous fining prerogatives can be exercised by the Courts without a Commission fining decision being contested for review.

The Commission takes note of today’s judgment of the Court of Justice confirming the General’s Court judgment of March 2020, which had annulled a Commission’s decision on 2016 finding that Spain had granted incompatible aid to Valencia CF in the form of a State guarantee.
The Commission will carefully study the judgment and reflect on possible next steps.
See also Curia's press release (in PDF format).

The Commission takes note of the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
In its judgment, the Court provided guidance on the interpretation of Article 4(3) TEU and Article 101 TFEU and on the method of calculation of the fine to be imposed by a national competition authority on an undertaking for an infringement of Article 101 TFEU.
We will carefully study the judgment.

In Case C-163/21, referred by a Commercial Court in Barcelona, the Court ruled that, in the light of primary objective pursued by the Damages Directive 2014/104, evidence which may be requested to be produced cannot be limited to pre-existing documents in the possession of the defendant or a third party. However, the Court added that the production of such evidence should be restricted to what is relevant, proportionate and proportionate to the interests at stake.
See also Curia's press release (in PDF format).

The Commission takes note of today’s judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union, which upholds the General Court’s judgment in case T-561/18, thereby confirming the relevant parts of the Commission’s decision of 28 May 2018. In its decision, the Commission approved several measures in favour of Post Danmark, of which three were appealed to the Court of Justice, including the compensation granted by Denmark to Post Danmark to deliver the universal service during the period 2017-2019.
In its judgment, the Court of Justice fully upheld the General Court’s findings confirming the Commission’s assessment with the respect to the three measures part of the appeal. In particular, it confirmed that (i) the Universal Service Obligation (‘USO’) compensation granted to Post Danmark is compatible aid; (ii) the State guarantee for redundancy payments of former civil servants in case of Post Danmark’s bankruptcy constitutes existing aid as it was granted in 2002 and does not confer a competitive advantage to Post Danmark; and (iii) the General Court’s interpretation of the cost allocation rules applicable to Post Danmark was correct, in that there was no evidence pointing to misallocation between Post Danmark’s USO account and non-USO account, and that there was therefore no State aid involved.

The Commission takes note of today’s judgment by the General Court upholding the Commission decision of 30 November 2021. In its decision, the Commission approved an €11.7 million Croatian grant to compensate Croatia Airlines for damage caused in the context of the coronavirus pandemic by the travel restrictions and containment measures introduced by Croatia and other destination countries in the period between 19 March 2020 and 30 June 2020.
In its judgment, the General Court fully upheld the Commission’s assessment. It found that the Commission had correctly calculated the damage suffered by Croatia Airlines in the relevant period and correctly assessed proportionality of the aid. In particular, the Court held that the Commission was entitled to take operational revenues and costs recorded during the relevant period as the reference value for the calculation of the damage suffered by Croatia Airlines.

The Commission takes note of the judgments by the General Court dismissing the actions brought by Alfa Acciai SpA, Feralpi Holding SpA, Ferriere Nord SpA, Valsabbia Investimenti SpA and Ferriera Valsabbia SpA for the annulment of the Commission decision of 4 July 2019 which found a cartel in the Italian market of steel reinforcing bars for concrete, in breach of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty.
In its judgments today, the General Court fully upheld the Commission’s assessment and decision.

The Commission takes note of today's judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which sets aside the General Court’s judgment and annuls the Commission’s Decision of 21 October 2015, finding that Luxembourg granted selective tax advantages to Fiat’s financing company, in breach of EU State aid rules.
As the Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager, responsible for competition policy, said today:

• Even if the Commission’s decision was annulled, the judgment gives important guidance on the application of EU State aid rules in the area of taxation. The Court confirmed that action by Member States in areas that are not subject to harmonization by EU law is not excluded from the scope of the Treaty provisions on the monitoring of State aid.
• The Commission is committed to continue using all the tools at its disposal to ensure that fair competition is not distorted in the Single Market through the grant by Member States of illegal tax breaks to multinational companies.
• The Commission’s work, both on enforcement of State aid rules and on the wider taxation agenda, is yielding results beyond individual State aid decisions. Some Member States have amended their tax legislation. Many Member States have incorporated OECD rules and introduced ruling practices to address loopholes and ensure more tax fairness. We have made a lot of progress already at national, European and global levels, and we need to keep working together to succeed. This includes continuing to look at aggressive tax planning measures of Member States under EU State aid rules, in light of the most recent case law of the Court.

The Commission takes note of the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice clarifying the power of civil courts to review user charges for railway infrastructure based on the criteria laid down in Article 102 TFEU and in national competition law. The Commission will carefully study the judgment.

The European Commission takes note of the judgment of the General Court upholding a 2021 State aid decision.
In the decision, the Commission concluded that the public service compensation granted since 2009 to Siremar and later to its acquirer Società di Navigazione Siciliana for the operation of ferry services in Italy is in line with EU State aid rules. However, it found that the illegal prolongation of the rescue aid to Siremar and the exemptions from certain taxes in the context of Siremar’s privatisation are incompatible with the internal market.
In its judgment, the General Court fully upheld the Commission’s assessment. It also found that the duration of the Commission’s in-depth investigation does not have an impact on the applicant’s obligation to repay the incompatible aid received.

The Commission takes note of today’s judgment of the General Court dismissing the action for annulment brought against a Commission Decision of 28 April 2020. In its decision, the Commission had rejected a complaint alleging State aid in favour of Maritim Group as an operator of a congress centre and of a hotel in Ingolstadt.
In its judgment, the General Court fully upheld the Commission’s finding that no direct or indirect advantage was conferred onto Maritim Group and that the measures challenged in the complaint do therefore not constitute State aid within the meaning of EU law.

The Commission takes note of the judgments of the General Court. In its judgments, the General Court fully upheld a 2019 State aid decision whereby the Commission found that aid granted by Greece to undertakings operating in certain Prefectures following the large forest fires of 2007 amounted to unlawful and incompatible aid and ordered recovery.
In addition, the General Court confirmed that aid to make good the damage caused by a natural disaster or exceptional circumstances under Article 107(2)(b) TFEU can be granted only to those undertakings damaged by the event and that the compensation must be subject to a number of conditions and requirements.
See also judgment in Sogia Ellas v Commission (T-347/20).