- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-350/08: Action brought on 22 August 2008 — Papierfabrik Hamburger-Spremberg v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008TN0350
62008TN0350
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
25.10.2008
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 272/43
(Case T-350/08)
(2008/C 272/86)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Papierfabrik Hamburger-Spremberg GmbH & Co. KG (Spremberg, Germany) (represented by: S. Polster, lawyer)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
—Annul the contested Commission Decision C(2008) 1107 final of 2 April 2008 in State aid case N 582/2007 — Germany, according to which the regional aid in favour of Propapier PM 2 GmbH & Co. KG is compatible with the EC Treaty;
—Order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant contests Commission Decision C(2008) 1107 final of 2 April 2008, by which the Commission declared that the regional aid which the Federal Republic of Germany approved for Propapier PM 2 is compatible with the EC Treaty.
The applicant relies on the following three pleas in law in support of its action.
First, the applicant alleges that, by not opening the formal investigation procedure, the Commission infringed Article 88(2) EC, Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 (1) and paragraph 68 et seq. of the Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 (2).
By its second plea in law the applicant complains that the obligation to provide reasons was infringed in relation to the nature of the regional aid Guidelines as the exclusive basis for the decision; it also complains of infringements in relation to the need to take into account the market for recycled fibre as the upstream market for corrugated case material and regarding the assessment of the competitive position on those markets and on the downstream corrugated board market of the recipient of State aid Propapier PM 2.
Finally the applicant claims with reference to the distortion of competition associated with the investment project affecting a total of three product markets that the regional aid approved for Propapier PM 2 is incompatible with the common market.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1).
(2) OJ 2006 C 54, p. 13.