Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Appeals – Grounds – Appeal against a judgment ruling on joined cases – Possibility of any party directing a plea against any reasoning of the Court, irrespective of the pleas it has lodged before the latter

(Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)

2. State aid – Provisions of the Treaty – Scope ratione temporis – Accession of Poland to the European Union – Protocol No 8 on the restructuring of the Polish steel industry, annexed to the Act of Accession of 2003

(Arts 87 EC and 88 EC; Act of Accession of 2003, Protocol No 8)

3. Community law – Principles – Protection of legitimate expectations – Limits

Summary

1. In appeal proceedings, given that a party must be able to challenge all the grounds for a judgment adversely affecting it, when the General Court has joined two cases and given a single judgment which answers all the pleas submitted by the parties to the proceedings before the Court, each of those parties may, without being accused of introducing a new plea, criticise the reasoning concerning pleas which, before the General Court, were raised by the applicant in the other joined case. The plea is not therefore a new one, even if it was not raised by the applicant at first instance but by the other applicant in the joined case.

(see para. 85)

2. In order to ensure observance of the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations, the substantive rules of Community law must be interpreted as applying to situations existing before their entry into force only in so far as it follows clearly from their terms, objectives or general scheme that such effect must be given to them.

It is clear from the wording of Protocol No 8 on the restructuring of the Polish steel industry, annexed to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded that it provides for retrospective effect by making express provision in respect of a period which had in large measure elapsed at the time of its entry into force on 1 May 2004.

The establishment of a system enabling the Commission to exercise monitoring of State aid by virtue of the Treaty over any aid granted for the restructuring of Polish steelmaking even before the accession of Poland to the Union was the logical consequence of the continuity of subject-matter between the Association Agreement with Poland which preceded its accession and the Treaty as regards State aid, expressing the objective of applying a single monitoring regime before and after accession. The purpose of Protocol No 8 was to establish a comprehensive system for the authorisation of aid intended for the restructuring of the Polish steel industry and not merely to avoid the aggregation of aid by benefiting companies. Protocol No 8 represents a lex specialis in relation to Articles 87 EC and 88 EC, which extended the power of the Commission to monitor aid granted in favour of the restructuring of the Polish steel industry during the period from 1997 to 2003.

(see paras 98-101, 103)

3. The right to rely on the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations extends to any person in a situation in which the Community administration has, by giving him precise assurances, caused him to entertain justified expectations. In the area of State aid, as regards the condition concerning precise assurances, a proposal for a decision from the Commission submitted to the Council cannot provide the foundation for any legitimate expectation whatsoever that the aid in question will be compatible with the legal rules of the Union

(see paras 123-124)