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-354/10: Action brought on 13 July 2010 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0354

62010CN0354

July 13, 2010
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

11.9.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 246/34

(Case C-354/10)

()

2010/C 246/57

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafillou and B. Stromsky)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Form of order sought

declare that, since it did not take within the prescribed period all the measures necessary for the refund of the aid that was found to be unlawful and incompatible with the common market, under Article 1(1) (except as referred to in Article 1(2) and Articles 2 and 3) of the Commission decision of 18 July 2007 (C(2007) 3251) concerning the tax-exempt reserve fund (aid number C 37/2005), or in any event has not informed the Commission sufficiently of the measures which it has taken under the article, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4, 5 and 6 of that decision and under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Greek authorities have not pleaded an absolute inability to implement the Commission decision and, three years on, have not demonstrated exactly what they have checked, in which instances recovery has been sought and in which instances recovery has taken place. More specifically:

they have not explained for every recipient what sort of expenditure it carried out so as to be entitled to aid on the basis of a regulation concerning a general exemption;

they have not calculated the extent of the aid in respect of each recipient;

they have extended the exemption from the obligation to refund aid to instances beyond those provided for in the decision;

they have miscalculated the amount of ‘de minimis’ aid which is exempt from refund;

they have not examined any cumulation with other aid;

they have not calculated correctly the amount to be recovered, proceeding from a mistaken basis;

they have not produced documentation for those refunds which have been effected.

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