# C_2023104EN.01003501.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/35

---

Action brought on 6 December 2022 — NO v Commission

(Case T-771/22)

(2023/C 104/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NO (represented by: E. Smartt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Commission decision of 27th September 2022; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Commission decision of 27th September 2022;

| — | order the Commission to bear its costs; and, |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to bear its costs; and,

| — | order the applicant’s costs to be reimbursed. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the applicant’s costs to be reimbursed.

Pleas in law and main arguments

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

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission committed a manifest error of assessment and acted in violation of Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1). |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission committed a manifest error of assessment and acted in violation of Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1).

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission committed a manifest error of assessment in its review of the lawfulness of the aid to the obligation to meet the conditions of Regulation (EU) Νο 1407/2013 (2). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission committed a manifest error of assessment in its review of the lawfulness of the aid to the obligation to meet the conditions of Regulation (EU) Νο 1407/2013 (2).

| 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 to submit comments on the elements that raise serious doubts as to the compatibility of the aid with the Internal Market. |
| --- | --- |

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 to submit comments on the elements that raise serious doubts as to the compatibility of the aid with the Internal Market.

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

4.

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

| 5. | Fifth plea in law, alleging that that the European Commission failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite evidence of a failure by [the Member State] to secure the applicant’s fundamental rights, in breach of Article 19(1) TEU. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law, alleging that that the European Commission failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite evidence of a failure by [the Member State] to secure the applicant’s fundamental rights, in breach of Article 19(1) TEU.

| 6. | Sixth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission’s decision violates specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law regarding the prohibition of discrimination based on nationality, property or status and free movement of services and the principle of equality before the law. Regulation (EU) Νο 1407/2013 provides for an exception to the obligation to notify State aid under Article 108(3) TFEU, but it does not provide for an exception to the other rules and principles of the TFEU or EU law, including Article 107(1) TFEU. |
| --- | --- |

6.

Sixth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission’s decision violates specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law regarding the prohibition of discrimination based on nationality, property or status and free movement of services and the principle of equality before the law. Regulation (EU) Νο 1407/2013 provides for an exception to the obligation to notify State aid under Article 108(3) TFEU, but it does not provide for an exception to the other rules and principles of the TFEU or EU law, including Article 107(1) TFEU.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (codification) (OJ 2015, L 248, p. 9).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 1407/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid (OJ 2013, L 352, p. 1).

---