62021TJ0668_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 October 2022 –Siremar v Commission
(Case T‑668/21) (
1
)
(State aid – Maritime transport – Rescue aid – Decision declaring the aid unlawful – Decision declaring the aid in part compatible and in part incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery – Service of general economic interest – Obligation to submit a restructuring or liquidation plan – Six-month time limit – Extension – Tax exemption – Advantage – Effect on trade between Member States – Adverse effect on competition – Length of proceedings – Legitimate expectations – Legal certainty – Principle of sound administration)
1.
State aid – Prohibition – Exceptions – Aid capable of being regarded as compatible with the internal market – Aid for rescuing an undertaking in difficulty – Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring undertakings in difficulty – Conditions for the grant of rescue aid – Obligation to submit a restructuring or liquidation plan within six months of the approval of the aid
(Commission Notice 2004/C 244/02, points 15, 25 and 26)
(see paragraphs 30-38, 42, 43)
2.
State aid – Prohibition – Exceptions – Discretion of the Commission – Adoption by the Commission of guidelines governing the compatibility of aid with the internal market – Consequences – Self-limitation of its discretion – Obligation to comply with the principles of equal treatment and protection of legitimate expectations
(Commission Notice 2004/C 244/02)
(see paragraphs 39, 40)
3.
State aid – Concept – Grant of an advantage to the beneficiaries – Burden of proving an advantage on the Commission – Relevant date for the purpose of determining whether there is an advantage – Date of the legally binding measure requiring the competent national authority to grant the aid – Aid which can materialise only upon the occurrence of future and uncertain events – Irrelevant
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 55-61)
4.
State aid – Commission decision finding aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery – Whether possible for the Commission to leave to national authorities the task of calculating the exact amount to be recovered – Obligation for the Commission to provide a calculation method – Obligation for national authorities to take into account all relevant elements brought to their knowledge, including exchanges between those authorities and the Commission
(Art. 108(2) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 62, 64-68)
5.
State aid – Decision of the Commission finding aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery – Difficulties in implementation – Duty of the Commission and of the Member State to collaborate in seeking a solution compatible with the Treaty
(Art. 4(3) TEU; Art. 108(2) TFEU)
(see paragraph 63)
6.
State aid – Effect on trade between Member States – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Aid which may affect that trade and distort competition – Concept
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 71-75)
7.
State aid – Effect on trade between Member States – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Aid enabling an undertaking in difficulty to remain on the market – Aid which may distort the conditions for competition
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 76-78)
8.
State aid – Recovery of unlawful aid – Obligation – Recipients in difficulty or bankrupt – Irrelevant
(Art. 108(2) TFEU)
(see paragraph 80)
9.
State aid – Recovery of unlawful aid – Aid granted in breach of the procedural rules of Article 108 TFEU – Legitimate expectations entertained by the recipients – None save in exceptional circumstances – Legitimate expectations arising from the excessive length of the administrative procedure – Obligation for the Commission to give a decision within a reasonable time – Assessment of actual situation
(Art. 108 TFEU; Council Regulation 2015/1589, Arts 15(2) and 16(1) and (2))
(see paragraphs 89-118, 123-128)
10.
State aid – Concept – Assessment under Article 107(1) TFEU only – Taking into account previous practice – Precluded
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 121, 122, 134)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA – Siremar to pay the costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.