do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-177/24: Action brought on 29 March 2024 – Germany v Commission
Date: 2024-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, carriage of goods, carriage of passengers, charges for use of infrastructure, control of State aid, rail transport, tax exemption








C_202403343EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3343


3.6.2024






Action brought on 29 March 2024 – Germany v Commission


(Case T-177/24)

(C/2024/3343)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller und R. Kanitz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the European Commission of 26 January 2024 on state aid SA.110055 (2024/N) – Germany – Amendment of the CHP (1) and Offshore electricity surcharges reductions for railway undertakings in so far as it states that the relief for railways






a)


from the CHP (2) levy,










b)


from the offshore network levy,




constitute state aid under the Energy Financing Law (3) and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicants puts forward a single plea. The European Commission erred in law in interpreting and applying Article 107(1) TFEU by finding that the undertakings affected by the notified measure received aid from the State or through State resources. According to the applicants, the relief for railways from the CHP levy and from the offshore network levy under the Energy Financing Law is not a mandatory levy within the meaning of the Court’s case-law. The funds collected by the network operators are also not under constant State control and are therefore not available to the State.


(1)  Combined heat and power (‘CHP’).

(2)  Gesetz für die Erhaltung, die Modernisierung und den Ausbau der Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung (‘KWKG 2023’) (Law for the maintenance, modernisation and expansion of combined heat and power; ‘CHP Law’) of 21 December 2015 (BGBl. I p. 2498), which was last amended by Article 9 of the Law of 20 December 2022 (BGBl. I p. 2512).

(3)  Gesetz zur Finanzierung der Energiewende im Stromsektor durch Zahlungen des Bundes und Erhebung von Umlagen (EnFG) (Law on financing the energy transition in the electricity sector through federal payments and levying of surcharges; ‘Energy Financing Law’) of 20 July 2022 (BGBl. I p. 1237, 1272), which was last amended by Article 5 of the Law of 26 July 2023 (BGBl. 2023 I No. 202).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3343/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-171/24: Action brought on 29 March 2024 – DH v Commission
Date: 2024-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, incapacity for work, medical report








C_202403178EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3178


21.5.2024






Action brought on 29 March 2024 – DH v Commission


(Case T-171/24)

(C/2024/3178)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: DH (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present action admissible and well founded;










—


annul the Commission’s decision of 15 February 2023, refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the applicant's invalidity;










—


annul the decision of 20 December 2023, communicated by email of 20 December 2023, rejecting the applicant's complaint of 15 May 2023;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





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 a failure to comply with the obligation to state reasons.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the existence of a flawed opinion of the Invalidity Committee and of a manifest error of assessment.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3178/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-236/24, Provincie Oost-Vlaanderen and Sogent: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 29 March 2024 – Provincie Oost-Vlaanderen, Sogent v KG, WA
Date: 2024-03-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: conflict of interest, environmental impact, environmental protection, industrial project








C_202405781EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5781


7.10.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Belgium) lodged on 29 March 2024 – Provincie Oost-Vlaanderen, Sogent v KG, WA


(Case C-236/24, Provincie Oost-Vlaanderen and Sogent)

(C/2024/5781)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Provincie Oost-Vlaanderen, Sogent

Defendants: KG, WA

Question referred

Is Article 9a of Directive 2011/92/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, inserted by Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014, to be interpreted as meaning that, in cases where the competent authority is also the developer, the appropriate separation between conflicting functions when performing the duties arising from that directive must also be applied to the assessment of whether the projects referred to in Article 4(2) of the directive are subject to assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of the directive?


(1)  
            OJ 2012 L 26, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5781/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)