Order — ECLI:EU:C:2017:952
Date: 2017-12-07
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Subject matter: State aids;Competition
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible;Judgment delivered after back reference
Origin: Italy

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 7 December 2017 — Eurallumina v Commission (Case C‑323/16 P) (1) (Appeal — State aid — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Intervention — Cross-appeal — Admissibility — Exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production — Principle of presumption of the legality and of the effet utile of acts of the institutions — Principle lex specialis derogat legi generali — Selective nature of the measure — Existing or new aid — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Article 1(b)(ii) — Principle of legal certainty — Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations — Duty to state reasons) 1. Appeal — Grounds — Appeal brought against a judgment ruling on joint cases — Whether possible for any party to raise a plea against any of the grounds of the General Court which adversely affect it, irrespective of the pleas raised by it before the General Court (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 26-28) 2. Appeal — Cross-appeal — Subject matter — Need to rely on different grounds than those relied upon in the response to the appeal in the main proceedings — Cross-appeal relying on grounds of appeal which are partly independent of and distinct from those raised in the main appeal — Statement of all of the grounds in the cross-appeal, including those put forward in the response — Lawfulness (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 172, 174, 176 and 178(1) and (3)) (see paras 29-31) 3. Appeal — Cross-appeal — Grounds — Specific criticism of a point of the General Court’s reasoning necessary (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 178(3)) (see paras 33, 38, 53) 4. Judicial proceedings — Judgment of the Court of Justice binding the General Court — Conditions — Reference back following an appeal — Points of law finally determined by the Court of Justice in the context of the appeal — Duty of the General Court to state reasons (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 61, second para.) (see paras 42-49, 56, 57, 67-69) 5. State aid — Definition — Selective nature of the measure —National measure such as to favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods in comparison with others in a comparable factual and legal situation (Art. 87(1) EC) (see paras 60-63) 6. Judicial proceedings — Judgment of the Court of Justice binding the General Court — Conditions — Reference back following an appeal — Points of law finally determined by the Court of Justice in the context of the appeal — Obligation of the General Court to draw consequences from the legal considerations set out by the Court of Justice (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 61, second para.) (see paras 74-77) 7. Appeal — Grounds — Plea alleging that the General Court failed to respond to a plea — Rules on submission (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 169(2) and 178(3)) (see para. 83) 8. Appeal — Grounds — Mistaken assessment of the facts — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts put before the General Court — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 85, 86, 102) 9. Judicial proceedings — Intervention — Pleas different from those of the main party supported — Admissibility — Condition — Connection with the subject matter of the case (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 40) (see paras 93, 94) 10. State aid — Commission decision to open a formal investigation procedure into a State measure — Obligation to give a decision within a reasonable time — Not relevant in case of aid not properly notified to the Commission — Infringement — No obstacle to recovery of the aid — Limits — Weighing up the imperatives of legal certainty and the public requirements relating to the recovery of the aid granted unlawfully (Art. 88 EC; Council Regulation No 659/1999) (see paras 96-101, 103, 106) 11. Appeal — Grounds — Plea submitted for the first time in the context of the appeal — Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58) (see para.104) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the main appeal and the cross-appeal; 2. Orders Eurallumina SpA to pay the costs relating to the main appeal; 3. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs relating to the cross-appeal; 4. Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs. 1 OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.