Action brought on 25 September 2008 - S.F. Turistico Immobiliare v Council and Commission

(Case T-408/08)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: S.F. Turistico Immobiliare Srl (Orosei, Italy) (represented by: L. Marcialis, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities

Forms of order sought

Principal forms of order sought:

Declare null and void the decision of the Commission of the European Communities C(2008)2997 of 2 July 2008 on a State aid scheme: 'Misuse of aid measure No N 272/98, Regional Act No 9 of 1998';

Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred by the applicant.

Alternative form of order sought:

Annul in part the contested decision, in so far as it declares the entire aid scheme incompatible with the common market, 'unless the recipient of the aid submitted an application for aid under the scheme before starting work on an initial investment project', and orders the Republic of Italy to recover the relevant amounts, without excepting the aid in so far as it provides an incentive to keep the resulting costs - borne by the recipient before the aid application was submitted - within the limits provided for under the de minimis aid provisions.

Further alternative form of order sought:

Declare unlawful point 4.2 of the Council Guidelines on national regional aid (98C 74/06), according to which '[i]n addition, aid schemes must lay down that an application for aid must be submitted before work is started on the projects', in so far as it excludes from eligibility all aid intended in favour of recipients, without excepting that part of the aid relating to investments, made after submission of the application, which are functionally or structurally autonomous.

Annul in part the contested decision, in so far as it orders full recovery by the Republic of Italy of the amounts previously disbursed, without excepting the aid in so far as it provides an incentive for costs to be borne by the recipient after submission of the application for aid and relating to portions which are functionally or structurally autonomous in relation to the project undertaken.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The contested decision in the present case is the same as that at issue in Case T-394/08 Regione Sardegna v Commission.

The pleas in law and principal arguments are similar to those put forward in Case T-394/08.

The applicant pleads in particular the unlawfulness, within the meaning of Article 241 EC, of point 4.2 of the Council Guidelines on national regional aid (98C 74/06), in so far as it is wholly counter to the rationale underlying the Community aid policies, especially in a case characterised by such special features, to infer from the completion of a small part (roughly 20%) of the planned work that the rest of the work is wholly ineligible for aid, even though that work had duly been commenced during a time-period subsequent to that established by the guidelines in question.

____________