- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 October 1996. # Pantochim SA v Commission of the European Communities. # State aid - Administrative procedure pending - Application for an interim order directing the Commission to require a Member State to modify the conditions for the grant of aid - Interim order involving a measure beyond the Commission's powers - Dismissal of the application. # Case T-107/96 R.
ECLI:EU:T:1996:151
61996TO0107
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
Avis juridique important
61996B0107
European Court reports 1996 Page II-01361
Summary
Keywords
Application for interim measures - Interim measures - Application for an order directing the Commission to require a Member State to modify the conditions for the grant of aid - Dismissal (EC Treaty, Arts 92, 93(2) and (3), and 186)
Summary
An application for interim measures seeking an order directing the Commission to require a Member State to extend to the applicant undertaking a duty-free scheme which, although not notified in advance by the Member State concerned, is being dealt with in a procedure under Article 93(2) of the Treaty, can only be dismissed since the measure sought is clearly beyond the powers conferred upon the Commission in relation to the administrative procedure provided for by Article 93(2) and is therefore contrary to the Community rules governing State aid. When, in such a procedure, the Commission finds that aid has been introduced without being notified to it in advance, as Article 93(3) of the Treaty requires, the only interim measure it can take is to direct the Member State concerned to suspend payment of the aid immediately and to provide it, within a period of time determined by it, with all the documents, information and data necessary for examining whether the aid is compatible with the common market.
Moreover, the Court must dismiss an application for the adoption of an interim measure which would have the same content and the same effects as the measure which, according to the applicant, the Commission has failed to adopt. It would not be consistent with the principles governing the distribution of powers between the various Community institutions, as intended by the authors of the Treaty, for the Community judicature to be able to require the Commission to accede to the request for interim measures submitted to it.
Similarly, since the measure sought would require the Court to assume the role of the Commission in assessing the alleged aid and judging whether it may need to be extended to the applicant before the Commission has taken any decision in the matter, the Court would not be addressing the measure sought to the Commission but to the Member State concerned.