Abertis Telecom Terrestre v Commission (Judgment) French Text [2016] EUECJ T-37/15 (15 December 2016)
The General Court held that the Commission correctly found the public funding for digital terrestrial television in Castille-La Manche constituted State aid incompatible with the internal market under Article 107 TFEU. The applicants were the direct beneficiaries, the absence of open tendering conferred a selective...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] EUECJ T-37/15
- Parties
- Applicant: Abertis Telecom Terrestre, SA; Applicant: Telecom Castilla-La Mancha, SA; Respondent: Commission européenne; Intervener: SES Astra
- Jurisdiction
- European Union
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Annulment Action (article 263 Tfeu) / Judgment at First Instance (general Court, Fifth Chamber)
- Outcome
- Applications dismissed
- Legal Topics
- State Aid Compatibility, Digital Television Transition, Distortion of Competition, Article 107 TFEU, Recovery of Unlawful Aid
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Abertis Telecom Terrestre, SA
Applicant
Telecom Castilla-La Mancha, SA
Applicant
Commission européenne
Respondent
SES Astra
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Annulment Action (article 263 Tfeu) / Judgment at First Instance (general Court, Fifth Chamber)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the public funding for digital terrestrial television in Castille-La Manche constitutes incompatible State aid under Article 107 TFEU
- 2 Whether the Commission erred in identifying the beneficiaries and the existence of an economic advantage
- 3 Whether the absence of public tendering procedures created a selective advantage
Ratio Decidendi
The General Court held that the Commission correctly found the public funding for digital terrestrial television in Castille-La Manche constituted State aid incompatible with the internal market under Article 107 TFEU. The applicants were the direct beneficiaries, the absence of open tendering conferred a selective advantage, and the aid distorted competition. The Commission did not err in its identification of the beneficiaries or in its reasoning. The recovery orders were upheld.
Court Disposition
Applications dismissed
Orders
- The actions are dismissed.
- Applicants are ordered to pay the costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment