Communication: new case No. 0690 of 2021

IDENTIFIER
62021TN0690
LANGUAGE
English
COURT
General Court
AG OPINION
NO
REQUEST DATE
REFERENCES MADE
0
REFERENCED
0
DOCUMENT TYPE
Communication: new case

Judgment



20.12.2021   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 513/35


Action brought on 25 October 2021 — LW Capital v Commission

(Case T-690/21)

(2021/C 513/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: LW Capital (Munich, Germany) (represented by: C. Ziegler, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

partially annul the Commission’s Decision of 3 June 2021 on State aid SA.56826 (2020/N) — Germany — [2020 reform of support for cogeneration] (Reform of the German Combined Heat and Power Generation Act 2020 (‘KWKG’)) and State aid SA.53308 (2019/N) — Germany — Change of support to existing CHP plants 2019 (§ 13 KWKG) (OJ 2021 C 306, pp. 1 and 2), to the extent that it does not raise concerns in respect of (i) the support of CHP electricity generation in new, modernised and retrofitted high-efficiency CHP installations and (ii) the support of CHP electricity generation in existing highly efficient gas-fired CHP installations in the district heating sector;

order the Commission to bear its own costs and, in addition, to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law.

By its single plea, the applicant challenges the decision at issue for ‘infringement of the Treaties or of any rule of law relating to their application’ within the meaning of the fourth paragraph read in conjunction with the second paragraph of Article 263 TFEU. That infringement consists in the fact that the Commission should have had concerns in relation to the compatibility of the KWKG 2020 aid scheme proposed by Germany and would therefore have been under an obligation to open the formal investigation procedure in accordance with Article 108(2) TFEU. As the Commission failed to act, it infringed the procedural rights of the applicant.

The applicant alleges the infringement of procedural rights under Article 108(2) in conjunction with the infringement of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and infringements of the principles of non-discrimination, proportionality and legitimate expectations, as well as an error of assessment of the facts.



Citations

Sign up for a free moonlit.ai™ account to access all citing documents.