CELEX: C2007/042/14
Language: en
Date: 2007-02-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-487/06 P: Appeal brought on 27 November 2006 by British Aggregates Association against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 13 September 2006 in Case T-210/02: British Aggregates Association v Commission of the European Communities

24.2.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 42/8
            
         Appeal brought on 27 November 2006 by British Aggregates Association against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 13 September 2006 in Case T-210/02: British Aggregates Association v Commission of the European Communities
   (Case C-487/06 P)
   (2007/C 42/14)
   Language of the case: English
   Parties
   
      Appellant: British Aggregates Association (represented by: C. Pouncey, Solicitor, L. Van den Hende, advocaat)
   
      Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
   Form of order sought
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               set aside the judgment of the CFI of 13 September 2006 in Case T-210/02;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul Commission decision C(2002) 1478fin of 24 April 2002‘State aid N863/01-United Kingdom/Aggregates Levy’, save as regards the exemption for Northern Ireland; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               to order the Commission to pay the Appellant's costs in this appeal and the procedure in Case T-210/01 in the CFI.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant submits that the contested judgment of the Court of First Instance should be set aside on the following grounds:
   
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by assessing the existence of state aid in a non-objective way.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by distinguishing the situation of the AGL from the situation at issue in Adria-Wien Pipeline (1) when assessing selectivity.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by accepting that an environmental levy is non-selective because it is applied to a specific sector, without requiring or providing a clear definition of that sector.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by applying the wring ‘standard of review’ to the Commission decision.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in its assessment of the ‘nature and general scheme’ of the AGL. and in relation to the issue of the export exemption.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by confirming that the Commission was under no obligation to initiate a formal investigation procedure.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Court of First Instance erred in law by finding that the contested decision is sufficiently reasoned.
            
         
      (1)  [2001]ECR I-8365.