The EU General Court explains that in the field of State aid it is not necessary to define precisely the relevant market in order to determine the existence of an advantage (Club Hotel Loutraki)

KEYWORDS
References

GCEU, Club Hotel Loutraki AE, Vivere Entertainment AE, Theros International Gaming, Inc., Elliniko Casino Kerkyras, Casino Rodos, Porto Carras AE,

Kazino Aigaiou AE, T-58/13, 8 January 2015

ii) Monopolies and the market economy investor principle* Several casinos in Greece appealed against Commission decision SA.33988 which found that an exclusive licence granted to OPAP, the Greek betting undertaking, to operate 35,000 video lottery terminals [exclusive rights 1] and the extension of existing exclusive rights to operate 13 games of chance [exclusive rights 2] were free of State aid. OPAP had to pay fees to the Greek state for both of these categories of exclusive rights. When the Commission examined the arrangements for each category of exclusive rights, it found that OPAP paid less than

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

Phedon Nicolaides, The EU General Court explains that in the field of State aid it is not necessary to define precisely the relevant market in order to determine the existence of an advantage (Club Hotel Loutraki), 8 January 2015, e-Competitions Exclusive rights (Art. 106 TFEU), Art. N° 71688

Visites 165

All issues

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