# C_2023252EN.01005202.xml

| 17.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/52

---

Action brought on 6 April 2023 — Dansk Avis Omdeling Distribution v Commission

(Case T-195/23)

(2023/C 252/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dansk Avis Omdeling Distribution A/S (Vejle, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare the application admissible and well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the application admissible and well founded;

| — | annul Commission Decision C(2022) 5706 final of 10 August 2022 on the State aid SA. 57991 — 2021/C (ex 2021/NN) implemented by Denmark for USO compensation to Post Danmark A/S for 2020; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Decision C(2022) 5706 final of 10 August 2022 on the State aid SA. 57991 — 2021/C (ex 2021/NN) implemented by Denmark for USO compensation to Post Danmark A/S for 2020; and

| — | order the Commission to pay its own costs and those of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay its own costs and those of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the aid granted by Denmark to Post Danmark for the universal service obligations for 2020 is not compatible with the internal market because it does not comply with the framework for services of general economic interest (1) (‘the SGEI Framework’), in that:






  — | the Commission did not conduct a complete and sufficient examination of the matter; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the aid granted by Denmark to Post Danmark for the universal service obligations for 2020 is not compatible with the internal market because it does not comply with the framework for services of general economic interest (1) (‘the SGEI Framework’), in that:

—

the Commission did not conduct a complete and sufficient examination of the matter;

| — | Post Danmark’s cost allocation does not comply with paragraph 18 of the SGEI Framework. |
| --- | --- |

—

Post Danmark’s cost allocation does not comply with paragraph 18 of the SGEI Framework.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the compensation for universal service obligations is not compatible with the internal market because the Net Avoided Cost (NAC) calculation is vitiated by errors of law and fact, in that:






  — | the NAC calculation is based on the assumption that the Post Danmark’s transformation has only taken place in the counterfactual scenario; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the compensation for universal service obligations is not compatible with the internal market because the Net Avoided Cost (NAC) calculation is vitiated by errors of law and fact, in that:

—

the NAC calculation is based on the assumption that the Post Danmark’s transformation has only taken place in the counterfactual scenario;

| — | the Commission does not explain why Post Danmark could not increase prices to cover the excess universal service obligations costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission does not explain why Post Danmark could not increase prices to cover the excess universal service obligations costs;

| — | the amount resulting from the NAC calculation is excessive as it by far exceeds Post Danmark’s net losses from the universal service obligations activities as reflected in Post Danmark’s 2020 annual report; |
| --- | --- |

—

the amount resulting from the NAC calculation is excessive as it by far exceeds Post Danmark’s net losses from the universal service obligations activities as reflected in Post Danmark’s 2020 annual report;

| — | errors have been committed in the counterfactual scenario; |
| --- | --- |

—

errors have been committed in the counterfactual scenario;

| — | the Commission erred is its assessment of the advantages deriving from the following intangible benefits relating to the universal service obligations: (a) intellectual property assets; (b) economies of scale; (c) bargaining power; (d) universal coverage; (e) ubiquity and corporate reputation; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission erred is its assessment of the advantages deriving from the following intangible benefits relating to the universal service obligations: (a) intellectual property assets; (b) economies of scale; (c) bargaining power; (d) universal coverage; (e) ubiquity and corporate reputation;

| — | the benchmarking exercise carried out for verifying the results of the NAC calculation is flawed. |
| --- | --- |

—

the benchmarking exercise carried out for verifying the results of the NAC calculation is flawed.

---

(1)  Communication from the Commission — European Union framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (2011) (OJ 2012 C 8, p. 15).

---