«(State aid – Effect on competition and trade between Member States – Sectoral guidelines and guidelines on aid for environmental protection)»

1.. State aid – Concept – Selective nature of the measure (EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

2.. State aid – Concept – Differential treatment of undertakings in the application of charges (EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

3.. State aid – Effect on trade between Member States – Aid of minor importance – Exclusion by the Commission of the transport sector from the benefit of the de minimis rule – Scope – Undertakings which only carry out transport on their own account (EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

4.. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Commission decision on State aid – Characterisation of the effect on trade between Member States (EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC); Art. 253 EC)

5.. State aid – Effect on trade between Member States – Adverse effect on competition – Aid relatively small in amount in a sector with strong competition (EC Treaty, Art. 92(1) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) EC))

6.. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Refusal by the Commission to authorise State aid under guidelines that are binding on it – Requirement to classify the aid according to an essential distinction made in the guidelines (EC Treaty, Art. 92(3) (now, after amendment, Art. 87(3); Art. 253 EC)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 13 February 2003 (1)

((State aid – Effect on competition and trade between Member States – Sectoral guidelines and guidelines on aid for environmental protection))

In Case C-409/00,

applicant,

v

defendant,

APPLICATION for the annulment of Commission Decision 2001/605/EC of 26 July 2000 on the aid scheme implemented by Spain for the purchase of commercial vehicles under the Cooperation Agreement of 26 February 1997 between the Ministry for Industry and Energy and the Instituto de Crédito Oficial (OJ 2001 L 212, p. 34),

THE COURT (Third Chamber),,

composed of: J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges,

Advocate General: S. Alber,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing, after hearing oral argument from the parties at the hearing on 20 June 2002, at which the Kingdom of Spain was represented by S. Ortiz Vaamonde, acting as Agent, and the Commission was represented by D. Triantafyllou and S. Pardo,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 10 September 2002,

gives the following

The second plea: infringement of Article 92(1) of the Treaty

The first part, alleging that the Commission wrongly held that the aid issue was by nature selective

Parties' arguments

Findings of the Court

The second part, alleging that the Commission wrongly held that the aid at issue affected competition and trade between Member States and was in any event discriminatory

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

The third plea, alleging, first, infringement of Article 92(3)(c) of the Treaty, and second, insufficient and inconsistent reasoning of the contested decision

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Third Chamber)

hereby:

Puissochet

Macken

Cunha Rodrigues

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 13 February 2003.

R. Grass

J.-P. Puissochet

Registrar

President of the Third Chamber