The Passing on Defence Aviated Into State Aid Law

Annotation on the Judgments of the General Court of 5 February 2015 in Case T-437/12 Aer Lingus v Commission and Case T-500/12 Ryanair v Commission

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

The two annotated judgments concern the aftermath of a differentiated taxation on travelling, which was implemented in breach of the free movement provisions in the Treaties. Airlines (Aer Lingus and Ryanair) who were identified as beneficiaries of the advantage arising from being subject to the low level of taxation, contested the Commission’s calculation of the amount to be recovered. The General Court found for the applicants and stated that the Commission should limit itself to ordering recovery of the advantage actually retained by the airlines, taking into account the competitive situation and the possibility that the advantage could have been passed on to passengers through lower ticket prices. Even if the Commission’s approach in the cases under scrutiny could be justified, the highly complicated economic analysis prescribed by the General Court is standard in other areas of EU law, making it appealing from a perspective of coherence in the EU legal system.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftESTAL - European State Aid Law Quarterly
Vol/bind14
Udgave nummer3
Sider (fra-til)437-442
ISSN1619-5272
StatusUdgivet - 2015

Emneord

  • Advantage
  • Aviation sector
  • Differentiated taxation
  • Recovery

Citer dette

@article{4c6afb6562364d2abc3578394f8676b8,
title = "The Passing on Defence Aviated Into State Aid Law: Annotation on the Judgments of the General Court of 5 February 2015 in Case T-437/12 Aer Lingus v Commission and Case T-500/12 Ryanair v Commission",
abstract = "The two annotated judgments concern the aftermath of a differentiated taxation on travelling, which was implemented in breach of the free movement provisions in the Treaties. Airlines (Aer Lingus and Ryanair) who were identified as beneficiaries of the advantage arising from being subject to the low level of taxation, contested the Commission’s calculation of the amount to be recovered. The General Court found for the applicants and stated that the Commission should limit itself to ordering recovery of the advantage actually retained by the airlines, taking into account the competitive situation and the possibility that the advantage could have been passed on to passengers through lower ticket prices. Even if the Commission’s approach in the cases under scrutiny could be justified, the highly complicated economic analysis prescribed by the General Court is standard in other areas of EU law, making it appealing from a perspective of coherence in the EU legal system.",
keywords = "Advantage, Aviation sector, Differentiated taxation, Recovery, Advantage, Aviation sector, Differentiated taxation, Recovery",
author = "{\O}lykke, {Grith Skovgaard}",
year = "2015",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "437--442",
journal = "European State Aid Law Quarterly",
issn = "1619-5272",
publisher = "Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Passing on Defence Aviated Into State Aid Law

T2 - Annotation on the Judgments of the General Court of 5 February 2015 in Case T-437/12 Aer Lingus v Commission and Case T-500/12 Ryanair v Commission

AU - Ølykke, Grith Skovgaard

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The two annotated judgments concern the aftermath of a differentiated taxation on travelling, which was implemented in breach of the free movement provisions in the Treaties. Airlines (Aer Lingus and Ryanair) who were identified as beneficiaries of the advantage arising from being subject to the low level of taxation, contested the Commission’s calculation of the amount to be recovered. The General Court found for the applicants and stated that the Commission should limit itself to ordering recovery of the advantage actually retained by the airlines, taking into account the competitive situation and the possibility that the advantage could have been passed on to passengers through lower ticket prices. Even if the Commission’s approach in the cases under scrutiny could be justified, the highly complicated economic analysis prescribed by the General Court is standard in other areas of EU law, making it appealing from a perspective of coherence in the EU legal system.

AB - The two annotated judgments concern the aftermath of a differentiated taxation on travelling, which was implemented in breach of the free movement provisions in the Treaties. Airlines (Aer Lingus and Ryanair) who were identified as beneficiaries of the advantage arising from being subject to the low level of taxation, contested the Commission’s calculation of the amount to be recovered. The General Court found for the applicants and stated that the Commission should limit itself to ordering recovery of the advantage actually retained by the airlines, taking into account the competitive situation and the possibility that the advantage could have been passed on to passengers through lower ticket prices. Even if the Commission’s approach in the cases under scrutiny could be justified, the highly complicated economic analysis prescribed by the General Court is standard in other areas of EU law, making it appealing from a perspective of coherence in the EU legal system.

KW - Advantage

KW - Aviation sector

KW - Differentiated taxation

KW - Recovery

KW - Advantage

KW - Aviation sector

KW - Differentiated taxation

KW - Recovery

UR - http://sfx.lib.cbs.dk:3210/sfxlcl3?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=1000000000210690&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

M3 - Journal article

VL - 14

SP - 437

EP - 442

JO - European State Aid Law Quarterly

JF - European State Aid Law Quarterly

SN - 1619-5272

IS - 3

ER -