CELEX: 62011TN0488
Language: en
Date: 2011-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Case T-488/11: Action brought on 9 September 2011 — Sarc v Commission

12.11.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 331/26
            
         Action brought on 9 September 2011 — Sarc v Commission
   (Case T-488/11)
   2011/C 331/50
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Scheepsbouwkundig Advies- en Rekencentrum (Sarc) BV (Bussum, Netherlands) (represented by: H. Speyart, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul Commission decision C(2011) 642 final of 10 May 2011 given in the State aid proceedings NN 68/2010 declaring that the aid granted does not constitute State aid; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the European Commission to pay its own costs and those incurred by the applicant.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.
   
               1.
            
            
               First plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           that the Commission failed, where it should have done so, to open the formal investigation procedure within the meaning of Article 108(2) TFEU;
                        
                     
         
               2.
            
            
               Second plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           that the Commission, in a further submission, failed to associate SARC in its preliminary assessment in a sufficient manner;
                        
                     
         
               3.
            
            
               Third plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           that the Commission misapplied Article 107 (1) TFEU;
                        
                     
         
               4.
            
            
               Fourth plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           that the Commission failed, where it should have done so, to order the Dutch authorities to submit an evaluation, or to commission an independent evaluation;
                        
                     
         
               5.
            
            
               Fifth plea in law, alleging
               
                           —
                        
                        
                           that the Commission failed to reason its decision to the required standard.