Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 March 2013

European Commission v Buczek Automotive sp. z o.o.

Appeal — State aid — Restructuring of the Polish steel industry — Concept of State aid — Recovery of public debts — Classification as State aid of the failure to request the liquidation of the debtor undertaking — Private creditor test — Allocation of the burden of proof — Limits of judicial review

Case C‑405/11 P



Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
17/05/2013 Commission v Buczek Automotive
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2013:186
21/03/2013 Commission v Buczek Automotive
Judgment (Information)
ECLI:EU:C:2013:186
21/03/2013 Commission v Buczek Automotive
Application (OJ)
07/10/2011 Commission v Buczek Automotive
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published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general - 'Information on unpublished decisions' section)

Subject-matter

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 17 May 2011 in Case T-1/08 Buczek Automotive v Commission by which the General Court partially annulled Commission Decision 2008/344/EC of 23 October 2007 on State Aid C 23/06 (ex NN 35/06) which Poland has implemented for steel producer Technologie Buczek Group (OJ 2008 L 116, p. 26) – Classification as State aid of the failure to request the liquidation of the debtor undertaking – Error of law in the assessment of the Commission’s application of the hypothetical private creditor test and in the allocation of the burden of proof

Systematic classification scheme

1.
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.02 Jurisdiction over the appeal
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.01 Definition of aid
      4.09.01.03 Advantage conferred on an undertaking
        4.09.01.03.00 General
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.01 Definition of aid
      4.09.01.03 Advantage conferred on an undertaking
        4.09.01.03.01 Private investor/private creditor test
          4.09.01.03.01.04 Recovery of debts
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.01 Definition of aid
      4.09.01.03 Advantage conferred on an undertaking
        4.09.01.03.01 Private investor/private creditor test
          4.09.01.03.01.04 Recovery of debts
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.03 Grounds of appeal
      3.10.03.03 Ineffective pleas in law


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion

Information not available


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 28/07/2011

Date of the Opinion

Information not available

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

21/03/2013


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 311 from 22.10.2011, p.19

Judgment: OJ C 156 from 01.06.2013, p.8

Name of the parties

Commission v Buczek Automotive

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Idot, Laurence: Créancier privé en économie de marché. La charge de la preuve des conditions d'application du critère du créancier privé en économie de marché pèse sur la Commission, Europe 2013 Mai Comm. nº 5 p.29 (FR)
  2. Muguet-Poullennec, Gwenaël: Critère du créancier privé et contrôle juridictionnel (suites des arrêts EDF et Frucona Koice), Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2013 nº 36 p.62-63 (FR)
  3. Vallery, Anne ; Wiame, Hannelore: The Private Creditor Test: Anythin New under the Sun?, European State Aid Law Quarterly 2014 p.528-537 (EN)
  4. Idot, Laurence: Remises fiscales dans le cadre d'un concordat et critère du créancier privé, Europe 2017 novembre nº 11 p.42 (FR)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - State aid

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Actions for annulment
  • Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds

Formation of the Court

sixième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Arabadjiev

Advocate General

Mengozzi

Language(s) of the Case

  • Polish

Language(s) of the Opinion

    Information not available