The EU Court of Justice holds that a member state may be found to have infringed art. 106(1) TFEU if its measures create a situation in which a public undertaking or an undertaking on which it has conferred special or exclusive rights is led to abuse its dominant position (Greek Lignite case)

This article has been nominated for the 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards.

ECJ held that the legal standard established by the General Court was incorrect, as the Commission was not required to identify or establish that an actual abuse had occurred or a particular abuse could have occurred as a result of the state measure at issue. The ECJ repeated its well established case law, according to which a member state may be found to have infringed article 106(1) TFEU if its measures create a situation in which a public undertaking or an undertaking on which it has conferred special or exclusive rights, merely by exercising the preferential rights conferred upon it, is led to abuse its dominant position, or when those rights are liable to create a situation in which that undertaking is led to commit such abuses. On 17 July 2014, the European Court of Justice

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

Peter Alexiadis, The EU Court of Justice holds that a member state may be found to have infringed art. 106(1) TFEU if its measures create a situation in which a public undertaking or an undertaking on which it has conferred special or exclusive rights is led to abuse its dominant position (Greek Lignite case), 17 July 2014, e-Competitions July 2014, Art. N° 73723

Visites 369

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues