- 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 C-579/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2018 — European Commission v FIH Holding A/S, FIH Erhvervsbank A/S (Appeal — State aid — Definition of ‘aid’ — Definition of ‘economic advantage’ — Market economy operator principle — Conditions governing applicability and application — Financial crisis — Successive bank bail outs — Whether account to be taken, in the assessment of the second bail out, of the risks arising from commitments entered into by a Member State in the first bail out)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0579
62016CA0579
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 161/10
(Case C-579/16 P) (<a id="ntc1-C_2018161EN.01001001-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2018161EN.01001001-E0001"> (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)</a>
((Appeal - State aid - Definition of ‘aid’ - Definition of ‘economic advantage’ - Market economy operator principle - Conditions governing applicability and application - Financial crisis - Successive bank bail outs - Whether account to be taken, in the assessment of the second bail out, of the risks arising from commitments entered into by a Member State in the first bail out))
(2018/C 161/11)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar, L. Flynn and K. Blanck-Putz, acting as Agents)
Other parties to the proceedings: FIH Holding A/S, FIH Erhvervsbank A/S (represented by: O. Koktvedgaard, advokat)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016, FIH Holding and FIH Erhvervsbank v Commission (T-386/14, EU:T:2016:474);
2.Dismisses the first plea in the action before the General Court;
3.Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to give judgment on the second plea in law;
4.Reserves the costs.
(<a id="ntr1-C_2018161EN.01001001-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2018161EN.01001001-E0001">(<span class="super">1</span>)</a> OJ C 14, 16.1.2017).