CELEX: 62016TN0203
Language: en
Date: 2016-05-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-203/16: Action brought on 2 May 2016 — Brancheforening for Regulerkraft i Danmark v Commission

27.6.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 232/29
            
         Action brought on 2 May 2016 — Brancheforening for Regulerkraft i Danmark v Commission
   (Case T-203/16)
   (2016/C 232/37)
   Language of the case: Danish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Brancheforening for Regulerkraft i Danmark [Danish Regulating Power Association (BRD)] (Ikast, Denmark) (represented by: N. Gade, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Declare that the Commission has infringed Article 265 TFEU, despite the requirement to act provided for in that article, in the manner in which it initiated the formal State aid investigation procedure: see Article 4(4) of Regulation No 2015/1589 and, contrary to the time limit laid down in Article 9(6), having failed to deliver a decision in State aid Case SA.32699 and SA.32184 on aid to electricity suppliers, which affects the market for regulating power.
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the European Commission to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The applicant submits that the Commission has infringed Article 265 TFEU by having initiated the formal State aid procedure only 29 months after the applicant’s complaint and by having failed to deliver a decision in the case even some 31 months after initiating that procedure.
   The applicant further submits that the Commission has received all information that could possibly be necessary to complete the State aid procedure and that a period of 31 months must be deemed to be abundantly sufficient in which to cover the factual and relevant aspects of the case, not least since, prior to the aforementioned 29 months spent on the preliminary examination procedure, the Commission had a total of five years to investigate the case.