«(State aid – Compensation for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany – Serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State – Regional economic development – Community framework for State aid in the motor vehicle industry)»

1.. State aid – Prohibited – Derogations – Aid for areas affected by the division of Germany – Scope of the derogation – Strict interpretation – Economic disadvantages caused by the isolation created by the frontier established between the two zones (Art. 92(1) and (2)(c) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 87(1) and (2)(c) EC)

2.. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Decision consistent with previous decisions – Permissibility of summary statement of reasons (Art. 190 of the EC Treaty (now Art. 253 EC))

3.. Appeals – Grounds – Plea put forward for the first time in the appeal – Inadmissible (Rules of Procedure of the Court, Arts. 42(2) and 118)

4.. State aid – Prohibited – Derogations – Aid which may be regarded as compatible with the common market – Aid to remedy serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State – Strict interpretation – Disturbance affecting the whole of the economy of the Member State concerned (Art. 92(3)(a)(b) and (c) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 87(3)(a), (b) and (c) EC))

5.. Appeals – Grounds – Plea challenging the decision of the Court of First Instance on costs – Inadmissible where all other pleas rejected (Statute of the Court, Art. 51, second para.)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 30 September 2003 (1)

((State aid – Compensation for the economic disadvantages caused by the division of Germany – Serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State – Regional economic development – Community framework for State aid in the motor vehicle industry))

In Joined Cases C-57/00 P and C-61/00 P,

appellants,

APPEALS against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 15 December 1999 in Joined Cases T-132/96 and T-143/96

the other parties to the proceedings being:

interveners at first instance,

THE COURT,,

composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and C.W.A. Timmermans (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken (Rapporteur), S. von Bahr and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges,

Advocate General: J. Mischo,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing, after hearing oral argument from the parties at the hearing on 26 February 2002, at which the Freistaat Sachsen was represented by T. Lübbig, Rechtsanwalt, Volkswagen AG and Volkswagen Sachsen GmbH by M. Schütte, the Commission by K.-D. Borchardt and M. Núñez-Müller, and the Federal Republic of Germany by T. Oppermann and W.-D. Plessing, acting as Agent,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 28 May 2002,

gives the following

.

First part of the plea

The wording of Article 92(2)(c) of the Treaty

─ Arguments of the parties

─ Findings of the Court

The history and effectiveness of Article 92(2)(c) of the Treaty

─ Arguments of the parties

─ Findings of the Court

The scheme of Article 92(2)(c) of the Treaty

─ Arguments of the parties

─ Findings of the Court

Second part of the plea

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

On those grounds,

THE COURT

hereby:

Rodríguez Iglesias

Puissochet

Wathelet

Schintgen

Timmermans

Edward

Jann

Skouris

Macken

von Bahr

Cunha Rodrigues

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 30 September 2003.

R. Grass

G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias

Registrar

President