ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT
3 April 2014 (*)
(Appeal — Intervention — Representative professional association — Admission)
In Case C‑303/13 P,
APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 3 June 2013,
European Commission, represented by L. Armati and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
appellant,
the other parties to the proceedings being:
Jørgen Andersen, residing in Ballerup (Denmark), represented by J. Rivas Andrés, abogado, and G. van de Walle de Ghelcke, avocat,
applicant at first instance,
Kingdom of Denmark, represented by V. Pasternak Jørgensen, acting as Agent, and by R. Holdgaard, advokat,
Danske Statsbaner (DSB), established in Copenhagen (Denmark), represented by M. Honoré, advokat,
interveners at first instance,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT,
having regard to the proposal of A. Arabadjiev, Judge-Rapporteur,
after hearing the Advocate General, M. Wathelet,
makes the following
Order
1        By its appeal, the European Commission seeks to have set aside the judgment in Case T‑92/11 Andersen v Commission EU:T:2013:143, by which the General Court annulled the second paragraph of Article 1 of Commission Decision 2011/3/EU of 24 February 2010 concerning public transport service contracts between the Danish Ministry of Transport and Danske Statsbaner (State Aid C 41/08 (ex NN 35/08)) (OJ 2011 L 7, p. 1).
2        By documents lodged at the Court Registry on 16 August 2013, the Kingdom of Denmark and Danske Statsbaner (DSB), lodged two cross-appeals, under Article 176 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court.
3        By document lodged at the Registry on 30 September 2013, Dansk Tog, an association governed by Danish law established in Copenhagen (Denmark), represented by J. Rivas Andrés, abogado, and G. van de Walle de Ghelcke, avocat, applied for leave to intervene in the present case, under the second paragraph of Article 40 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, in support of the form of order sought by Mr Andersen. The parties to the proceedings did not submit observations on that application.
4        The application to intervene was submitted in accordance with Articles 130 and 190(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure.
5        Under the second paragraph of Article 40 of the Statute of the Court, the right to intervene in a case before the Court is open to any person establishing an interest in the result of that case.
6        In that regard, Dansk Tog states that it is an association representing the interests of commercial rail transport operators in Denmark and that the decision of the Court in the present case is liable to affect the interests of its members to an appreciable extent.
7        According to settled case-law, the concept of ‘an interest in the result of the case’, within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 40 of the Statute of the Court, must be defined in the light of the precise subject-matter of the dispute and be understood as meaning a direct, existing interest in the ruling on the forms of order sought and not as an interest in relation to the pleas in law or arguments put forward. The term ‘result of the case’ refers to the operative part of the final judgment which the parties ask the Court to deliver (see order of the President of the Court of 6 November 2013 in Case C‑28/13 P Thesing and Bloomberg Finance v ECB, paragraph 8 and the case-law cited).
8        In particular, an application for leave to intervene submitted by a professional association may be admitted where it is a representative association whose object is the protection of its members in cases raising questions of principle liable to affect those members (see order of the President of the Court in Thesing and Bloomberg Finance v ECB, paragraph 11 and the case-law cited).
9        In the present case, first of all, it is apparent from Dansk Tog’s observations in support of its application that, if the market share of Danske Statsbaner (DSB) is disregarded, its members operate more than 95% of passenger rail transport in Denmark. Consequently, Dansk Tog must be regarded as being a representative professional association within the meaning of the case-law cited in the preceding paragraph of this order.
10      Next, it is apparent from Article 3 of Dansk Tog’s statutes, annexed to that application, that the objects of that association include the protection of its members’ interests. Dansk Tog further states that it submitted one of the two complaints to the Commission which gave rise to the present proceedings.
11      Lastly, Dansk Tog correctly observes that the present case concerns not only whether the aid granted since 2000 by the Kingdom of Denmark to the main competitor of Dansk Tog’s members is lawful, but also the matter of identifying the substantive rules of law temporally applicable in order to assess whether that aid is compatible with the internal market. It follows that the present case raises issues liable to affect Dansk Tog’s members.
12      It follows from the foregoing that Dansk Tog has established an interest in the result of the case and that it must accordingly be admitted as an intervener.
Costs
13      Since Dansk Tog’s application to intervene is granted, the costs relating to that intervention are reserved.
On those grounds, the President of the Court hereby orders:
1.      Dansk Tog is granted leave to intervene in Case C‑303/13 P in support of the form of order sought by Mr Jørgen Andersen.
2.      A period shall be prescribed within which Dansk Tog is to state in writing the pleas in law in support of the form of order which it seeks.
3.      The Registrar shall ensure that copies of all the procedural documents are served on Dansk Tog.
4.      The costs are reserved.
[Signatures]
* Language of the case: English.