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-193/19) (*)
(State aid - Aid to Litgas for the supply of a minimum quantity of LNG to the LNG terminal at the sea port of Klaipėda - Decision not to raise objections - Safeguarding procedural rights - EU framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation - Service of general economic interest - Compensation for a service of general economic interest - Boil-off costs - Balancing costs - Security of supply - Article 14 of Directive 2004/18/EC - Body of consistent evidence)
(2021/C 452/19)
Language of the case: English
Applicants: Achema AB (Jonava, Lithuania), Achema Gas Trade UAB (Jonava) (represented by: J. Ruiz Calzado, J. Wileur and N. Solárová, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and A. Bouchagiar, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the defendant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: K. Dieninis and R. Dzikovič, acting as Agents), Ignitis UAB, formerly Lietuvos energijos tiekimas UAB (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: K. Kačerauskas, lawyer)
Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 7141 final of 31 October 2018 in State aid case SA.44678 (2018/N) — modification of aid for LNG terminal in Lithuania.
The Court:
1.Annuls Commission Decision C(2018) 7141 final of 31 October 2018 in State aid case SA.44678 (2018/N) relating to modification of aid for LNG terminal in Lithuania, in so far as the Commission decided not to raise objections to the State aid resulting from the 2016 amendments;
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders Achema AB, Achema Gas Trade UAB, the European Commission, the Republic of Lithuania and Ignitis UAB to bear their own costs.
(*) Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140
* * *
Language of the case: English