Selectivity: The General Court of the European Union dismisses the action brought against the European Commission’s “Alumina II decision” and reminds that once it has established the a priori selective nature of a measure, it is then for the Member State or the beneficiary of the State aid challenging the selective nature of the measure to show that it is justified by the nature and general scheme of the domestic tax system (Irland and Aughinish Alumina)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. It is not possible here to review all the facts and developments in this lengthy process or to consider all the substantive issues that have been addressed since 2006 in this series of cases. For its background, it is useful to refer to the previous observations in Concurrences CFI, 12 December 2007, Ireland and Others v Commission, T-50/06, Concurrences No. 1-2008, p. 155, obs. J.-Y. C. ; CJEU, 2 December 2009, Commission v. Ireland and Others, C-89/08 P, Concurrences No. 1-2010, p. 147, obs. J.-Y. C. and "Procedures" column, no. 1-2010, pp. 158-160, obs. A. M. Trib. EU, 21 March 2012, Ireland and others v Commission, T-50/06 RENV I, Concurrences No. 3-2012,

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.