Case T-530/08: Action brought on 2 December 2008 — Diputación Foral de Guipúzcoa v Commission
Date: 2008-12-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, State aid, action for annulment (EU), aid system, corporation tax, electrical engineering, tax exemption

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/47

Action brought on 2 December 2008 — Diputación Foral
de Álava v Commission

Finally,
the applicant submits that, by requiring compound
interest, the Commission is imposing a penalty not provided for
in Community law.

(Case T-529/08)

(2009/C 32/90)

Language of the case: Spanish

(1) Both decisions were challenged before the Court of First Instance
(Cases T-227/01 Diputación Foral de Álava and Gobierno Vasco v
Commission, and T-230/01 Diputación Foral de Álava and Gobierno
Vasco v Commission, still sub judice).

Parties

Applicant: Territorio Histórico de Álava — Diputación Foral de
Álava (represented by: I. Sáenz-Cortabarría Fernández and M.
Morales Isasi, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Declaration that the letter from the Directorate General of
the European Commission D/53778
Competition of
[COMP/H4/NM/ed D(2008) 247], of 2 October 2008,
is
null and void, in so far as it requires the interest referred to
in Decisions 2002/820/EC and 2002/892/EC, of 11 July
2001 (infringement file 2007/2215), to be recovered on a
compound basis; and

— An order that the Commission should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The purpose of the present action is to challenge the decision in
which the defendant takes the view that, in implementing the
decisions of 11 July 2001, on the State aid scheme implemented
by Spain for firms in Álava in the form of a tax credit
amounting to 45 % of investments (Decision 2002/820/EC) and
on the State aid scheme applied by Spain to certain newly estab-
lished firms in Álava (Decision 2002/892/EC) (1), the rate of
interest to be applied in the recovery is a compound rate of
interest.

In the applicant's view, that decision constitutes a clear de facto
modification of the decisions of 11 July 2001, which, in turn,
represents a manifest abuse of power and an infringement of
the principle of sound administration. In that connection,
it
should be pointed out that the application of a compound rate
of interest was introduced into Community law for the first
time by Article 11(2) of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004, laying down detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of
22 March 1999, laying down detailed rules for the application
of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999 L 140, p. 1). However,
that provision is not applicable ratione temporis to the Decisions
of 11 July 2001.

Similarly, the change to the actual contents of those decisions
made by the Commission, in terms of the rate of interest applic-
able,
is an infringement of the principle of equal treatment,
since both the authorities charged with implementing the Deci-
sions of 17 July 2001 and the companies affected have been
placed in a different position from that of the competent autho-
rities in the Member States (and companies) affected by deci-
sions for the recovery of aid contemporaneous with or prior to
July 2001 which have not been required to pay compound
interest in the aid recovery process.

Action brought on 2 December 2008 — Diputación Foral
de Guipúzcoa v Commission

(Case T-530/08)

(2009/C 32/91)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Territorio Histórico de Guipúzcoa — Diputación
Foral de Guipúzcoa (represented by:
I. Sáenz-Cortabarría
Fernández and M. Morales Isasi, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Declaration that the letter from the Directorate General of
the European Commission D/53778
Competition of
is
[COMP/H4/NM/ed D(2008) 247], of 2 October 2008,
null and void, in so far as it requires the interest referred to
in Decisions 2002/894/EC and 2002/540/EC, of 11 July
2001 (infringement file 2007/2215), to be recovered on a
compound basis; and

— An order that the Commission should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those put forward in
Case T-529/08 Diputación Foral de Álava v Commission.