Order — ECLI:EU:T:2002:266
Date: 2002-11-04
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (1951)
Subject matter: State aids;Competition
Concepts: Investments and financial aid;General
Procedure: Action for annulment - decision unnecessary
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Order 
1. ECSC — Aid to the steel industry — Commission decision to open a formal 
examination procedure in relation to a State measure — Effects — Prohibition on 
implementation prior to a final decision by the Commission — Right of interested 
third parties to bring att action before national courts to obtain recovery of sums 
unlawfully paid 
(General Decision No 2496/96, Art. 6(4), first subpara., and (5)) 
II - 4535 
SUMMARY — CASE T-90/99 
2. ECSC — Aid to the steel industry — Commission decision to open a formal 
examination procedure in relation to a State measure — Effects — Irrelevant to the 
lawfulness of the measure in question 
(General Decision No 2496/96, Art. 6(5)) 
3. Actions for annulment — Action brought against a Commission decision to open the 
formal examination procedure provided for in the Sixth Steel Aid Code in relation to a 
State measure — Adoption of a final decision declaring the measure in question to be 
incompatible with the common market and ordering recovery of the aid — Action 
rendered devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate 
(ECSC Treaty, Art. 33, second para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, 
Arts 113 and 114(3); General Decision No 2496/96) 
1. Where the formal examination pro­
cedure provided for in Article 6(5) of 
the Sixth Steel Aid Code is initiated, the 
prohibition on the implementation of 
aid measures planned by the Member 
States without the Commission's 
approval, provided for in the first 
subparagraph of Article 6(4) of that 
code, continues until the Commission 
reaches a final decision on the com­
patibility of the planned aid with the 
common market and has direct effect 
so that any interested third parties may 
invoke it before a national court in 
order to obtain, in particular, recovery 
of financial support which has been 
granted notwithstanding the absence of 
approval. 
(see para. 12) 
2. The decision to open the formal exam­
ination procedure provided for in 
Article 6(5) of the Sixth Steel Aid Code 
does not in itself produce any irrevers­
ible effects as regards the legality of the 
State measure it concerns. It is only the 
Commission decision closing that pro­
cedure which, since it definitively 
defines the measure in question as aid, 
has the effect of establishing that it is 
unlawful. 
(see para. 14 ) 
3. The adoption by the Commission of 
the final decision declaring a State 
measure to be incompatible with the 
II - 4536 
SALZGITTER v COMMISSION 
common market and ordering recovery 
of the aid removes any grounds on 
which interested third parties could 
invoke before a national court the 
decision to initiate the formal examin­
ation procedure in order to obtain an 
order for the recovery of the financial 
support granted by way of implemen­
tation of the measure in question and 
renders devoid of purpose the action 
brought by the recipient undertaking 
against the decision to open the pro­
cedure and there is no further need to 
adjudicate on that action. 
(see paras 13, 16-18) 
II - 4537