The US government applies to intervene in Apple’s EU State Aid case for a second time
13/02/2018

Apple and the Irish government have appealed the 2016 Commission’s Decision whereby Ireland was ordered to recover up to EUR 13 billion from the American IT manufacturer.

The US applied to intervene in the case before the General Court of the EU. However, by order of 15 December 2017 in Case T-892/16, Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe v Commission, this application was rejected by the Court due to the US failure to show that it was directly concerned by the decision in question or that it has a particular interest in the case. The US has challenged the Court’s order to reject its application to intervene. The reference of the appeal is C—12/18 P(I).

The procedural rules of the General Court of the EU allow Member States and other interested parties to intervene in a case. Whereas this right is automatically recognised for EU Member States, companies and third countries are required to demonstrate that they have a specific interest in the outcome of the case for the right to intervene to be granted.

In this sense, the US argued that: (i) its tax revenues would decrease if the decision is upheld; (ii) the bilateral tax agreement between Ireland and the US would be negatively affected and (iii) the development of the OECD’s transfer pricing rules may be harmed.

The application to intervene filed by the Irish Business and Employers Association has also been rejected by the General Court of the EU.

It is not common that foreign governments seek to appear in support of a party in EU judicial proceedings. The most recent precedent dates back from 1983, when the government of Dominica intervened in a case relating to banana imports (Order of the Court of Justice of the EU of 23 February 1983 in Joined Cases 91 and 200/82, Chris International Foods Ltd v Commission of the European Communities).

Voir aussi : Gomez-Acebo & Pombo ( Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer )

Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer
Partner
mtroncoso@gomezacebo-pombo.com

Tous les articles Droit Européen

Derniers articles Droit Européen

The European Commission undertakes the review of SMEs’ definition
08/02/2018

The European Commission is reviewing the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) established by Rec...

Read more

Brexit Business Brief newsletter | The transition period
02/02/2018

After the EU27 and the UK reached outline agreement on the terms of the UK’s withdrawal just before Christmas, we no...

Brexit Business Brief newsletter | The transition period Read more

Qualcomm fined for abusing exclusivity rebates
02/02/2018

Qualcomm has been fined nearly EUR 1 billion over an exclusivity agreement with Apple. Under a 2011 agreement, Apple co...

Qualcomm fined for abusing exclusivity rebates Read more

The European Commission fines Qualcomm EUR 997 million for abuse of dominance .
01/02/2018

The Commission investigation has shown that Qualcomm held a dominant position in the worldwide market for Long-Term Evolut...

Read more

Derniers articles de Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer

The European Commission undertakes the review of SMEs’ definition
08/02/2018

The European Commission is reviewing the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) established by Rec...

Read more

The European Commission fines Qualcomm EUR 997 million for abuse of dominance .
01/02/2018

The Commission investigation has shown that Qualcomm held a dominant position in the worldwide market for Long-Term Evolut...

Read more

The Court of Justice of the EU nds that luxury goods’ suppliers can prevent authorized distribut...
08/01/2018

Coty Germany (“Coty”) is a luxury cosmetic goods’ supplier in Germany Coty preserves the luxury image of...

Read more

The European Commission finds the International Skating Union’s (“ISU”) rules, which foresee sign...
02/01/2018

The ISU is the only body recognised by the International Olympic Commi ee (“IOC”) in charge of managing gure s...

Read more

LexGO Network