Judgments of Court of Justice of the European Communities nº C-521/06 P, of July 17, 2008

In Case C-521/06 P,

APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, brought on 18 December 2006,

Athinaïki Techniki AE, established in Athens (Greece), represented by S. Pappas, dikigoros,

appellant,

the other parties to the proceedings being:

Commission of the European Communities, represented by D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg,

defendant at first instance,

Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon, established in Marrousi (Greece), represented by F. Carlin, Barrister, and N. