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 C-660/15 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2015 by Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2015 in Case T-125/12: Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd v European Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015CN0660

62015CN0660

December 8, 2015
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 59/9

(Case C-660/15 P)

(2016/C 059/09)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd (represented by: M. Honoré and S. Kalsmose-Hjelmborg, advokater)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Kingdom of Denmark, TV2/Danmark A/S

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

set aside the judgment in Case T-125/12, Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd v Commission, and

annul Commission Decision 2011/839/EU (1) of 20 April 2011 on measures adopted by the Danish state in favour of TV2/Danmark (EUT 2011 L 340, s. 1), and

order the defendant at first instance to pay the costs of Viasat both incurred in the first instance and before your Court

alternatively,

set aside the judgment under appeal, and

refer the case back to the General Court, and

reserve the costs of the proceedings at first instance and on.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the form of order sought, Viasat contends that the General Court erred in law when stating that in its assessment under Article 106(2) TFEU the Commission was not required to take account of the fact that aid to TV2 had been granted without observing fundamental principles of transparency and cost efficiency.

More in particular, Viasat contends that the General Court erred in law (1) by relying on the M6 judgment and the related case law to dismiss Viasat’s claims, (2) by holding that Viasat’s arguments lead to a ‘logical impasse’ (3) by rejecting the significance of the 2005 and 2011 SGEI Communications and the 2009 Broadcasting Communication (4) by holding that the 2001 Broadcasting Communication prevented the Commission from applying the methodology which, in Viasat’s view, flows from Article 106(2) TFEU.

(1) Commission Decision of 20 April 2011 on the measures implemented by Denmark (C 2/03) for TV2/Danmark

OJ L 340, p. 1.

* * *

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