Action brought on 10 November 2010 - Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia v Commission

(Case T-520/10)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia (Santiago de Compostela, Spain) (represented by: S. Martínez Lage and H. Brokelmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission

Form of order sought

Annul Decision N 178/2010 of 29 September 2010 approving public-service compensation for Spanish electricity producers;

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This action is brought against the same decision as that challenged in Case T-484/10 Gas Natural Fenosa SDG v Commission.

The applicant puts forward three pleas in support of its action:

Infringement of procedural rights ensured by Article 108(2) TFEU and Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty, ¹ since the Commission failed to initiate the formal investigation procedure, which it is obliged to do whenever there are serious doubts as to the compatibility of the aid under consideration with the common market.

Infringement of Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 of 23 July 2002 on State aid to the coal industry ².

Infringement of Article 106(2) TFEU, inasmuch as the conditions of necessity and proportionality required by that provision if the aid in the present case, which was granted by the Spanish authorities to compensate for the additional costs resulting from the provision of a public service, is to be approved are not met.

Infringement of Article 34 TFEU, since the aid in the present case is a measure having equivalent effect, which cannot be justified under Article 36 TFEU by the need to secure the electricity supply.

The aid in the present case constitutes an undue cumulation of aid granted to the coal industry in the period 2008-2010, contrary to the provision made in Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 of 23 July 2002 on State aid to the coal industry, ³ and seriously distorts competition in the electricity sector, disregarding Article 4(d) and (e) of Regulation No 1407/2002.

Infringement of Articles 11 and 191 TFEU and of Article 3(3) TEU, since the contested decision fails, in the applicant's submission, to have to regard to the damaging effects which the decision will have so far as the environment is concerned.

Finally, the applicant alleges breach of the right to property safeguarded by Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

____________

¹ - OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1.

² - OJ 2002 L 205, p. 1

³ - OJ 2002 L 205, p. 1.