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-591/21 P: Appeal brought on 23 September 2021 by Ryanair DAC, Laudamotion GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 14 July 2021 in Case T-677/20, Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission (Austrian Airlines; Covid-19)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0591

62021CN0591

September 23, 2021
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

15.11.2021

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/32

(Case C-591/21)

(2021/C 462/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Ryanair DAC, Laudamotion GmbH (represented by: V. Blanc, E. Vahida and F.-C. Laprévote, avocats, D. Pérez de Lamo and S. Rating, abogados, I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, dikigoros)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany, Republic of Austria, Austrian Airlines AG

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:

set aside the judgment under appeal;

declare in accordance with Articles 263 and 264 TFEU the Commission Decision C(2020) 4684 final of 6 July 2020 on State aid SA.57539 (2020/N) — Austria — COVID-19 — Aid to Austrian Airlines void;

order the Commission to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Ryanair, and order the interveners at first instance and in this appeal (if any) to bear their own costs.

Alternatively:

set aside the judgment under appeal;

refer the case back to the General Court for reconsideration;

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellants rely on seven pleas in law.

First plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts in rejecting the appellants’ claim that the Commission failed to review a possible ‘spill-over’ of aid to or from Lufthansa.

Second plea in law: the General Court erred in law in rejecting the appellants’ claim that the Commission breached the requirement that aid granted under Article 107(2)(b) TFEU is not to make good the damage suffered by a single victim.

Third plea in law: the General Court erred in law in rejecting the appellants’ claim that the non-discrimination principle has been unjustifiably violated.

Fourth plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts in rejecting the appellants’ claim on the infringement of the freedom of establishment and the free provision of services.

Fifth plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts in the application of Article 107(2)(B) TFEU and the proportionality principle in relation to damage caused to Austrian Airlines by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sixth plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts regarding the failure to open a formal investigation procedure.

Seventh plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts regarding the Commission’s failure to state reasons.

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