Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 29 April 2021.Fortischem a.s. v European Commission.Appeal – State aid – Advantage – Recovery – Economic continuity.Case C-890/19 P.

Judgment // 29/04/2021 // 2 min read
bookmark 18 citations

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 29 April 2021 – Fortischem v Commission

(Case C‑890/19 P) ( 1 )

(Appeal – State aid – Advantage – Recovery – Economic continuity)

  1. State aid — Concept — Grant of an advantage to the beneficiaries — Application of rules derogating from the normal insolvency rules to strategic insolvent companies — Included — Conditions — Obligation on the insolvency administrator to continue to operate the undertaking, irrespective of its economic situation, and to prevent unjustified collective dismissals — Included

(Art. 107(1) TFEU)

(see paras 32, 42-44)

  1. Action for annulment — Jurisdiction of the EU judicature — Interpretation of the reasoning of an administrative measure — Limits — Substitution of the reasoning of the EU Court for that of the author of the contested act — Not permissible

(Arts 263 and 264 TFEU)

(see paras 48-50)

  1. State aid — Recovery of unlawful aid — Determination of the debtor where assets transferred — Undertaking in receipt of aid becoming insolvent — Constitution of a new undertaking to carry on its business — Repayment incumbent on the new undertaking — Conditions — ‘Economic continuity’ criterion between undertakings — Elements to be taken into consideration

(Art. 108(2) TFEU)

(see paras 58, 59, 79, 80, 86, 88, 96, 100)

  1. Appeal — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted — Plea alleging distortion of the facts — Need to indicate precisely the evidence alleged to have been distorted and show the errors of appraisal which led to that distortion

(Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 168(1)(d))

(see paras 69-71)

  1. Appeal — Grounds — Ground of appeal against a ground of the judgment not necessary to support the operative part — Invalid ground of appeal

(see paras 102, 103, 110)

Operative part

  1. Dismisses the appeal.

  2. Orders Fortischem a.s. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by AlzChem AG.

( 1 ) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.

State aids , Competition