# C_2023104EN.01003601.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/36

---

Action brought on 22 December 2022 — Wizz Air Hungary v Commission

(Case T-827/22)

(2023/C 104/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the European Commission’s decision (EU) of 29 April 2022 on State Aid SA.63360 (2021/N) — Romania COVID-19 — TAROM — damage compensation II (1); and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the European Commission’s decision (EU) of 29 April 2022 on State Aid SA.63360 (2021/N) — Romania COVID-19 — TAROM — damage compensation II (1); and

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed manifest errors of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed manifest errors of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalisation of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, the free provision of services — applied to air transport through Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 (2) — and free establishment). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalisation of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, the free provision of services — applied to air transport through Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 (2) — and free establishment).

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the European Commission failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicant’s procedural rights. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the European Commission failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicant’s procedural rights.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated its duty to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated its duty to state reasons.

---

(1)  
  OJ 2022, C 378, p. 2.

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008, on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community, OJ 2008, L 293, p. 3.

---