EU Court Clears Germany of Illegally Giving State Aid to Heavy Industry
The EU's Court of Justice found that Germany acted legally when it exempted heavy industry from subsidies intended to aid in the development of wind and solar power and that the exemptions should not be classified as state aid.
March 28, 2019 at 04:30 PM
2 minute read
The European Union's Court of Justice on Thursday reversed a decision by the European Commission that had classified Germany's support system for renewable energy as state aid.
The Court of Justice, the EU's supreme court, found that Germany's move to exempt heavy industry from surcharges imposed to subsidise the development of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, was legal and should not be classified as state aid.
Under EU law, national governments can only provide state aid under strict conditions to prevent distortions of competition in the EU's single market.
In Germany, levies had been imposed on power bills to subsidise the development of renewable energy. But the country exempted from the surcharge companies that required a lot of energy, so that it would not affect their competitiveness.
The Court of Justice found that the action taken should not be treated as state aid under the EU's definition because it failed to meet two necessary conditions: the money that benefited energy-intensive industries did not come from the German government and was not controlled by the government. Also, there were no advantages to the beneficiaries of the scheme over other economic operators.
The case illustrates the sensitivity EU member states have around issues of energy policy and European Commission rules that affect national policies.
"Beyond the technical aspects of state aid law, this case is also about the broader issue of member states determining their energy mix on an autonomous basis," said Thomas Luebbig, an attorney with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in Berlin, who represented the German Government in the case.
The ruling follows a 2014 decision by the commission finding that the surcharge exemption should be counted as state aid. The German Government appealed the commission's decision.
Germany established the support system for renewable energy in 2012, as part of its drive to decarbonise its energy sector.
The German Government appealed the commission's decision in 2016 at the EU's General Court. The General Court dismissed Germany's appeal. The government then appealed the General Court's ruling at the EU's Court of Justice.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDoctors and Scientists Lead Climate Protests at Each Magic Circle Firm
Leigh Day Cleared of Wrongdoing in £55M Shell Settlement with Nigeria
2 minute readLinklaters Leads on $2B Omani Energy IPO, the GCC's Largest This Year
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250