Joined Cases T‑515/13 and T‑719/13

Kingdom of Spain and Others

v

European Commission

‛State aid — Shipbuilding — Tax provisions applicable to certain agreements put in place for the financing and acquisition of vessels — Decision declaring the aid incompatible in part with the internal market and ordering its partial recovery — Actions for annulment — Individual concern — Admissibility — Advantage — Selectivity — Effect on trade between Member States — Adverse effect on competition — Obligation to state reasons’

Summary — Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber), 17 December 2015

State aid — Commission decision finding aid incompatible with the internal market — Obligation to state reasons — Scope — Characterising of the adverse effect on competition and of the affecting of trade between Member States

Judicial proceedings — Introduction of new pleas during the proceedings — Inadequate statement of reasons — Plea capable of being raised at any stage of the proceedings

Actions for annulment — Grounds — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Lack of or inadequate statement of reasons — To be considered of the Court’s own motion

State aid — Concept — Selective nature of the measure — Derogation from the general tax system — Measure of a general nature applicable without discrimination to all economic operators — Alleged discretionary power in granting the tax advantage — No selective character

State aid — Concept — Selective nature of the measure — Derogation from the general tax system — Measure favouring a certain type of investment — Operation available, under the same conditions, to any undertaking without discrimination — Not selective in character

EU law — Interpretation — Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — To be taken into account when interpreting the operative part

Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Interest in bringing proceedings — Interest in bringing proceedings established for one of the applicants — Other applicant alleged to have no interest in bringing proceedings — Admissibility of the action

Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Measures of direct and individual concern to them — Decision of the Commission addressed to a Member State and finding an aid partially incompatible with the internal market — Action brought by an undertaking having received individual aid granted under that scheme and that must be recovered — Admissibility

See the text of the decision. (see paras 85-89)

See the text of the decision. (see para. 90)

See the text of the decision. (see para. 94)

In State aid matters, when assessing the selectivity of a State measure, the existence of a derogation from or exception to the reference framework identified by the Commission cannot, in itself, establish that the measure at issue favours ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’ within the meaning of Article 107 TFEU, if that measure is available, a priori, to any undertaking. The fact that the advantages at issue are granted on the basis of an investment in a particular asset, to the exclusion of other assets or other types of investments, does not mean that they are selective vis-à-vis investors, in so far as the operation is available, under the same conditions, to any undertaking without discrimination. It follows that, where an advantage is granted, on the same terms, to any undertaking on the basis of a certain type of investment available to any operator, it acquires a general nature with respect to those operators and does not constitute State aid in favour of them. (see paras 140-143, 146-148, 155, 180)

In the area of State aid, the tax advantage which any undertaking may enjoy by reason of the realisation of a certain type of investment accessible to any economic operator cannot be regarded as being selective on the basis of an alleged discretionary power of the tax administration, since that power consists, de jure and de facto, only in the definition of the type of operation eligible to benefit from the tax advantages at issue. (see paras 160, 163)

See the text of the decision. (see paras 177, 183)

See the text of the decision. (see para. 183)