Case C-442/25, SAS: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms tingsrätt (Sweden) lodged on 4 July 2025 – SAS AB v Staten genom Justitiekanslern
Date: 2025-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, credit rating, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_202504749EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4749


8.9.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms tingsrätt (Sweden) lodged on 4 July 2025 – SAS AB v Staten genom Justitiekanslern


(Case C-442/25, SAS)

(C/2025/4749)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Stockholms tingsrätt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SAS AB

Defendant: Staten genom Justitiekanslern

Questions referred







1.


Is the obligation to pay interest for the period during which a State aid measure was unlawful, which flows, inter alia, from the judgment of the Court of Justice in CELF and Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication (C-199/06, ECLI:EU:C:2008:79), applicable in a situation such as that in the present proceedings, having regard to:






a.


the fact that the notification obligation laid down in Article 108(3) TFEU has been complied with by the Member State which granted the aid;










b.


the fact that the aid was paid out after the Commission’s approval decision;










c.


the fact that the Commission’s approval decision was subsequently annulled by the General Court; and










d.


the fact that the Commission subsequently adopted a new decision stating that the implemented aid measure is compatible with the internal market provided that certain conditions set out in the new decision were fulfilled within two months of the date of the new decision and that those conditions were implemented thereafter within that two-month period?














2.


In the event that there is in fact an obligation to pay interest in the circumstances set out in Question 1, can a situation such as that in the present case before the national court constitute such an exceptional situation which can provide grounds for a limit on the obligation of the aid recipient to pay interest?










3.


Is Article 9(2) of Regulation [No] 794/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the interest which is to be applied in accordance with Article 9(1) of the regulation, in the event that the Commission does not adopt a separate decision, is to be calculated by increasing the base rate established by the Commission by 100 basis points, even where the aid recipient has






i.


weak or bad creditworthiness, or










ii.


good creditworthiness with low collateralisation, or










iii.


satisfactory creditworthiness with normal or low collateralisation (see Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates (2008/C 14/02)?














4.


If the answer to the previous question is in the affirmative, is Article 108(3) TFEU to be interpreted as precluding a national provision which provides that the provisions on calculation of interest in Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 TFEU are also to apply where the Commission has not adopted any decision in the case?






(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2004 L 140, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4749/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)