62018TJ0447_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 September 2021 –TUIfly v Commission
(Case T‑447/18)
(State aid – Agreements concluded by Kärntner Flughafen Betriebsgesellschaft with airlines Hapag Lloyd Express and TUIfly – Airport services – Marketing services – Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery – Advantage – Private investor test – Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Right of access to the file – Right to be heard)
1.
State aid – Administrative procedure – Obligations of the Commission – Possible for aid beneficiary to rely on rights as extensive as defence rights as such – Absence – Right of the aid beneficiary to be involved in the procedure to the extent appropriate – Scope – Right of access to the Commission’s administrative file – None
(Art. 108(2) TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41)
(see paras 40-55)
2.
State aid – Concept – Selective nature of the measure – Distinction between the requirement for selectivity and the concomitant detection of an economic advantage, and between an aid scheme and individual aid – Individual aid – Airport and marketing services agreements providing an advantage to an airline – Presumption of selectivity – Service agreements that have been preceded by open tenders to all interested airlines – Irrelevant
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paras 63-73)
3.
State aid – Concept – Assessment according to the criterion of the private investor – Assessment of all factors relevant to the transaction at issue and its context – No hierarchy between the comparative analysis method and other methods of assessment
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paras 77-80)
4.
State aid – Commission decision – Assessment of the legality by reference to the information available at the time of adoption of the decision
(Arts 108(2) and 263 TFEU)
(see para. 91)
5.
State aid – Concept – Assessment according to the criterion of the private investor – Reasonableness of the operation for a private investor following a relatively long-term strategy – Airport and marketing services agreements providing an advantage to an airline – Analysis of the profitability of the agreements – Assessment carried out by limiting the time frame to the duration of the agreements – Whether permissible
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paras 92-100, 107, 108, 119)
6.
State aid – Concept – Assessment having regard to Article 107(1) TFEU – Taking into account previous practice – Not included
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paras 102, 198)
7.
Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Commission decision on State aid – Examination of the private investor test – Statement of reasons which led the Commission to assess the profitability of the agreements concerned by limiting the time frame to their duration – Sufficient statement of reasons
(Art. 296 TFEU)
(see paras 120, 121)
8.
State aid – Concept – Grant of an advantage to the beneficiaries – Airport and marketing services agreements providing an advantage to an airline – Analysis of the profitability of the agreements – Taking into account the aid granted to the airport manager in order to partially finance those agreements as marginal revenue – Absence
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paras 138-147)
9.
State aid – Prohibition – Exceptions – Discretion of the Commission – Judicial review – Limits
(Art. 107(1) and (3) TFEU)
(see paras 183-185)
10.
State aid – Prohibition – Exceptions – Aid capable of benefiting from the derogation under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU – Conditions – Incentive effect and need for aid – Airport and marketing services agreements providing an advantage to an airline – Agreements which bring about an improvement in the financial situation of the beneficiary undertaking without it being necessary to achieve the objectives specified in Article 107(3)(c) TFEU – Not included
(Art. 107(3)(c) TFEU)
(see paras 186-196)
Re:
Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2018/628 of 11 November 2016 on State aid SA.24221(2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Austria for the Klagenfurt airport, Ryanair and other airlines using the airport (OJ 2018 L 107, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders TUIfly GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.