CELEX: 62015TN0256
Language: en
Date: 2015-05-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-256/15: Action brought on 22 May 2015 — Telefónica v Commission

27.7.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 245/37
            
         Action brought on 22 May 2015 — Telefónica v Commission
   (Case T-256/15)
   (2015/C 245/44)
   Language of the case: Spanish
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Telefónica, S.A. (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Ruiz Calzado and J. Domínguez Pérez, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Forms of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               annul Article 1 of the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul Article 4(1) of the contested decision insofar as it orders the Kingdom of Spain to put an end to the aid scheme referred to in Article 1;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul Article 4(2),(3),(4) and (5) of the contested decision, insofar as it orders the recovery of the State aid established by the Commission;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, limit the recovery obligation laid down by Article 4(2) of the contested decision under the same conditions as those established in the First and Second Decisions, and
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to bear the total costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The contested decision in these proceedings is the same as that in Cases T-12/15, Banco de Santander and Santusa v Commission and T-252/15 Ferrovial SA and others v Commission.
   The pleas and main arguments relied on are similar to those already raised in those cases.
   It is claimed in particular that the Commission committed errors of law and assessment in examining the interpretation of the Spanish tax administration (DGT) and concluding that it amounts to a new measure likely to constitute new state aid, and in claiming that the first two decisions did not cover the possible application of the measure at issue to the acquisition of indirect shareholdings.