The Amsterdam Court of Appeal refuses to recognise the tortious liability of recipients of State aids that have not been notified to the EC Commission in accordance with Art. 88.3 EC (Baby Dan)

Baby Dan is a company which produces security devices for babies, such as stair gates, i.e. gates impeding babies' access to stairs. Before the first instance court of Utrecht, this company introduced an action in damages against two of its competitors, De Risse and WeDeKa, which had, according to Baby Dan, distorted competition by using State aid in order to sell their products below their cost price. Baby Dan argued that De Risse and WeDeKa had committed an unlawful act by accepting State aid. However, in December 2004, the court of first instance of Utrecht held that Baby Dan could not derive any rights from Articles 87(1) EC, 88(3) EC, and Commission Regulation (EC) n° 2204/2002, of 12 December 2002, on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for

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

Authors

  • European Commission - DG HR (Brussels)
  • European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)

Quotation

Tristan Baumé, Sally Janssen, The Amsterdam Court of Appeal refuses to recognise the tortious liability of recipients of State aids that have not been notified to the EC Commission in accordance with Art. 88.3 EC (Baby Dan), 29 June 2006, e-Competitions June 2006, Art. N° 12739

Visites 6189

All issues

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