Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 January 2013.

Associazione italiana delle società concessionarie per la costruzione e l’esercizio di autostrade e trafori stradali (Aiscat) v European Commission.

State aid - Direct concession for the construction and subsequent management of a section of motorway - Decision to take no further action on the complaint - Action for annulment - Actionable measure - Locus standi - Individual concern - Admissibility - Definition of aid - State resources.

Case T-182/10.


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
08/02/2013 Aiscat v Commission
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:T:2013:9
15/01/2013 Aiscat v Commission
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:T:2013:9
15/01/2013 Aiscat v Commission
Application (OJ)
19/06/2010 Aiscat v Commission
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 10 February 2010 rejecting the applicant’s complaint concerning an alleged infringement on the part of the Italian authorities of the provisions of EU law on State aid as a result of the direct concession for the construction and subsequent management of a section of motorway (the Passante di Mestre) to the semi-public company CAV and the method used to finance the works.

Systematic classification scheme

1.
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.01 Acts which may be the subject of an action for annulment
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.04 Procedure for reviewing aid
      4.09.04.05 Commission decision following a preliminary review or proceeding to the formal investigation procedure
        4.09.04.05.01 Decision finding no aid
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.02 Acts which are of individual concern to them
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.03 Acts which are of direct concern to them
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.04 Procedure for reviewing aid
      4.09.04.05 Commission decision following a preliminary review or proceeding to the formal investigation procedure
        4.09.04.05.01 Decision finding no aid
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.02 Acts which are of individual concern to them
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.02 Acts which are of individual concern to them
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.02 Acts which are of individual concern to them
3 Legal proceedings
  3.02 Actions for annulment
    3.02.03 Applications by natural or legal persons
      3.02.03.02 Acts which are of individual concern to them
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.01 Definition of aid
      4.09.01.02 Use of State resources


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • TFEU, Article 107 : paragraphs 36, 82
  • TFEU, Article 107 -P1 : paragraphs 90, 103, 104, 107
  • TFEU, Article 108 : paragraph 41
  • TFEU, Article 108 -P2 : paragraphs 41 - 43, 45
  • TFEU, Article 108 -P3 : paragraphs 41, 42
  • TFEU, Article 263 : paragraph 20
  • General Court - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A44P1LC : paragraph 85
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A04 : paragraphs 21, 25, 27, 30, 32, 34
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A04P2 : paragraphs 28, 33, 44, 89
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A04P3 : paragraph 28
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A04P4 : paragraph 28
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A13P1 : paragraph 28
  • Regulation 659/1999 -A20P2 : paragraphs 21, 23, 28, 32
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -25/62 : paragraphs 40, 43, 47, 59
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -10/68 : paragraph 64
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -169/84 : paragraphs 43, 47, 60, 61
  • General Court - Judgment T -380/94 : paragraphs 48, 58, 59
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -367/95 : paragraphs 41, 45
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -83/98 : paragraphs 104, 105
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/98 : paragraphs 65, 78
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -379/98 : paragraphs 103, 105
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -482/99 : paragraphs 104, 105
  • General Court - Judgment T -36/99 : paragraph 60
  • General Court - Judgment T -227/01 : paragraphs 48, 58, 59
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -78/03 : paragraphs 40 - 43, 45 - 47, 61
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -525/04 : paragraphs 64 - 66, 78
  • Court of Justice - Order C -367/04 : paragraphs 64, 65, 78
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -487/06 : paragraphs 40, 42
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -521/06 : paragraphs 28, 29, 31, 32, 34
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/07 : paragraphs 43, 47
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -322/09 : paragraphs 27, 31
  • General Court - Order T -236/10 : paragraphs 48, 58, 59

Operative part

Information not available

Opinion

Information not available


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 19/04/2010

Date of the Opinion

Information not available

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

15/01/2013


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 161 from 19.06.2010, p.54

Judgment: OJ C 55 from 23.02.2013, p.9

Name of the parties

Aiscat v Commission

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Berlin, Dominique: Les péages d'autoroutes ne sont pas des aides d'État, La Semaine Juridique - édition générale 2013 nº 5 p.195 (FR)
  2. Idot, Laurence: Notion d'aide et transfert de ressources d'État. L'augmentation du péage d'une section d'autoroute dont bénéficie le concessionnaire d'une autre section n'est pas une aide d'État en l'absence de tout transfert de ressources étatiques, Europe 2013 Mars Comm. nº 3 p.33-34 (FR)
  3. Cardonnel, Pascal: Aides : Le Tribunal de l’UE déclare partiellement recevable le recours d’une association contre une décision rejetant une plainte sans ouvrir la phase formelle (AISCAT), Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2013 nº2 p.146-147 (FR)
  4. Barbier De La Serre, Éric: Recevabilité en matière d’aides d’État – la complexité demeure, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2013 nº 36 p.104 (FR)
  5. Heise, Svend: Admissibility of Third Parties? Legal Actions in State Aid Cases - One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, European State Aid Law Quarterly 2014 p.574-581 (EN)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - State aid

Procedure and result

  • Actions for annulment : dismissal on grounds of inadmissibility
  • Actions for annulment : dismissal on substantive grounds

Formation of the Court

quatrième chambre (Tribunal)

Judge-Rapporteur

Pelikánová

Advocate General

Information not available

Language(s) of the Case

  • Italian

Language(s) of the Opinion

    Information not available