Case C‑657/15 P
Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd
v
TV2/Danmark A/S
(Appeal — State aid — Article 107 (1) TFEU — Public broadcasting service — Measures implemented by the Danish authorities in favour of the Danish broadcaster TV2/Danmark — Concept of ‘aid granted by a Member State or through State resources’ — Judgment in Altmark)
Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 9 November 2017
State aid—Meaning—Aid from State resources—Concept of State resources—Revenue of a public broadcaster deriving from the sale of its advertising space by another public undertaking—Revenue administered by public undertakings created, owned and appointed by the State—Included
(Art. 107(1) TFEU)
Appeal—Grounds—Heads of claim not seeking to have set aside, in whole or in part, the decision set out in the operative part of the judgment under appeal—Inadmissibility
(Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 169(1))
Article 107 (1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that the revenue of a public broadcaster deriving from the sale of its advertising space by another public undertaking constitutes State resources, provided that the entire distribution channel of that revenue ending with its transfer to that broadcaster is governed by the national legislation, under which public undertakings specially appointed by the State have the task of administering that revenue.
The concept of intervention ‘through State resources’, within the meaning of that provision, is intended to cover, in addition to advantages granted directly by a State, those granted through a public or private body appointed or established by that State to administer the aid. EU law cannot permit the rules on State aid to be circumvented merely through the creation of autonomous institutions charged with allocating aid
Further, since the resources of public undertakings are subject to the control of the State and are therefore at its disposal, those resources fall within the scope of the concept of ‘State resources’, within the meaning of Article 107 (1) TFEU. The State is perfectly capable, by exercising its dominant influence over such undertakings, of directing the use of their resources in order, as the occasion arises, to finance specific advantages in favour of other undertakings. The fact that the resources concerned may be administered by entities that are distinct from the public authorities or that the source of those resources may be private is of no significance in that regard.
(see paras 36, 37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45)
See the text of the judgment.
(see paras 66-69)