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 T-533/10: Action brought on 24 November 2010 — DTS Distribuidora de Televisión Digital v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TN0533

62010TN0533

November 24, 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

29.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/44

(Case T-533/10)

()

2011/C 30/80

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: DTS Distribuidora de Televisión Digital, SA (Tres Cantos, Madrid, Spain) (represented by: H. Brokelmann and M. Ganino, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Annul Commission Decision C(2010) 4925 final of 20 July 2010, and

order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present proceedings, a satellite pay TV operator, challenges Commission Decision C(2010) 4925 final of 20 July 2010‘on the State aid scheme No C 38/2009 (ex NN 58/2009) which Spain is planning to implement for Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española (RTVE)’, which declared that that scheme, as amended by Law 8/2009 of 28 August 2009 on financing Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española, was compatible with the common market, without its being necessary to analyse the scheme’s method of financing.

The applicant submits that the Commission was not entitled to authorise the aid scheme in question without analysing the method of financing introduced by the above-mentioned Law and, specifically, the 1,5% tax on the gross operating income of pay-TV broadcasters.

In support of its claims the applicant puts forward the following pleas in law:

Error of law on the part of the Commission, by authorising the aid which is the subject-matter of the proceedings without analysing its method of financing. In that connection, it is submitted that it is settled case-law that aid cannot be considered separately from the effects of its method of financing if that method forms an integral part of the aid, and that, with regard to the present case, the 1.5 % tax on the gross operating income of pay-TV broadcasters forms an integral part of the aid scheme, which is why the Commission ought to have analysed the scheme and the aid together.

Infringement of Article 106(2) TFEU, in that the Commission authorised an aid scheme which fails to observe the principle of proportionality, since the taxes financing the scheme involve a serious distortion of competition, in the content acquisitions market and in the downstream viewers’ market, contrary to the common interest.

Infringement of Articles 49 and 63 TFEU. In the applicant’s submission, the Commission infringed those provisions, in so far as the method of financing the aid authorised restricts freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital, by making it less attractive for pay TV operators and other investors established in other Member States to exercise those freedoms.

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