Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 17 November 2003 by Izar Construcciones Navales SA against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-382/03)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 17 November 2003 by Izar Construcciones Navales SA, whose registered office is at Madrid, represented by Jaime Folguera Crespo, Edurne Navarro Varona and Alfonso Gutiérrez Hernández, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

-    Annul, pursuant to Article 230 of the EC Treaty, the decision of the Commission of 27 July 2003 on the suspected aid granted to the Spanish State shipyards, and

-    Order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by IZAR in these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in this case, the same as that in Case T-381/03 IZAR, challenges the decision of the defendant by which it:

- initiated the formal investigation procedure under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty with regard to three cases of alleged aid consisting in an increase of capital of EUR 736 million, with an issue premium of EUR 586 million, and of two subsequent injections of EUR 105 million and EUR 50 million respectively by way of issue premia;

- rejects the arguments of the Kingdom of Spain, based on Article 296 of the EC Treaty, thus ruling out the specific procedures provided for by Article 198(1) and (2);

- questions, according to the applicant, whether certain aid authorised in 1997 in the same sector, in relation to which the abovementioned aid ought to be considered additional aid, is compatible with Community law.

The pleas and main arguments are similar to those relied upon in Case T-381/03 IZAR.

In particular, the applicant alleges infringement of Articles 88, 296 and 298 of the EC Treaty inasmuch as, since the Kingdom of Spain had previously and expressly invoked the exception provided for in Article 296(1)(b) of the Treaty, the Commission had power to initiate not the procedure under Article 88(2) but only certain of the specific procedures under Article 298.

____________