# C_2005155EN.01003101.xml

| 25.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/31

---

Action brought on 6 May 2005 by Stradeblu s.r.l. against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-179/05)

(2005/C 155/59)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 6 May 2005 by Stradeblu s.r.l. established in Cagliari, represented by Alberto M. Rossi, lawyer, for annulment of Decision 2005/163/EC of 16 March 2004 on the State aid paid by Italy to the Adriatica, Caremar, Siremar, Saremar and Toremar shipping companies (Tirrenia Group), and particularly Article 1 thereof, which provides that ‘without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, the aid granted by Italy to Adriatica as of 1 January 1992 as compensation for providing a public service is compatible with the common market having regard to Article 86(2) of the Treaty’.

without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, the aid granted by Italy to Adriatica as of 1 January 1992 as compensation for providing a public service is compatible with the common market having regard to Article 86(2) of the Treaty

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | annul the contested decision, and particularly Article 1 thereof, in so far as it authorises the aid granted to Adriatica (as it then was, now called Tirrenia di Navigazione S.p.A) in respect of the Genoa (Voltri) to Palermo (Termini Imprese) route; |
| --- | --- |

1.

annul the contested decision, and particularly Article 1 thereof, in so far as it authorises the aid granted to Adriatica (as it then was, now called Tirrenia di Navigazione S.p.A) in respect of the Genoa (Voltri) to Palermo (Termini Imprese) route;

| 2. | order repayment of the aid unlawfully received by Adriatica (and, as from 26 July 2004, by Tirrenia di Navigazione S.p.A.) in respect of the transport services rendered on the Genoa (Voltri) to Palermo (Termini Imprese) route; |
| --- | --- |

2.

order repayment of the aid unlawfully received by Adriatica (and, as from 26 July 2004, by Tirrenia di Navigazione S.p.A.) in respect of the transport services rendered on the Genoa (Voltri) to Palermo (Termini Imprese) route;

| 3. | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present proceedings have been instituted against the decision of the Commission in respect of the State aid paid by Italy to the Adriatica, Caremar, Siremar, Saremar and Toremar shipping companies (Tirrenia Group) (1) and particularly Article 1 thereof, which provides that ‘without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, the aid granted by Italy to Adriatica as of 1 January 1992 as compensation for providing a public service is compatible with the common market having regard to Article 86(2) of the Treaty’.

1

without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, the aid granted by Italy to Adriatica as of 1 January 1992 as compensation for providing a public service is compatible with the common market having regard to Article 86(2) of the Treaty

In support of its claims, the applicant points to the inconsistency between the contested decision and Decision 2001/851/EC of 21 June 2001 on the aid paid by Italy to Tirrenia di Navigazione S.p.A. In that decision, the defendant took account of the obligation undertaken by the Italian authorities to eliminate the services provided by Tirrenia on the Genoa (Voltri) to Palermo (Termini Imprese) route, for a further five-year period, with the effect that that route was no longer taken into account in calculating the compensation for providing a public service. It is also stated in that decision that on the route in question the services provided by the private operator satisfy the requirements of public service laid down by the agreements entered into with the State, in terms of their capacity and frequency.

In the contested decision, by contrast, the Commission:

| — | adopts no measure against the Italian authorities for failing to comply with the obligation formally undertaken in the presence of the defendant to eliminate the service on the route; |
| --- | --- |

—

adopts no measure against the Italian authorities for failing to comply with the obligation formally undertaken in the presence of the defendant to eliminate the service on the route;

| — | declares that the Voltri/Termini Imprese route, served by Adriatica in competition with other private undertakings, can be subsidised in that ‘...these operators' supply cannot be regarded as comparable to Adriatica's in terms of regularity, frequency and type of ship stipulated by the Italian authorities in the public service agreement’ (paragraph 103 of the decision). |
| --- | --- |

—

declares that the Voltri/Termini Imprese route, served by Adriatica in competition with other private undertakings, can be subsidised in that ‘...these operators' supply cannot be regarded as comparable to Adriatica's in terms of regularity, frequency and type of ship stipulated by the Italian authorities in the public service agreement’ (paragraph 103 of the decision).

In short, the applicant alleges a failure to state reasons and/or inconsistency in the statement of reasons given for the contested decision and an infringement of Regulation No 3577/92 (2).

2

---

(1)  Commission Decision 2005/163/EC of 16 March 2004 on the State aid paid by Italy to the Adriatica, Caremar, Siremar, Saremar and Toremar shipping companies (Tirrenia Group) (notified under document number C(2004) 470) (OJ 2005 L 53, p. 29).

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) (OJ 1992 L 364, p. 7).

2

---