Examples of using Contested aid in English and their translations into Portuguese
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
The contested aid was abolished by the French authorities in 2002.
According to the applicant, when the contested aid was granted, small orders were not defined.
First of all,it established the relevance of small orders as a criterion for justifying the granting of the contested aid recitals 187 to 197.
Finally, the Commission established that the contested aid did not overcompensate the costs of processing of small orders.
By letter of 7 August 1992, the Commission confirmed to the applicant that certain aid granted to CELF, including the contested aid, had not been notified.
The only subsidy which is the subject of the present case(‘the contested aid') was granted on an annual basis from 1980, although the amount of the subsidy varied as of.
In the further alternative,annul the last sentence of Article 1 of the contested decision in so far as it declares the contested aid compatible before 1 November 1993;
The French Republic submits that CELF benefited from the contested aid on account of its general interest objective of meeting unprofitable orders placed by foreign booksellers.
In the light of the foregoing considerations, I do not consider that the Commission,by ordering repayment of the contested aid, could have infringed Salzgitter's legal certainty.
The Commission therefore declared the contested aid compatible with the common market after weighing the objectives of promoting French culture against those of safeguarding free competition.
It is apparent from the last sentence of Article 1 of the contested decision that the contested aid was declared compatible with the common market under Article 87(3)(d) EC.
In the light of the foregoing, the second part of the third plea,alleging a manifest error of assessment in the examination of the compatibility of the contested aid.
The first plea alleges that there is no legal basis for declaring the contested aid compatible with the common market prior to 1 November 1993.
The Court notes the assertion by the Commission and the interveners that in 1986 no trade in cement existed between Greece and the other Member States and that, consequently,intraCommunity trade could not have been affected by the contested aid.
As a consequence, the Commission simply checked the compatibility of the contested aid on the export agency market under Article 87(3)(d) EC recital 186.
It is in the light of those principles that it is necessary to consider whether the applicant has succeeded in demonstrating that the contested decision is vitiated by a manifest error of assessment as regards the examination of whether the contested aid is compatible with the common market.
Secondly, it verified that the justification for the contested aid was genuine, namely that there were extra costs directly associated with the processing of small orders.
It considers that the Commission committed an error by calculating the costs directly associated with small orders during the whole period in which the contested aid was paid on the basis of an extrapolation of the data for 1994 alone.
Since no consistent method of calculation was used, the contested aid should be regarded as an operating subsidy, granted irrespective of the extra costs incurred in processing small orders.
If the Commission had calculated the turnover for small orders in accordance with the method it used to calculate the cost of purchasing books for small orders, the resulting turnover would have been much higher than that calculated in the contested decision,which would have had an impact on whether the contested aid was classified as excessive in relation to the cultural objective covered by the derogation in Article 87(3)(d) EC which was identified by the Commission in the contested decision.
In the present case, the object of the contested aid was to disseminate French language and literature by means of a mechanism offsetting the extra costs of handling small orders.
The Commission nevertheless took the view in the contested decision(recital 212) that the effect of the French authorities' error, repeated in its own calculations,was not such as to call into question the proportionate nature of the contested aid, since the financial incidence of the switch of teletransmitted orders and orders not so transmitted amounted to the modest sum of EUR 0.24 per book.
Secondly, when examining the compatibility of the contested aid with the common market in coal and steel, it explains why the application of Article 87(2)(c) EC to a steel undertaking is automatically ruled out paragraphs 110 to 120.
In order to ascertain the effect that error had on the Commission's assessment in the contested decision as to whether the contested aid was excessive, the Court asked the Commission to provide it with a calculation of the costs associated with small orders without individual multiplying factors.
The contested aid consisted of a package of annual subsidies, each of which was specifically intended to offset the extra costs incurred each year in handling orders from booksellers established abroad to the value of FRF 500(EUR 76.22) or less, excluding costs of carriage(‘small orders'), which were considered to be below the break-even point.
In that regard, the Commission states, first,that the cultural objective of the aid at issue was not called into question by the applicant and, second, that the contested aid did not overcompensate the costs relating to the activities in question, even though the file submitted by the French authorities is not without its weak points and provides no guarantee as to exactly how all the sums were used.
As the European Airbus company considerably increased its sales in 1987,the American authorities contested the aid granted by European governments to the Air bus programme, considering that this practice was disloyal and infringed the rules of the GATTcode.