EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-841/16: Action brought on 24 November 2016 — Alex v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TN0841

62016TN0841

November 24, 2016
With Google you find a lot.
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

30.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/55

(Case T-841/16)

(2017/C 030/63)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alex SCI (Bayonne, France) (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decision of the European Commission of 21 September 2016;

declare and hold that the aid paid to the Côte-Basque-Adour Conurbation Authority (CABAB) by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the French State, the Aquitaine Regional Council and the Pyrénées Atlantiques Departmental Council is unlawful and incompatible with the common market;

and consequently,

order the French State, the Aquitaine Regional Council, the Pyrénées Atlantiques Departmental Council, as decentralised state bodies, and the ERDF to recover the aid unlawfully paid, together with interest at the statutory rate as from the date on which that aid was made available;

order the European Commission to bear all the costs of the proceedings, including lawyers’ fees of EUR 5 000.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging the substantive unlawfulness of the decision of the European Commission.

2.Second plea in law, alleging a failure to notify the financing allocated to the ‘Technocité’ project, granted by the ERDF, the French Republic, the Aquitaine Regional Council and the Pyrénées Atlantiques Departmental Council to the CABAB.

3.Third plea in law, alleging the incompatibility of the financing with the internal market.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging the non-performance of conditions to which the grant of the financing was subject.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia