*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. – ECJ, 5 October 2006, Transalpine Ölleitung in Österreich Gmbh (TAL) a. o. v. Finanzlandesdirektion für Tirol a. o., case C-368/04 The number of requests for preliminary rulings on State aid matters, and more specifically on State aid litigation, is increasing; indeed, this is one of the major shipyards of the future. The question of whether national courts should disapply a law constituting unlawful aid, but subsequently declared compatible by the Commission, was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities (Transalpine judgment, paragraph 33). A look back at the Adria-Wien Pipeline case At issue was an Austrian law, the first version of
CASE COMMENT: PROCEDURES - STATE AID - LITIGATION - EXCLUSION FROM THE BENEFIT OF A TAX REIMBURSEMENT - ILLEGAL STATE AID - ACTION FOR REIMBURSEMENT - DECISION OF COMPATIBILITY - EFFECT - LACK OF EX POST FACTO REGULARISATION
Lack of ex post facto regularisation: The ECJ holds that a decision of compatibility does not have the effect of regularising measures implementing an aid (Transalpine Ölleitung in Österreich)
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.