natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Case C-170/83 Hydrotherm ECLI:EU:C:1984:271, paragraph 11.
Glej tudi združeni zadevi C-182/03 in C-217/03, Belgija in Forum 187 ASBL proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:2006:416.
See also Case T-137/02 Pollmeier Malchow v Commission ECLI:EU:T:2004:304, paragraph 50.
Glej zadevo C-441/06, Komisija proti Franciji, ECLI:EU:C:2007:616, točka 29 in navedena sodna praksa.
Case C-480/09 P Acea Electrabel Produzione SpA v Commission ECLI:EU:C:2010:787 paragraphs 47 to 55; Case C-222/04 Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze SpA and Others ECLI:EU:C:2006:8, paragraph 112.
Za Komisijo je seznam, ki so ga zagotovili belgijski organi in je priložen temu sklepu, zgolj informativen.
See, by analogy, Case 323/82 Intermills ECLI:EU:C:1984:345: paragraph 11 ‘It is clear from the information supplied by the applicants themselves that following the restructuring both SA Intermills and the three manufacturing companies are controlled by the Walloon regional executive and that, following the transfer of the plant to the three newly constituted companies, SA Intermills continues to have an interest in those companies.
Seznam nikakor ne omejuje obveznosti Belgije, da opredeli vse upravičence do pomoči, dodeljene na podlagi sporne sheme, in da od njih zahteva vračilo vseh zneskov, ki so jim bili dodeljeni, vključno z upravičenci, ki so pridobili davčne ugodnosti na podlagi navedene sheme in niso navedeni v prilogi, ter nove davčne ugodnosti, dodeljene na podlagi sheme upravičencem, ki so na tem seznamu.
It must therefore be accepted that, in spite of the fact that the three manufacturing companies each has a legal personality separate from the former SA Intermills, all those undertakings together form a single group, at least as far as the aid granted by the Belgian authorities is concerned (…).’
PRILOGA
The exceptions provided for in Article 107(2) of the Treaty concern aid of a social character granted to individual consumers, aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences and aid granted to certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany, none of which apply in the present case.
SEZNAM PREDHODNIH ODLOČB, IZDANIH NA PODLAGI SPORNE SHEME
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1).
Vir: Sporočilo belgijskih organov z dne 29. maja 2015 po sklepu o začetku postopka.
See Case C-5/89 Commission v Germany, ECLI:EU:C:1990:320, paragraph 17, and Case C-310/99 Italy v Commission ECLI:EU:C:2002:143, paragraph 104.
Št. odločbe
See Case T-67/94 Ladbroke Racing v Commission ECLI:EU:T:1998:7, paragraph 183; See also Joined Cases T-116/01 and T-118/01, P&O European Ferries (Vizcaya) SA and Diputacion Floral de Vizcaya v Commission ECLI:EU:T:2003:217, paragraph 203.
Datum
See Case T-290/97 Mehibas Dordtselaan v Commission ECLI:EU:T:2000:8, paragraph 59 and Joined Cases C-182/03 and C-217/03 Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission ECLI:EU:C:2006:416, paragraph 147.
Družba
See Joined Cases C-182/03 and C-217/03 Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission ECLI:EU:C:2006:416, paragraph 150-152.
Veljavnost (začetek)
See C-138/09 Todaro Nunziatina & C. ECLI:EU:C:2010:291, paragraph 21.
Veljavnost (konec)
See Commission Decision of 11 July 2001 in Case C 47/2001 (ex NN 42/2000) — Germany: Control and coordination centres of foreign companies (OJ C 304, 30.10.2001, p. 2).
% oproščenega EBIT
See Commission Decision 2005/378/EC of 8 September 2004 concerning the aid scheme which Belgium is proposing to implement for coordination centres (OJ L 125, 18.5.2005, p. 10), a.o., recitals 22, 34 and 37 as well as Article 1, point (b).
Skupni presežni dobiček Napovedi
Joined Cases C-182/03 and C-217/03 Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission ECLI:EU:C:2006:416.
Davčna leta 2005–2014
See Case C-441/06 Commission v France ECLI:EU:C:2007:616, paragraph 29 and the case-law cited.
