# C_2013038EN.01002301.xml

| 9.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/23

---

Order of the General Court of 12 December 2012 — Sacaim and Others v Commission

(Case T-261/00) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - State aid - Reductions in social security contributions for undertakings in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and imposing the recovery of the aid paid - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 38/40

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Sacaim SpA (Venice, Italy); Alfier Costruzioni Srl (Venice); Azin Asfalti Srl (Venice); Barbato Srl (Venice); Camata Costruzioni Sas (Venice); Dal Carlo Mario & C. Srl (Venice); Impresa Costruzioni Civili e Montaggi Srl (ICCEM) (Marghera, Italy); Rossi Renzo Costruzioni Srl (Marcon, Italy); Vettore Costruzioni Srl (Venice); ACEA — Associazione dei Costruttori Edili ed Affini di Venezia e Provincia (Venice); and Comitato ‘Venezia vuole vivere’ (Marghera) (represented by: A. Vianello, M. Merola, A. Sodano and M. Pappalardo, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicants: The Italian Republic (represented: initially by U. Leanza, then by I. Braguglia, then by R. Adam, and finally by I. Bruni, Agents, and by G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)

Intervener in support of the applicants:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000, L 150, p. 50).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance of the case. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance of the case.

| 2. | The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 3. | Sacaim SpA, Alfier Costruzioni Srl, Azin Asfalti Srl, Barbato Srl, Camata Costruzioni Sas, Dal Carlo Mario & C. Srl, Impresa Costruzioni Civili e Montaggi Srl (ICCEM), Rossi Renzo Costruzioni Srl, Vettore Costruzioni Srl, ACEA — Associazione dei Costruttori Edili ed Affini di Venezia e Provincia and Comitato ‘Venezia vuole vivere’ are ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Sacaim SpA, Alfier Costruzioni Srl, Azin Asfalti Srl, Barbato Srl, Camata Costruzioni Sas, Dal Carlo Mario & C. Srl, Impresa Costruzioni Civili e Montaggi Srl (ICCEM), Rossi Renzo Costruzioni Srl, Vettore Costruzioni Srl, ACEA — Associazione dei Costruttori Edili ed Affini di Venezia e Provincia and Comitato ‘Venezia vuole vivere’ are ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission.

| 4. | The Italian Republic is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Italian Republic is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.

1

---