The General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on Wednesday rejected the action submitted by Wizz Air regarding the aid granted by Romania to the national airline TAROM as compensation for the damages suffered as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and decided that the aid, which amounts to almost two million euros, is compatible with the internal market, informs a press release of the CJEU.
On February 3, 2022, Romania notified the Commission of an individual aid of almost two million euros, in the form of a capital increase, intended for the Romanian airline TAROM. This aid is financed from the general budget of Romania and seeks to compensate TAROM for the damages suffered on 14 specific international routes in the period between July 1 and December 31, 2020, due to travel restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
On April 29, 2022, the Commission considered this aid to be compatible with the internal market, pursuant to Article 107 paragraph (2) letter (b) TFEU, without opening a formal investigation procedure. However, the competing airline Wizz Air contested this decision before the Court of the European Union, which today rejected its action.
The court recalls, among other things, that aid compensating for damage caused by extraordinary events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, is authorized and that the measure in question seeks to compensate TAROM for the damage it would have suffered between July 1 and December 31, 2020, as a result of the travel restrictions in force during that period related to this pandemic.
In addition, the General Court equally rejected Wizz Air's arguments that the Commission had not taken into account the rescue aid previously granted to TAROM under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and that the Commission had underestimated the competitive advantage obtained by TAROM.
On the one hand, the previous aid and the measure in question are distinct and do not cover the same costs and, on the other hand, the Commission is not obliged to take into account a possible advantage that TAROM would have benefited from indirectly, such as the competitive advantage invoked by Wizz Air, it is also shown in the reasoning of the General Court.
Comentează