3 leta
The list of beneficiaries provided by Belgium and annexed to this decision is only regarded by the Commission as illustrative.
4 leta
It in no way restricts the obligation of Belgium to identify all the beneficiaries of aid under the contested scheme and recover from them the full amount of aid they were granted, including beneficiaries that have received tax advantages under the scheme that are not listed in the Annex and new tax advantages granted under the scheme to beneficiaries listed in the Annex.
[40–60]
ANNEX
5 let in 3 leta
LIST OF RULINGS GRANTED UNDER THE CONTESTED SCHEME
[60–80]
Source: Submission by the Belgian authorities of 29 May 2015, following the Opening Decision.
> OM [1–4] %
No decision
[40–60] % (2009–2011)
Company
[20–40] %
start Ruling
[80–100]
end Ruling
6 let
EBIT exemption (%)
Presežek SKUPAJ
NPBT exemption (%)
Glede na informacije, ki jih je predložila Belgija, te družbe v svojih napovedih do davčnega leta 2013 niso prijavile presežnega dobička.
Total excess profit in tax return
Znesek skupnega presežnega dobička, ki so ga družbe prijavile v svojih davčnih napovedih, iz katerega pa ni razvidna dodeljena državna pomoč.
2005-2014
Pripombe sta predložili družbi AGC Glass Europe SA/NV 1. julija 2015 in […] 3. julija 2015.
periode van 3 jaar
Obe družbi sta prejeli predhodno odločbo na podlagi člena 185(2)(b) CIR 92.
periode van 4 jaar
Prvič, oprostitev presežnega dobička ni predpisana z nobeno določbo CIR 92.
[40-60]
Prvič, oprostitev presežnega dobička je dostopna samo subjektom, ki so del multinacionalne skupine, in ne samostojnim subjektom ali subjektom, ki so del nacionalnih skupin družb.
Commission Decision (EU) 2016/1700
Sklep Komisije (EU) 2016/1700
15836 (2012/C) (ex NN 34/2000 and NN 34A/2000) implemented by Austria (AMA marketing measures)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2016) 1972)
(notified under document C(2016) 1972)
(Besedilo v nemškem jeziku je edino verodostojno)
(Only the German text is authentic)
EVROPSKA KOMISIJA JE –
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, zlasti prvega pododstavka člena 108(2) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof,
po pozivu zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo pripombe [1],
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments [1],
ob upoštevanju naslednjega:
Whereas:
Sodišče Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sodišče) je v sodbi z dne 27. oktobra 2011 [2] potrdilo, da je sodba Sodišča prve stopnje [3] (zdaj Splošno sodišče), s katero je bila Odločba Komisije C(2004) 2037 z dne 30. junija 2004 o državi pomoči NN 34A/2000 za programe kakovosti in znakov „AMA Biosiegel“ (v nadaljnjem besedilu: znak bio) in „AMA Gütesiegel“ (v nadaljnjem besedilu: znak kakovosti), razveljavljena.
By judgment of 27 October 2011 [2], the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter: the Court) upheld the Court of First Instance's ruling [3] (now the General Court) by which Commission Decision C(2004) 2037 of 30 June 2004 in State aid case NN 34A/2000 on quality programmes and the quality labels AMA Biosiegel (hereafter: the bio label) and AMA Gütesiegel (hereafter: the quality label) had been annulled.
Na podlagi sodbe Sodišča mora Komisija sprejeti potrebne ukrepe za uskladitev z navedeno sodbo.
Following the judgment of the Court, the Commission is required to take the necessary measures to comply with that judgment.
Zato mora sprejeti nov sklep.
It therefore must adopt a new decision.
Z navedenima sodbama se je zaključil postopek, katerega glavne faze so predstavljene v nadaljevanju.
The judgments cited above are the culmination of a procedure the principal stages of which are set out below.
POSTOPEK PRED KOMISIJO
PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COMMISSION
ZAČETEK POSTOPKA – PRITOŽBE
INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS — COMPLAINTS
Komisija je na podlagi dveh pritožb z dne 21. septembra 1999 in z dne 5. novembra 1999, ki sta bili evidentirani 23. septembra 1999 oziroma 20. januarja 2000, avstrijske organe z dopisom z dne 15. februarja 2000 pozvala, naj predložijo ustrezne informacije o ukrepih pomoči, ki se nanašajo na dejavnosti trženja družbe Agrarmarkt Austria Marketing GesmbH (v nadaljnjem besedilu: družba AMA Marketing), ki je podružnica družbe Agrarmarkt Austria (v nadaljnjem besedilu: organ AMA).
