CELEX: 62019CN0665
Language: en
Date: 2019-09-05 00:00:00
Title: Case C-665/19 P: Appeal brought on 5 September 2019 by NeXovation, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 19 June 2019 in Case T-353/15: NeXovation v Commission

4.11.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 372/23
            
         
      Appeal brought on 5 September 2019 by NeXovation, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 19 June 2019 in Case T-353/15: NeXovation v Commission
      (Case C-665/19 P)
      (2019/C 372/25)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: NeXovation, Inc. (represented by: A. von Bergwelt, M. Nordmann, L. Hettstedt, Rechtsanwälte)
      
         Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  set aside points 3 and 4 of the operative part of the judgment under appeal, and annul Article 3(2) and the final indent of Article 1 of the Commission Decision (1) of 1 October 2014 on the State aid SA.31550 implemented by Germany for Nurburgring (with a corrigendum of 13 April 2015);
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  in the alternative, set aside points 3 and 4 of the operative part of the judgment under appeal and refer the case back to the General Court;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the Commission to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      The appeal is based on two grounds of appeal:
      With respect to the first contested decision the General Court erred in applying Article 263(4) TFEU since the appellant was individually concerned. The General Court misjudged that the case does not reflect the typical scenario in which competition between several suppliers of goods is affected but between bidders, which request a certain good.
      With respect to the second contested decision the General Court erred in applying Articles 107(1) and 296(2) TFEU as well as Articles 4(3) and 20(2) of the procedural Regulation No (EU) 659/1999 (2) and the principle of a diligent and impartial investigation.
      
         (1)  Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on the State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring (notified under document C(2014) 3634) (OJ 2016, L 34, p. 1).
      
         (2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999, L 83, p. 1).