The Austrian Supreme Court finds that the protective scope of standstill obligations does not include the prevention of damages incurred by a competitor who has been unlawfully passed over in a public tender (Bank Burgenland III)

Background & Facts of the case One of the most prominent lines of recent Austrian State aid case law is probably the one pertaining to Bank Burgenland (“BB”), which, until its privatisation, was a regional bank taking the form of a company limited by shares under Austrian law with its registered office in Eisenstadt (Austria). In 2005, it was wholly owned by the province of Burgenland. According to a provincial law (that had already existed before Austria’s accession to the EEC), the province of Burgenland was liable as deficiency guarantor for all the bank’s liabilities in the event of default. Following an agreement between the Commission and the Republic of Austria [1], this guarantee system had to be abolished by 30 September

L'accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés

Déjà abonné ? Identifiez-vous

L’accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés.

Lire gratuitement un article

Vous pouvez lire cet article gratuitement en vous inscrivant.