CELEX: C2001/331/48
Language: en
Date: 2001-11-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-227/01: Action brought on 25 September 2001 by Territorio Histórico de Alava — Excma. Diputación de Alava, and the Comunidad autónoma del País Vasco — Gobierno Vasco against Commission of the European Communities

24.11.2001            EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 331/29
     —     If the Commission were to apply such reasoning                 Pleas in law and main arguments
           generally to all fiscal legislation, it would arrive at
           the absurd conclusion that any change in the fiscal
           burden constitutes State aid.                                  The applicant has brought the present action against the
                                                                          Commission in order to seek compensation for the damage
     —     If the Commission carried its reasoning to its final           allegedly suffered as a result of the decisions adopted in the
           logical conclusion, the result would be that any               context of the tender procedure opened in relation to the
           variation within the regulatory framework in which             supply of fruit juice and fruit jams intended for the people of
           undertakings operate would constitute State aid.               Armenia and Azerbaijan under Commission Regulation (EC)
                                                                          No 228/96 of 7 February 1996 on the supply of fruit juice
                                                                          and fruit jams intended for the people of Armenia and
(c)  The applicant refutes the charge that the measures at                Azerbaijan (OJ 1996 L 30, p. 18), in particular decision
     issue are selective and specific in nature, since, first, the        C(96)1916 of 22 July 1996 and decision C(96)2208 of
     legislation is general in nature, not favouring a particular         6 September 1996.
     undertaking or sector over another and, secondly, the
     authority competent to apply it does not enjoy any
     discretion but can instead merely ascertain on a case-by-            Those decisions allowed for the substitution of the fruit
     case basis whether the conditions laid down for triggering           provided for in the tender, with no legal basis nor a supraven-
     the fiscal advantages are met.                                       ing request for it.
                                                                          Both decisions were challenged by the applicant (Joined Cases
                                                                          T-191/96 and T-106/97) (1) before the Court of First Instance
                                                                          which, by judgment of 14 October 1999, annulled the decision
                                                                          of 6 September 1996, declaring the action brought in Case
                                                                          T-106/97 inadmissible on the ground that it was out of time.
Action brought on 25 September 2001 by CAS Succhi di
Frutta SpA against the Commission of the European                         The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put
                         Communities                                      forward in the abovementioned cases.
                        (Case T-226/01)                                   (1) [1999] ECR II-3181.
                        (2001/C 331/47)
                   (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                          Action brought on 25 September 2001 by Territorio
                                                                          Histórico de Alava — Excma. Diputación de Alava, and
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                          the Comunidad autónoma del Paı́s Vasco — Gobierno
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                          Vasco against Commission of the European Communities
European Communities on 25 September 2001 by CAS Succhi
di Frutta SpA, represented by Gian Michele Roberti and
Francesco Sciaudone, lawyers.                                                                     (Case T-227/01)
                                                                                                  (2001/C 331/48)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                            (Language of the case: Spanish)
—    find that the Commission has incurred non-contractual
     liability by adopting the decisions of 22 July and of
     6 September 1996,
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
—    declare that the applicant suffered damage as a result of            ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
     those decisions amounting to ITL 2 682 049 410,                      European Communities on 25 September 2001 by the Territo-
                                                                          rio Histórico de Alava — Excma. Diputación de Alava, and the
                                                                          Comunidad autónoma del Paı́s Vasco — Gobierno Vasco,
—    order the Commission to pay the costs.                               Alava (Spain), represented by Ramón Falcón, lawyer.
 ---pagebreak--- C 331/30                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                     24.11.2001
The applicants claim that the Court should:                                    —     recovery of the aid cannot be imposed as an
                                                                                     obligation when there are other options for restoring
                                                                                     the status quo.
—     annul in its entirety the decision of the Commission
      which is contested in this action, in the alternative, annul
      Article 3 of that decision,
                                                                         (1) That tax credit, in the form now challenged by the contested
                                                                             decision, was provided for in respect of 1995, in the sixth
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                 addendum to Norma Foral (Regional Law No 22/1994 of
                                                                             20 December 1994, and was extended until 1996 (Norma Foral
                                                                             No 33/1995) and 1997 (Norma Foral No 31/1996); it was
                                                                             amended by Norma Foral No 24/1996 relativa al Impuesto sobre
                                                                             Sociedades (Regional Law on Corporation Tax). Normas Forales
Pleas in law and main arguments                                              33/1997 and 36/1998 made similar provision in respect of
                                                                             1998 and 1999.
The applicants contest Commission Decision C(2001) 1759
final of 11 July 2001 declaring incompatible with the common
market the tax reductions arising from a number of regional
Laws (1) which provide for a tax credit of 45 % of the
investment in new fixed material assets in excess of ESP
2 500 million (EUR 15 025 303 ) made by undertakings in
the Territorio Histórico de Alava.                                      Action brought on 25 September 2001 by Territorio
                                                                         Histórico de Vizcaya — Excma. Diputación de Vizcaya,
                                                                         and the Comunidad autónoma del Paı́s Vasco — Gobierno
                                                                         Vasco against Commission of the European Communities
In support of their claims, the applicants put forward the
following three arguments:
                                                                                                  (Case T-228/01)
(a)   there is no ‘aid’ within the meaning of Article 87 of the
      EC Treaty. The applicants maintain that, contrary to what                                   (2001/C 331/49)
      is stated in the contested decision:
                                                                                            (Language of the case: Spanish)
      —     the existence of a minimum quantitative threshold
            does not imply that there is any selectivity,
      —     the Commission has not given any substantiate its            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
            charge that the fiscal measure threatens to distort          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
            competition,                                                 European Communities on 25 September 2001 by the Territo-
                                                                         rio Histórico de Vizcaya — Excma. Diputación de Vizcaya, and
                                                                         the Comunidad autónoma del Paı́s Vasco — Gobierno Vasco,
      —     moreover, the decision is disproportionate, since it
                                                                         Vizcaya (Spain), represented by Ramón Falcón, lawyer.
            does not even exclude those sectors which are not
            open to competition nor that portion of alleged aid
            which could be regared as compatible;
                                                                         The applicants claim that the Court should:
(b) misuse of powers: the Commission is using its powers in
      the field of State aid in order to pursue an objective more        —     annul in its entirety the decision of the Commission
      appropriate to tax harmonisation.                                        which is contested in this action, in the alternative, annul
                                                                               Article 3 of that decision,
(c)   recovery of the aid, at least in the way required by the           —     order the Commission to pay the costs.
      contested decision, is excluded:
      —     the requirement to recover the aid is in breach of
            legitimate expectations,                                     Pleas in law and main arguments
      —     recovery should have been excluded in respect of
            those undertakings whos production is intended for           The applicants contest Commission Decision C(2001)
            the local market or for sectors in which there is no         1765 final of 11 July 2001 declaring incompatible with the
            competition, as well as in respect of that portion of        common market the tax reductions arising from the fourth
            the tax credit that does not exceed 25 % net grant           addendum to Norma Foral (Regional Law) No 7/1996 of
            equivalent (NGE),                                            26 December 1996, and the 10th addendum to Norma Foral