Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 July 2019

Bayerische Motoren Werke AG and Freistaat Sachsen v European Commission

Appeal – State aid – Regional investment aid – Aid for a large investment project – Aid partly incompatible with the internal market – Article 107(3) TFEU – Whether the aid is necessary – Article 108(3) TFEU – Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 – Aid exceeding the individual notification threshold – Notification – Scope of the block exemption – Cross-appeal – Whether an intervention before the General Court of the European Union may proceed – Admissibility

Case C-654/17 P



Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
06/09/2019 Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen
Competition
- State aid
  • Competition
  • - State aid
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2019:634		 29/07/2019 Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen
Competition
- State aid
  • Competition
  • - State aid
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Abstract
ECLI:EU:C:2019:634		 29/07/2019 Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen
Competition
- State aid
  • Competition
  • - State aid
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
23/02/2018 Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen
Competition
- State aid
  • Competition
  • - State aid
View pdf documents
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2019:284		 03/04/2019 Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen
Competition
- State aid
  • Competition
  • - State aid
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
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

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.01 Subject of the appeal
      3.10.01.01 Decisions which may be the subject of an appeal
-
1 The legal order of the European Union
  1.04 Fundamental rights
    1.04.03 The fundamental rights
      1.04.03.47 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.08 Procedural rules
    3.08.02 Intervention
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.00 General
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.03 Exceptions to the prohibition of aid
      4.09.03.02 Aid that may be considered to be compatible with the internal market (Article 107(3) TFEU)
        4.09.03.02.02 Regional aid
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.02 Jurisdiction over the appeal
      3.10.02.01 Exclusion of questions of fact
        3.10.02.01.01 Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence
          3.10.02.01.01.01 Distortion of the facts and evidence
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.03 Exceptions to the prohibition of aid
      4.09.03.02 Aid that may be considered to be compatible with the internal market (Article 107(3) TFEU)
        4.09.03.02.02 Regional aid
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.03 Exceptions to the prohibition of aid
      4.09.03.03 Regulations declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.03 Exceptions to the prohibition of aid
      4.09.03.03 Regulations declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market
-
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.09 State aid
    4.09.03 Exceptions to the prohibition of aid
      4.09.03.02 Aid that may be considered to be compatible with the internal market (Article 107(3) TFEU)
        4.09.03.02.02 Regional aid


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 22/11/2017

Date of the Opinion

  • 03/04/2019

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

29/07/2019


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 319 from 23.09.2019, p.11

Application: OJ C 94 from 12.03.2018, p.4

Name of the parties

Bayerische Motoren Werke v Commission and Freistaat Sachsen

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Idot, Laurence: Portée du règlement général d'exemption, Europe 2019 Mois Comm. nº 10 p.35-36 (FR)
  2. Nicolaides, Phedon: Presumed Versus Actual Compatibility of State Aid with the Internal Market, European State Aid Law Quarterly 2019 Vol.18 N°3 p.339-345 (EN)
  3. Achleitner, Ranjana Andrea ; Bartosch, Andreas ; Bieber, Thomas: Zur Freistellung von Beihilfen nach der AGVO : gesetzlicher Anspruch und Wirklichkeit : Rs. Eesti Pagar (C-349/17) und BMW (C-654/17 P), Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2022 p. 293-299 (DE)



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 grounds of inadmissibility
  • Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds

Formation of the Court

cinquième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Regan

Advocate General

Tanchev

Language(s) of the Case

  • German

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French