Following two complaints of 21 September 1999 and of 5 November 1999, registered on 23 September 1999 and 20 January 2000 respectively, the Commission asked, by letter of 15 February 2000, the Austrian authorities to supply appropriate information concerning aid measures relating to the marketing activities of Agrarmarkt Austria Marketing GesmbH (AMA Marketing), a subsidiary of Agrarmarkt Austria (AMA).
Avstrijski organi so zahtevane informacije poslali z dopisom z dne 20. marca 2000, evidentiranim 21. marca 2000.
The Austrian authorities supplied the requested information by letter of 20 March 2000, registered on 21 March 2000.
Drugi pritožnik je dodatne informacije poslal z dopisom z dne 4. aprila 2000, evidentiranim 7. aprila 2000.
By letter of 4 April 2000 registered on 7 April 2000 the second complainant submitted additional information.
ZADEVA NN 34/2000 IN UPRAVNA RAZDELITEV
A third complaint on the same subject was received by the Commission on 22 January 2003.
Avstrijski organi so v tem dopisu, v katerega je bil vključen izpolnjen obrazec za priglasitev, trdili, da so ukrepe v zvezi z znakom kakovosti in znakom bio organa AMA priglasili v okviru novih notranjih predpisov [4].
CASE NN 34/2000 AND ADMINISTRATIVE SPLITTING
Vendar je Komisija vztrajala pri tem, da tega dopisa ni mogoče šteti za priglasitev nove pomoči, saj so spremenjene smernice organa AMA 26. septembra 2002 že začele veljati in so se tako začele izvajati pred kakršno koli odobritvijo ukrepov pomoči, ki so temeljili na njih [5].
The Austrian authorities replied with letter of 29 September 2000, registered on the same day and with letter of 16 October 2000 registered on 17 October 2000.
Preiskavi v zvezi z ukrepi za znak bio in znak kakovosti organa AMA, ki se uporabljajo po 26. septembru 2002, je bila dodeljena opravilna številka NN 34A/2000, pod opravilno številko NN 34/2000 pa je Komisija obravnavala ukrepe za znak bio in znak kakovosti organa AMA pred navedenim datumom ter druge ukrepe trženja organa AMA.
Additional information was requested by letter of 15 October 2001, to which the Austrian authorities replied by letter of 7 November 2001.
Z novimi notranjimi predpisi organa AMA je bila uvedena nova oblika znakov in so bili oblikovani novi standardi kakovosti, ki se uporabljajo za proizvode z enim od navedenih znakov.
By letter of 19 December 2002 the Austrian authorities provided additional information and informed the Commission about the modified (internal) AMA directives (AMA Richtlinien) governing the advertising activities for products displaying the AMA quality label and the AMA bio label which entered into force on 26 September 2002.
Iz pojasnil avstrijskih organov ter podrobnega proučevanja novih znakov in standardov kakovosti se zdi, da so bili ti sprejeti za uskladitev z novimi predpisi Skupnosti.
By this letter, which included a completed notification form, the Austrian authorities claimed to notify the AMA quality and bio label measures implemented under the new internal rules [4].
Medtem ko v novi različici notranjih predpisov organa AMA niso bili določeni pogoji v zvezi s poreklom proizvodov, se je osnovni pravni akt, ki ureja organ AMA (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zakon o organu AMA), še vedno skliceval le na nacionalne proizvode.
Following a request from the Austrian authorities dated and received on 8 March 2004, the Commission decided to split case NN 34/2000.
Službe Komisije so na tej podlagi menile, da je bila nepriglašena shema pomoči, evidentirana kot NN 34/2000, zaradi uskladitve s pravili o državni pomoči z dne 26. septembra 2002 precej spremenjena in da je bilo zato upravičeno, da se po navedenem datumu izvede ločena ocena sheme.
