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-696/17) (*)
(State aid - Corporate tax exemption scheme implemented by Belgium in favour of its ports - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the internal market - Concept of economic activity - Services of general economic interest - Non-economic activities - Separable nature - Selective nature - Request for a transitional period)
(2019/C 406/34)
Language of the case: Dutch
Applicants: Havenbedrijf Antwerpen NV (Antwerp, Belgium), Maatschappij van de Brugse Zeehaven NV (Zeebrugge, Belgium) (represented by P. Wytinck, W. Panis and I. Letten, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by B. Stromsky and S. Noë, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the applicants: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by J.-C. Halleux, P. Cottin, L. Van den Broeck and C. Pochet, acting as Agents, and by A. Lepièce and H. Baeyens, lawyers)
Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/2115 of 27 July 2017 on aid scheme SA.38393 (2016/C, ex 2015/E) implemented by Belgium — Taxation of ports in Belgium (OJ 2017 L 332, p. 1).
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Havenbedrijf Antwerpen NV and Maatschappij van de Brugse Zeehaven NV to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission;
3.Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to bear its own costs.
(*) Language of the case: Dutch.