I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
(Case T-231/00) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Action for annulment - State aid - Relief from social security contributions for firms in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and requiring recovery of aid paid - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
2013/C 38/37
Language of the case: Italian
Applicants: Adriatica di Navigazione SpA (Venice, Italy) and Comitato ‘Venezia Vuole Vivere’ (Venice) (represented by: M. Siragusa and F. Moretti, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, agent, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)
Intervener in support of the applicants: Italian Republic (represented: initially by U. Leanza, then by I. Braguglia, then by R. Adam, and lastly by I. Bruni, agents, and by G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)
Action for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000 L 150, p. 50)
1.The plea of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is considered with the substance of the case.
2.The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.
3.Adriatica di Navigazione SpA and the Comitato ‘Venezia vuole vivere’ shall bear their own costs and pay those of the Commission.
4.The Italian Republic shall bear its own costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 316, 4.11.2000.