CELEX: 62008TN0002
Language: en
Date: 2008-01-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-2/08: Action brought on 2 January 2008 — Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen v Commission

8.3.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 64/54
            
         Action brought on 2 January 2008 — Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen v Commission
   (Case T-2/08)
   (2008/C 64/86)
   Language of the case: German
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen (LfM) (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: A. Rosenfeld and G.-B. Lehr, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               Annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 5109 final of 23 October 2007 on the State Aid which the Federal Republic of Germany wishes to grant for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in Nordrhein-Westfalen;
            
         
               —
            
            
               the Commission to be ordered to pay the costs
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant is challenging Commission Decision C (2007) 5109 final of 23 October 2007 on State aid C 34/2006 (ex N 29/2005 and ex CP 13/2004), in which the Commission decided that the State aid which the Federal Republic of Germany wishes to grant to commercial service broadcasters in the context of the introduction of digital terrestrial television in Nordrhein-Westfalen, and which was notified to the Commission, is not compatible with the common market.
   In support of its action the applicant submits, first, that the contested decision infringes Article 87(1) EC as the measure was wrongly found to amount to State aid. In this connection it is also submitted that there was infringement of Article 253 EC.
   In addition it is submitted that an unlawful method of assessment was used in the context of the assessment under Article 87(3)(c) EC. In that regard, the applicant also maintains that there were errors of judgment and assessment and that there was infringement of Article 253 EC.
   As a result of errors of judgment and assessment it is further submitted that there was infringement of Article 87(3)(b) and (d) EC.
   Lastly, the applicant claims that the measure concerned is in any event covered by the exception in Article 86(2) EC. It is also submitted here that there was infringement of Article 253 EC.