do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-415/21: Action brought on 10 July 2021 — Banca Popolare di Bari v Commission
Date: 2021-07-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, bank, control of State aid, credit guarantee, financial aid, indemnification








C_2021401EN.01001301.xml










4.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 401/13






Action brought on 10 July 2021 — Banca Popolare di Bari v Commission
(Case T-415/21)
(2021/C 401/14)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Banca Popolare di Bari SpA (Bari, Italy) (represented by: A. Zoppini, G. Roberti, I. Perego and G. Parisi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


order the European Union, represented by the Commission, to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 280 million as compensation for material damage, as well as an adequate amount of compensation for non-material damage, caused by Commission Decision (EU) 2016/1208 of 23 December 2015 on State aid granted by Italy to the bank Tercas (Case SA.39451 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN));










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s conduct was unlawful






—


In this regard, the applicant claims that there was an infringement which was sufficiently serious given that, in adopting the decision, the Commission (i) had no margin of discretion, since Article 107(1) TFEU is a provision with direct effect which is precise and unconditional, and (ii) made a manifest error of assessment. Furthermore, the Commission relied on insufficient evidence and distorted the case-law of both the General Court (judgment of 19 March 2019, Italy and Others v Commission, T-98/16, T-196/16 and T-198/16, EU:T:2019:167) and of the Court of Justice (judgment of 2 March 2021, Commission v Italy and Others, C-425/19 P, EU:C:2021:154).










—


The provisions infringed by the decision are provisions which confer rights on individuals; therefore, that decision also infringes the freedom to conduct a business and the fundamental right to sound administration.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging material and non-material damage caused to the applicant by the Commission’s unlawful conduct.






—


In this regard, the applicant claims that, in the absence of other possible concurrent factors, it was the Commission’s decision which was the determining factor that caused the bank’s clients to lose faith in it and occasioned the losses suffered by it: the Commission blocked the plan to integrate Tercas and Caripe and the planned intervention by the Fondo Interbancario di Tutela dei Depositi (Italian Interbank Deposit Protection Fund; FITD).
Case T-425/21: Action brought on 10 July 2021 — eSlovensko Bratislava v Commission
Date: 2021-07-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financial instrument, abuse of power, eligibility criteria, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to justice, rule of law, trans-European network, transmission network








C_2021431EN.01004101.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/41






Action brought on 10 July 2021 — eSlovensko Bratislava v Commission
(Case T-425/21)
(2021/C 431/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: eSlovensko Bratislava (Bratislava-Staré Mesto, Slovakia) (represented by: B. Fridrich, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Decision C(2020)7415 final of 21 October 2020 amending Implementing Decision C(2018)6712 on the selection and award of grants under the Connecting Europe Facility in the sector of Telecommunication (annex No. 1), delivered to eSlovensko Bratislava on 10 May 2021 by email;










—


order the Commission to reimburse the costs and expenses of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of an essential procedural requirement, exceeding of power, infringement of the Treaties or of any rule of law relating to their application, or misuse of powers, particularly improper legal evaluation of facts and findings (breach of right to good administration, exceeding of power, breach of principle of proportionality, principle of legal certainty, rule of law, principle of legal expectations and improper legal evaluation of facts and findings in the process of the selection and award of grants under Connecting Europe Facility 2018-1 CEF Telecom call for proposals CEF-TC- 2018-1, particularly Action No. 2018-SK-IA-0019 Slovak Safer Internet Centre V submitted by eSlovensko Bratislava).










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission should be ordered to reimburse costs and expenses of the proceedings, in accordance with the above-mentioned arguments and the alleged arbitrary character of the contested Commission decision.