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

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).

Zie ook : Gomez-Acebo & Pombo ( Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer )

Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer

Click here to see the ad(s)
Alle artikels Europees recht

Laatste artikels Europees recht

Mergers to be controlled in both Brussels and London in case of no-deal Brexit

In a UK parliamentary vote on March 14, MPs voted to ask the EU for a delay to Brexit and rejected the idea of leaving the...

Mergers to be controlled in both Brussels and London in case of no-deal Brexit Read more

Impact of Brexit on the litigation rules of the Brussels and Rome EU Regulations

On 29 March 2019, the United Kingdom is supposed to leave the European Union as a consequence of the referendum held in th...

Impact of Brexit on the litigation rules of the Brussels and Rome EU Regulations Read more

Belgium braces for Hard Brexit with draft law

On February 19, Belgium passed a draft law preparing itself for a Hard Brexit should the UK leave the European Union (EU) ...

Belgium braces for Hard Brexit with draft law Read more

‘To be, or not to be’ ... Brexit, Act III (with apologies to William Shakespeare)

On February 28, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee issued a statement that it had published as evidence, a Nat...

Read more

Laatste artikels van Mr. Miguel Troncoso-Ferrer

The Commission clears the acquisition of parts of Fox by Disney with commitments

On 14 September 2018, Disney noti ed its proposed acquisition of certain parts of Fox’ business. Disney and Fox are ...

Read more

The European Commission fines Google EUR4.34 billion for abuse of dominance

The European Commission has found that Google has been imposing illegal restrictions on Android device manufacturers and m...

Read more

New EU Regulation to ban unjustified geo-blocking in the internal mark

Regulation 2018/302 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2018 on addressing unjusti ed geo-blockin...

Read more

A new Belgian Code of Companies and Associations

An important modification in the field of Belgian corporate law is now on track and it also concerns non-profit associatio...

Read more

LexGO Network