CELEX: 62013CN0690
Language: en
Date: 2013-12-27 00:00:00
Title: Case C-690/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio Thrakis (Greece) lodged on 27 December 2013 — Trapeza Eurobank Ergasias A.E. v Agrotiki Trapeza tis Ellados (A.T.E.), Pavlos Sidiropoulos

15.3.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 78/5
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio Thrakis (Greece) lodged on 27 December 2013 — Trapeza Eurobank Ergasias A.E. v Agrotiki Trapeza tis Ellados (A.T.E.), Pavlos Sidiropoulos
   (Case C-690/13)
   2014/C 78/09
   Language of the case: Greek
   
      Referring court
   
   Efetio Thrakis
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant: Trapeza Eurobank Ergasias A.E.
   
      Respondents: Agrotiki Trapeza tis Ellados (A.T.E.), Pavlos Sidiropoulos
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               
                           (a)
                        
                        
                           Do the substantive and procedural privileges conferred upon ‘A.T.E. A.E.’ by Articles 12 and 13(1) of Law 4332/1929, in conjunction with Article 26(1) of Law 1914/1990, fall within the scope of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?
                        
                     
                           (b)
                        
                        
                           Does the same restriction apply even if it is assumed that ‘A.T.E. A.E.’ continues to engage in activity of ‘public benefit’ under its statutes?
                        
                     
         
               2.
            
            
               If the answers to questions ‘1.a’ and ‘1.b’ are in the affirmative, should Greece have observed the procedure prescribed by Article 108(3) of that Treaty in order for the privileges in question to remain into force?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               In the instance in question, must this court not apply Articles 12 and 13(1) of Law 4332/1929 inasmuch as they may be contrary to Articles 107(1) and 108(3) TFEU?