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-203/10)(1)
(State aid - Scheme of aid granted by the Netherlands to housing corporations - Existing aid - Decision accepting Member State’s commitments - Decision declaring new aid compatible - Action for annulment - Not individually concerned - No interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)
2012/C 49/43
Language of the case: Dutch
Applicants: Stichting Woonpunt (Beek, Netherlands); Stichting Com.wonen (Rotterdam, Netherlands); Woningstichting Haag Wonen (The Hague, Netherlands); and Stichting Woonbedrijf SWS.Hhvl (Eindhoven, Netherlands) (represented by: P. Glazener, E. Henny and T. Ottervanger, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, S. Noë and S. Thomas, Agents, and by H. Gilliams, lawyer)
Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 9963 final of 15 December 2009 relating to State aid E 2/2005 and N 642/2009 (Netherlands) — Existing and special project aid to housing corporations.
1.The action is dismissed as inadmissible;
2.There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene of Vesteda Groep BV and the Netherlands Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed;
3.Stichting Woonpunt, Stichting Com.wonen, Woningstichting Haag Wonen and Stichting Woonbedrijf SWS.Hhvl are ordered to bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission;
4.Vesteda Groep and the Netherlands Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed, applicants for leave to intervene, are ordered to bear their own costs.
(1)
OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.