Case T-166/21: Action brought on 29 March 2021 — Autorità di sistema portuale del Mare Ligure occidentale and Others v Commission
Date: 2021-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, harbour installation, port administration, public institution, right to justice, rights of the defence, tax exemption








C_2021189EN.01002301.xml










17.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/23






Action brought on 29 March 2021 — Autorità di sistema portuale del Mare Ligure occidentale and Others v Commission
(Case T-166/21)
(2021/C 189/26)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: Autorità di sistema portuale del Mare Ligure occidentale and 15 other applicants (represented by: F. Munari, I. Perego, G. Roberti and S. Zunarelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Commission’s decision;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action has been brought against Commission Decision C(2020) 8498 final of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.38399 2019/C (ex 2018/E) implemented by Italy — Taxation of ports in Italy.
That decision classified as State aid the exemption, which is established for the port system authorities in Italy, from corporate income tax.
In support of the action, the applicants rely on the following arguments and pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the decision is incorrect and infringes Article 107(1) TFEU in so far as it asserts that the Port System Authorities perform an economic activity under the terms identified by the Commission. The applicants claim in that regard that the Commission erred in considering itself entitled to transpose the criteria developed in the practice and case-law relating to the ports of other Member States or to other types of infrastructure, also infringing the general principles of equal treatment and sound administration.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the decision is incorrect and infringes Article 107(1) TFEU in so far as the Commission misinterpreted the pleadings raised by Italy concerning the absence of a market, since that sector is not open to competition by virtue of a choice of the national legislature.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed Article 345 TFEU and Articles 3, 7 and 121 TFEU, and also failed to observe multiple principles of EU law, since it failed to appreciate that the Treaty does not affect the right of Member States to maintain public ownership of port assets and infrastructure and to entrust and reserve the regulation and management thereof exclusively to infra-State bodies such as the Port System Authorities.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the decision is incorrect and infringes Article 107(1) TFEU in so far as:






—


it considered that there was a transfer of State resources;










—


it regarded the taxation regime applicable to the Port System Authorities as selective; and










—


it regarded the taxation regime applicable to Italian ports as liable to distort competition and trade between Member States.














5.


The decision is also vitiated by a failure to investigate and to state reasons.