Case T-17/05: Action brought on 10 January 2005 by France Télécom against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-04-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, France, State aid, action for annulment (EU), aid to undertakings, control of State aid, television

C 82/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.4.2005

The applicant further submits that the Commission erred in
law in finding that any element of State aid which might be
linked to recapitalisation would be compatible with the
common market under Article 86(2) EC. In support of its plea
in law, the applicant submits inter alia as follows:

— the scope of Article 86(2) EC is limited to compensation for
the net supplementary costs connected with the provision
of services of general economic interest (public service).
That provision therefore does not cover State investments
in companies which are required to provide those services;

— the Danish State's investment

in TV 2/DANMARK A/S
(recapitalisation) is not compensation for the public-service
related services which it has purchased and is therefore not
compensation for the net supplementary costs arising from
the public-service obligations;

— TV 2/DANMARK A/S is not considered to have net supple-
mentary costs connected with its public-service obligations;

Action brought on 10 January 2005 by France Télécom
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-17/05)

(2005/C 82/63)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 10 January 2005 by France
Télécom, having its principal place of business in Paris, repre-
sented by Antoine Gosset-Grainville and Laurent Godfroid,
lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul Decision No C(2004)3061 adopted by the Commis-
sion on 2 August 2004 concerning State aid implemented
by France in favour of France Télécom;

2. the Commission to pay all the costs of the proceedings.

— the Commission did not check the definition of public
service and thereby accepted a very wide definition of that
term, under which the entire programme schedule of TV 2/
DANMARK A/S constitutes a public service, with the result
that
the proportionality test under Article 86(2) EC is
voided of substance; and

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments put forward by the appli-
cant in the present case are identical to those which it put
forward in Case T-427/04.

— Article 86(2) EC cannot establish an exemption for State
aid which was granted with a view to making State compa-
nies attractive as a step in the State's sale of those compa-
nies.

The applicant also submits that the Commission was limited to
appraising the planned recapitalisation under Article 87(2) EC
and 87(3) EC, in particular Article 87(3)(c) EC, and the Com-
munity guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring
firms in difficulty, (2) and that the planned recapitalisation does
not meet the conditions for exemption under those provisions.

(1) Commission Decision C(2004)1814 final of 19 May 2004 in Case C
2/2003 (ex NN 22/2002) on Danish measures benefiting TV 2/
DANMARK.

(2) Communication from the Commission, OJ C 244 of 1 October

2004, p. 2.

Action brought on 20 January 2005 by Boliden AB, Outo-
kumpu Copper Fabrication AB and Outokumpu Copper
the European
BCZ S.A. against

the Commission of

Communities

(Case T-19/05)

(2005/C 82/64)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 January 2005 by Boliden AB,
established in Stockholm (Sweden), Outokumpu Copper Fabri-
cation AB, established in Västerås (Sweden) and Outokumpu
Copper BCZ S.A., established in Liège (Belguim) represented by
C. Wetter and O. Rislund, lawyers.