the rules of the European Union on State aid are applicable to measures relating to the area of nuclear energy
the Commission did not err in taking the view that the UK was entitled to define the development of nuclear energy as being a public-interest objective, even though that objective is not shared by all of the Member States
The General Court notes in this regard that the objective of promoting nuclear power, and, more specifically, of promoting the creation of new nuclear energy production capacities, is related to theEuratom Community’s goal of facilitating investment in the nuclear field. Furthermore, it followsfrom the FEU Treaty that each Member State has the right to choose between the different energy sources those which it prefers.
JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Fifth Chamber)
12 July 2018 (*)
(State aid — Aid planned by the United Kingdom in favour of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station — Contract for Difference, Secretary of State Agreement and Credit Guarantee — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market — Article 107(3)(c) TFEU — Public interest objective — Promotion of nuclear energy — Need for State intervention — Guarantee Notice — Determination of the aid element — Proportionality — Investment aid — Operating aid — Right to submit observations — Public procurement procedure — Obligation to state reasons)
In Case T?356/15,
Republic of Austria, represented initially by C. Pesendorfer and M. Klamert, and subsequently by G. Hesse and M. Fruhmann, acting as Agents, and by H. Kristoferitsch, lawyer,
applicant,
supported by
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, represented by D. Holderer, acting as Agent, and by P. Kinsch, lawyer,
intervener,
v
European Commission, represented by É. Gippini Fournier, R. Sauer, T. Maxian Rusche and P. N?me?ková, acting as Agents,
defendant,
supported by
Czech Republic, represented by M. Smolek, T. Müller and J. Vlá?il, acting as Agents,
by
French Republic, represented initially by G. de Bergues, D. Colas and J. Bousin, and subsequently by D. Colas and J. Bousin, acting as Agents,
by
Hungary, represented initially by M. Fehér and M. Bóra, subsequently by B. Sonkodi, then by A. Steiner, acting as Agents, and by P. Nagy, lawyer, and finally by A. Steiner,
by
Republic of Poland, represented by B. Majczyna, acting as Agent,
by
Romania, represented initially by R. Radu and M. Bejenar, and subsequently by M. Bejenar and C.?R. Can??r, acting as Agents,
by
Slovak Republic, represented by B. Ricziová, acting as Agent,
and by
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented initially by C. Brodie and S. Brandon, subsequently by C. Brodie, S. Simmons and M. Holt, then by C. Brodie, S. Simmons and D. Robertson, then by C. Brodie, and finally by C. Brodie and Z. Lavery, acting as Agents, and by T. Johnston, Barrister, and A. Robertson QC,
Follow