- 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-6/19: Action brought on 4 January 2019 — Irish Wind Farmers’ Association and Others v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0006
62019TN0006
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
11.3.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 93/69
(Case T-6/19)
(2019/C 93/89)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Irish Wind Farmers’ Association Clg (Kilkenny, Ireland), Carrons Windfarm Ltd (Shanagolden, Ireland), Foyle Windfarm Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) and Greenoge Windfarm Ltd (Bunclody, Ireland) (represented by: M. Segura Catalán and M. Clayton, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—annul the letter of the European Commission dated 25 October 2018 regarding case SA.44671 Ireland — Alleged illegal State aid granted to the fossil fuel sector in the form of reduced property tax rates;
—order the Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, namely that the Commission failed to open the formal investigation under Article 108(2) TFEU and Article 4(4) of Regulation 2015/1589, (*) notwithstanding doubts as to the existence of State aid, thereby depriving the applicants of their procedural rights. This plea comprises two branches:
1.First branch: the Commission should have adopted a formal decision. The Commission has not conducted a proper examination of the complaint as required under its own rules and the contested act has been adopted in contravention of the provisions of Regulation 2015/1589.
2.Second branch: the Commission should have had serious doubts as to the classification of the measure as aid and accordingly opened the formal investigation under Article 4(4) of Regulation 2015/1589, in particular and inter alia as the Commission misunderstood the scope of the complaint, failed to adequately examine all the information provided by the complainant in the context of the complaint, did not properly examine the measure, and followed the wrong approach regarding the assessment of selectivity and did not examine the other requirements laid down in Article 107 TFEU.
Council Regulation 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9).