The registration number NN 34A/2000 was given to the examination concerning the provisions on the AMA bio label and the AMA quality label applicable after 26 September 2002, whereas under registration number NN 34/2000 the Commission dealt with the measures concerning the AMA bio label and the AMA quality label before 26 September 2002 as well as with the other marketing measures by AMA.
NEPRIGLAŠENA POMOČ NN 34A/2000 PO RAZDELITVI
On 16 March 2004, for internal administrative reasons a new dossier NN 34B/2000 was opened regarding the measures implemented before 26 September 2002.
Avstrijski organi so dodatne informacije v zvezi z zadevo NN 34A/2000 poslali z dopisi z dne 2. aprila 2004 (evidentiranim 5. aprila 2004), 19. aprila 2004, 29. aprila 2004, 4. maja 2004, 7. maja 2004, 13. maja 2004, 9. junija 2004, 16. junija 2004 in 24. junija 2004, ki so bili vsi evidentirani na dan prejema.
The Commission notes that this case does not have any impact on the substance of the present procedure.
Komisija se je z Odločbo C(2004) 2037 odločila, da ne bo nasprotovala navedenemu ukrepu in ga je štela za združljivega s skupnim trgom v smislu člena 87(3)(c) PES (zdaj člen 107(3)(c) PDEU), in sicer v tem, da je skladen s pogoji iz točk 13 in 14 Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem sektorju [6] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice za obdobje 2000–2006) ter s Smernicami Skupnosti o državni pomoči za oglaševanje proizvodov iz Priloge I k Pogodbi ES in nekaterih proizvodov, ki niso zajeti v Prilogi I [7] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice za oglaševanje).
The new AMA internal rules introduced a new design for the labels and made new quality standards applicable to products displaying one of these labels.
Shema pomoči, proučena v zadevi NN 34A/2000, je bila za vse ukrepe v zvezi z znakom kakovosti (AMA Gütesiegel) in ukrepe za podporo kakovosti v zvezi z znakom bio (Biozeichen) časovno omejena do 31. decembra 2008, oglaševalski ukrepi v zvezi z znakom bio (Biozeichen) pa so bili časovno omejeni do 31. marca 2006.
From the explanations provided by the Austrian authorities and the detailed examination of the new labels and quality standards it appeared that these had been adopted to conform to the new Community rules.
Glede na odločbo so bili vsi ukrepi, ki sta jih organ AMA in družba AMA Marketing izvajali pred 26. septembrom 2002, za katere še naprej velja zadeva NN 34/2000, izrecno izključeni iz proučevanja v zadevi NN 34A/2000.
While the new version of the AMA internal rules did not stipulate conditions as to the origin of products, the basic legal act governing AMA, the AMA Act, still referred only to national products.
Vendar v zvezi s tem ni jasno, kdaj so začeli veljati novi notranji predpisi organa AMA, in sicer, ali so bili ukrepi pomoči na podlagi novih predpisov odobreni že od 26. septembra 2002, tj. datuma, ko so predpisi začeli veljati, ali je obstajalo prehodno obdobje po 26. septembru 2002, med katerim se je pomoč še naprej dodeljevala v skladu s starimi predpisi.
In this regard, by a letter dated 19 December 2002, registered on 23 December 2002, the Austrian authorities confirmed that under the new rules the AMA labels are available to all products regardless of their origin and committed to the subsequent adaptation of the AMA Act.
Avstrijski organi so v odgovoru z dne 14. septembra 2012 trdili, da se ni uporabljalo nobeno prehodno obdobje in da so novi predpisi začeli veljati 26. septembra 2002.
Based on the above grounds, the Commission services considered that the non-notified aid scheme registered as NN 34/2000 had been modified substantially as of 26 September 2002 to conform to the State aid rules and that for this reason a separate assessment of the scheme after that date was justified.
PRIGLASITEV UKREPOV TRŽENJA ORGANA AMA (SPLOŠNO TRŽENJE, TRŽENJE ZUNAJ AVSTRIJE IN TRŽNE RAZISKAVE) – N 239/2004
NON-NOTIFIED AID NN 34A/2000 AFTER SPLITTING
Avstrijski organi so 28. maja 2004 priglasili ukrepe trženja organa AMA, ki so obsegali splošne ukrepe trženja, ukrepe trženja zunaj Avstrije in tržne raziskave.
