Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2000:217
Date: 2000-09-27
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Second Chamber, Extended Composition
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: State aids;Competition;Taxation;Excise duties
Concepts: Applications by natural or legal persons;Excise duties;Commission discretion
Procedure: Action for annulment - decision unnecessary;Action for annulment - successful;Action for annulment - inadmissible
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Measures of direct and individual 
concern to them — Measures producing binding legal effects — Measure comprising 
essentially distinct parts 
(EC Treaty, Art. 173, fourth para, (now, after amendment, Article 230 EC, fourth 
para.) 
II-3145 
SUMMARY — CASE T-184/97 
2. State aid — Prohibition — Derogations — Commission's discretion — Limits — 
Difference between that discretion and the margin of discretion inherent in the 
interpretation of a concept in Community legislation 
(EC Treaty, Art. 92(3) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(3) EC); Directive 92/81, 
Art. 8(2)) 
3. Tax provisions — Harmonisation of laws — Excise duties — Directive 92/81 — Pilot 
projects for the technological development of more environmentally-friendly pro­
ducts — Concept — Interpretation in the light of distortions of competition which 
might result from such projects 
(Directive 92/81, Art. 8(2)(d)) 
4. Tax provisions — Harmonisation of laws — Excise duties — Directive 92/81 — Pilot 
projects for the technological development of more environmentally-friendly pro­
ducts — Concept 
(Directive 92/81, Arts 1(1) and 8(2)) 
1. Pursuant to the fourth paragraph of 
Article 173 of the Treaty (now, after 
amendment, the fourth paragraph of 
Article 230 EC), a natural or legal 
person may contest only measures 
which produce binding legal effects 
capable of affecting that person's inter­
ests by bringing about a significant 
change in his/its legal situation. Conse­
quently, where a measure against 
which an action for annulment has 
been brought comprises essentially dis­
tinct parts, only those parts of that 
measure which produce binding legal 
effects capable of bringing about a 
significant change in the applicant's 
legal situation can be challenged. 
(see para. 34) 
2. The broad discretion in the application 
of Article 92(3) of the Treaty (now, 
after amendment, Article 87(3) EC) 
conferred on the Commission by Arti­
cle 93 of the Treaty (now Article 88 
EC) does not permit it to authorise 
Member States to derogate from provi­
sions of Community law other than 
those relating to the application of 
Article 92(1) of the Treaty. 
The margin of discretion which the 
Commission lawfully intends leaving to 
the Member States in applying the 
concept of 'pilot projects for the tech­
nological development of more envir­
onmentally-friendly products' referred 
to in Article 8(2) of Directive 92/81 
must be distinguished from the margin 
of discretion conferred on the Commis­
sion by Article 93 of the Treaty in 
order to determine to what extent State 
aid is compatible with the common 
market within the meaning of Arti-
II - 3146 
BP CHEMICALS V COMMISSION' 
ele 92 of the Treaty. Whereas the 
power conferred on the Commission 
by Article 93 of the Treaty presupposes 
that that institution will undertake 
discretionary appraisals of complex 
economic and social situations, judicial 
review of which must be of a limited 
nature, any appraisal of an application 
of the provision of Directive 92/81 in 
question must, in contrast, be guided 
by a plausible interpretation of the 
legislative concepts of a vague and 
indeterminate character used in it, an 
appraisal which, in the last resort, is a 
matter for the Community judicature. 
Consequently, it is incumbent both on 
the Commission, when appraising a 
notified aid scheme, and on the Com­
munity judicature before which an 
action for annulment has been brought 
to ensure observance of the limits 
inherent in any contextual and reason­
able interpretation of terms used in 
Community legislation. 
(see paras 55-57) 
3. It is clear from the sixth recital to 
Directive 92/81 on the harmonisation 
of the structures of excise duties on 
mineral oils that the whole of Arti­
cle 8(2) of that directive, including, 
therefore, the term 'pilot projects for 
the technological development of more 
environmentally-friendly products' in 
subparagraph (d), must be interpreted 
in the light of the distortions of com­
petition to which the measures apply­
ing that provision are capable of giving 
rise. 
In that connection, it is common 
ground that the closer research and 
development carried out by an under­
taking, in the technological field for 
example, come to the marketing stage 
and, consequently, the commercial 
exploitation of the products concerned, 
the more likely it is that such activities 
will have an impact on competition. It 
is also common ground that pilot or 
demonstration projects usually repre­
sent the last stage of research and 
development before industrial exploi­
tation on a larger scale of the results of 
such research. 
The Commission must therefore inter­
pret the term 'pilot projects for the 
technological development of more 
environmentally-friendly products' not 
only in a textual and restrictive manner 
but also in a manner which takes 
particular account of the proximity of 
the programme for exemption from 
customs duties examined by it to its 
poss ible subsequen t commerc ia l 
exploitation. 
Moreover, the need for consistent 
application of all Community legisla-
I I - 3 1 4 7 
SUMMARY — CASE T-184/97 
tion means that the Community Frame­
work for State Aid for Research and 
Development is one of the factors on 
which the Community judicature may 
rely in determining the scope to be 
attributed to the term. 
(see paras 62-64, 66) 
4. A scheme notified as a programme 
intended to demonstrate the economic 
and industrial viability of a biofuel 
sector does not constitute 'a pilot 
project for the technological develop­
ment of more environmentally-friendly 
products' within the meaning of Direc­
tive 92/81 on the harmonisation of the 
structures of excise duties on mineral 
oils, where that scheme is designed 
essentially not to demonstrate the tech­
nical or technological feasibility of 
producing biofuels but rather to eval­
uate the economic performance and 
industrial capacity of the existing bio­
fuel production plants. 
(see para. 69) 
II - 3148