Error! Reference source not found.

Action brought on 23 May 2008 - Polson and others v. Commission

(Case T-197/08)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Magnus Polson (Lerwick, United Kingdom), Garry Sandison (Lerwick, United Kingdom), Andrew Anderson (Whalsay, United Kingdom), Ian Johnston (Lerwick, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Murray, Solicitor, R. Thompson, QC)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

annul Articles 1(2), 3, 4 and 5 of Commission Decision State Aid No. C 39/2006 (ex NN 94/2005) of 13 November 2007 concerning the First Time Shareholders Scheme implemented in the United Kingdom;

order the Commission to pay costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case, the applicants seek partial annulment of Commission Decision 2008/166/EC, State Aid No. C 39/2006 (ex NN 94/2005) of 13 November 2007 concerning the First Time Shareholders Scheme implemented by the United Kingdom¹. In the contested decision the Commission found that the aid was incompatible with the common market as far as it concerned aid granted for the first time acquisition of a share in a second-hand fishing vessel and required the United Kingdom to recover the aid granted. The applicants are the beneficiaries of the aid to be recovered.

The applicants seek annulment of the contested decision on the following grounds:

The Commission erred in law in finding that all payments made for first time acquisition of a share in a second-hand fishing vessel were incompatible with the common market and had to be repaid; the applicants claim that the awarded grants fall within the scope of Commission Regulation 875/2007² and should be therefore considered de minimis aids compatible with the common market; they claim that Articles 1(2) and Articles 3 to 5 of the contested decision unlawfully extend to beneficiaries of aid who complied in substance with the relevant Community guidelines;

The Commission erred in law in finding that the recovery of these payments would be compatible with Article 14(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 659/1999³ as well as with the general principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations and of equality of treatment.

____________

¹ - OJ 2008 L 55, p.27

² - Commission Regulation (EC) No 875/2007 of 24 July 2007 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid in the fisheries sector and amending Regulation (EC) No 1860/2004, OJ 2007 L 193, p. 6

³ - Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1).