CASE COMMENTS: STATE AIDS – CJEU – LOSS CARRYOVER – SELECTIVE NATURE OF A SCHEME – REFERENCE FRAMEWORK

Selective nature of a scheme: The Court of Justice of the European Union annuls a judgement of the General Court and a decision of the Commission concerning the selective nature of a possibility to carry forward past losses, because the reference framework used to carry out the analysis of selectivity was too narrow and too much focused on the legislative technique used by the Member State (Dirk Andres)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. The Dirk Andres v. Commission judgment is one of four judgments delivered on 28 June 2018 on the same Commission decision, which considered the possibility offered by Germany to companies in difficulty to carry forward losses as selective and constituting State aid. These four judgments are very similar and only the Dirk Andres v Commission judgment will therefore be commented on here. One might have thought that with the judgments Commission v World Duty Free (judgment of the Court of 21 December 2016 in Joined Cases C-20/15 P and C-21/15 P, EU:C:2016:981) and Commission v Hansestadt Lübeck (judgment of the Court of 21 December 2016 in Case C-524/14 P,

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

  • European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)

Quotation

Bruno Stromsky, Selective nature of a scheme: The Court of Justice of the European Union annuls a judgement of the General Court and a decision of the Commission concerning the selective nature of a possibility to carry forward past losses, because the reference framework used to carry out the analysis of selectivity was too narrow and too much focused on the legislative technique used by the Member State (Dirk Andres), 28 June 2018, Concurrences N° 3-2018, Art. N° 87631, pp. 154-155

Visites 201

All reviews