Regarding the case NN 34A/2000, additional information was provided by the Austrian authorities by letters of 2 April 2004 (registered on 5 April 2004), 19 April 2004, 29 April 2004, 4 May 2004, 7 May 2004, 13 May 2004, 9 June 2004, 16 June 2004 and 24 June 2004, all registered on the day of their receipt.
PODALJŠANJE NN 34A/2000
By decision C(2004) 2037 the Commission decided not to raise any objections to that measure and considered it as compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) EC (now Article 107(3)(c) TFEU), in that it complied with the conditions imposed by points 13 and 14 of the Community Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural sector [6] (hereafter: the 2000-2006 Guidelines) and by the Community Guidelines for State aid for advertising of products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty and of certain non-Annex I products [7] (hereafter: the Advertising Guidelines).
Avstrijski organi so z dopisom z dne 15. marca 2006, evidentiranim istega dne, priglasili podaljšanje ukrepov v zvezi z znakom bio, in sicer do 31. decembra 2010 [8] (shema državne pomoči N 175/2006, odobrena z Odločbo Komisije C(2006) 2281 z dne 2. junija 2006).
The aid scheme examined in case NN 34A/2000 was limited in time until 31 December 2008 for all quality label (AMA Gütesiegel) measures and the bio label (Biozeichen) quality support measures, whereas the bio label (Biozeichen) advertising measures were limited in time until 31 March 2006.
Ta sklep se ne nanaša na opisane odobrene sheme pomoči N 175/2006, N 589/2008, N 239/2004 in N 496/2009.
According to the decision, all the measures implemented by AMA and AMA Marketing before 26 September 2002, which remained subject to case NN 34/2000 were expressly excluded from the examination in case NN 34A/2000.
Temveč se nanaša na nepriglašene ukrepe organa AMA v okviru sheme pomoči NN 34/2000 (ki zajemajo obdobje pred 26. septembrom 2002) in ukrepe organa AMA, ki so bili obravnavani v razveljavljeni Odločbi Komisije NN 34A/2000 (v katero je bilo zajeto obdobje po 26. septembru 2002).
In the answer of 14 September 2012 the Austrian authorities maintained that no transitional period applied and that the new rules had been put into effect on 26 September 2002.
POSTOPKI PRED SPLOŠNIM SODIŠČEM – ZADEVA T-375/04
NOTIFICATION OF THE AMA MARKETING MEASURES (GENERIC MARKETING, MARKETING OUTSIDE AUSTRIA AND MARKET RESEARCH) — N 239/2004
Odločbo Komisije v zadevi NN 34A/2000 so 17. septembra 2004 pred Sodiščem prve stopnje (zdaj Splošnim sodiščem) izpodbijali pritožniki iz uvodne izjave 4.
The aid scheme registered under State aid number N 239/2004 was approved by Commission decision C(2004) 3945 of 20 October 2004.
Splošno sodišče je v sodbi z dne 18. novembra 2009 ugotovilo, da bi morala Komisija uvesti formalni postopek preiskave zaradi protislovja med (i) besedilom osnovnega zakona o organu AMA iz leta 1992, ki po mnenju tega sodišča omejuje shemo na nacionalne proizvode, ter (ii) notranjimi smernicami organa AMA in zagotovili avstrijskih organov, ki so zatrjevali, da je bila shema odprta za proizvode iz drugih držav članic.
By decision C(2010) 377 of 21 January 2010 the Commission approved under State aid number N 496/2009 a continuation of the above aid scheme until 31 December 2013.
Splošno sodišče je ugotovilo, da je to protislovje zadostovalo za povzročitev resnih dvomov o združljivosti sheme z notranjim trgom.
These decisions are not affected by the Court rulings cited above and the approved measures are not subject to the present decision.
Zato je ugotovilo (točka 86 sodbe), da bi morala Komisija uvesti postopek iz nekdanjega člena 88(2) PES (zdaj člena 108(2) PDEU).
PROLONGATION OF NN 34A/2000
Na tej podlagi je Splošno sodišče Odločbo Komisije v zadevi NN 34A/2000 razglasilo za nično.
