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-674/17) (*)
(State aid - Corporate tax exemption scheme implemented by Belgium in favour of its ports - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the internal market - Concept of economic activity - Services of general economic interest - Non-economic activities - Severability - Selectivity - Article 93 TFEU and Article 106(2) TFEU)
(2019/C 406/33)
Language of the case: French
Applicants: Port de Bruxelles (Brussels, Belgium), Région de Bruxelles-Capitale (Belgium) (represented by: J. Vanden Eynde and E. Wauters, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and S. Noë, (acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the applicants: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: J.-C. Halleux, P. Cottin, L. Van den Broeck and C. Pochet, acting as Agents, and by A. Lepièce and H. Baeyens, lawyers
Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/2115 of 27 July 2017 on aid scheme SA.38393 (2016/C, ex 2015/E) implemented by Belgium — Taxation of ports in Belgium (OJ 2017 L 332, p.1).
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Port de Bruxelles and Région de Bruxelles-Capitale to pay, in addition to their own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission;
3.Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to bear its own costs.
(*)
Language of the case: French.
* * *
(1) OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.