CELEX: 62014TN0484
Language: en
Date: 2014-06-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-484/14: Action brought on 26 June 2014  — Monthisa Residencial v Commission

11.8.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 261/52
            
         Action brought on 26 June 2014 — Monthisa Residencial v Commission
   (Case T-484/14)
   2014/C 261/82
   Language of the case: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Monthisa Residencial, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: F. de Artíñano Rodríguez de Torres and J. Martínez Muro, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid in breach of general principles of EU law;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.
   In particular, it is alleged that Article 107(1) TFEU and the general principle of EU law relating to the protection of legitimate expectations have been infringed.