By letter of 15 March 2006, registered on the same day, the Austrian authorities notified a prolongation until 31 December 2010 for the measures regarding the bio label [8] (State aid scheme N 175/2006 approved by Commission decision C(2006) 2281 of 2 June 2006).
POSTOPKI PRED SODIŠČEM – ZADEVA C-47/10
By letter of 19 November 2008 Austria notified a prolongation until 31 December 2013 of the aid measure NN 34A/2000 regarding both the quality and the bio label which expired on 31 December 2010.
Republika Avstrija se je 27. januarja 2010 pritožila na sodbo Splošnega sodišča.
The notified aid which was registered as N 589/2008 and approved by Commission decision C(2009) 1092 of 25 February 2009 at the same time replaced the aid measure N 175/2006.
Pritožba je bila evidentirana kot zadeva C-47/10.
The present decision does not concern the above described approved aid schemes N 175/2006, N 589/2008, N 239/2004 and N 496/2009.
Sodišče je v sodbi z dne 27. oktobra 2011 pritožbo, ki jo je vložila Republika Avstrija, zavrnilo in v celoti podprlo sodbo Splošnega sodišča.
Subject of the present decision are the non-notified AMA measures under aid scheme NN 34/2000 (covering the period before 26 September 2002) and the AMA measures that had been addressed by the annulled Commission decision NN 34A/2000 (covering the period after 26 September 2002).
SKLEP O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA IN NASLEDNJE STOPNJE POSTOPKA
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE UNION COURTS (GENERAL COURT AND COURT OF JUSTICE) AND OPENING DECISION
Komisija je na podlagi sodbe Sodišča uvedla formalni postopek preiskave v skladu s členom 108(2) PDEU v zadevi NN 34A/2000.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE GENERAL COURT — CASE T-375/04
Komisija je ob upoštevanju obrazložitve sodbe v sklepu o začetku postopka z dne 12. junija 2012 [9] avstrijske organe in zadevne strani pozvala, naj ji v enem mesecu predložijo pripombe, da bi pojasnila dvome v zvezi s protislovjem, opisanim v uvodni izjavi 23.
The Commission Decision in case NN 34A/2000 was challenged before the Court of First Instance (now General Court) by the complainants referred to in recital 4 on 17 September 2004.
Komisija od tretjih strani ni prejela pripomb.
The case was registered as T-375/04.
Avstrija je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 29. junija 2012, v katerem je prosila za podaljšanje roka za odgovor.
In its judgment of 18 November 2009, the General Court concluded that the Commission should have initiated the formal investigation procedure because of the existence of a contradiction between (i) the wording of the AMA Act of 1992, which according to the General Court limits the scheme to national products, and (ii) the internal AMA directives and the assurances of the Austrian authorities, which had maintained that the scheme was open to products from other Member States.
Komisija je odobrila podaljšanje roka za odgovor, in sicer do 13. julija 2012.
The General Court found that this contradiction sufficed to create serious doubts as to the compatibility of the scheme with the Internal Market.
Avstrijski organi so svoje pripombe poslali 14. septembra 2012.
The General Court therefore concluded (paragraph 86 of the judgment) that the Commission should have initiated the procedure provided by former Article 88(2) EC (now Article 108(2) TFEU).
Komisija je dodatne informacije zahtevala z dopisom z dne 19. februarja 2014.
On this ground, the General Court annulled the Commission Decision in case NN 34A/2000.
Avstrijski organi so odgovorili 14. marca 2014 in prosili za podaljšanje roka za odgovor.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE — CASE C-47/10
Avstrija je dodatne informacije poslala 7. maja 2014.
The Republic of Austria on 27 January 2010 appealed the above judgment of the General Court.
OPIS UKREPOV POMOČI
The appeal was registered as Case C-47/10.
IME
In its judgment of 27 October 2011, the Court of Justice dismissed the appeal brought by the Republic of Austria and fully upheld the ruling of the General Court.
Ukrepi trženja organa AMA
OPENING DECISION AND SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURAL STEPS
TRAJANJE UKREPA
Following the Court's judgment, the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU in case NN 34A/2000.
Kljub temu pa avstrijski organi Komisije niso obvestili o ukrepih organa AMA v skladu s členoma 143 ali 144 Akta o pristopu Republike Avstrije [10].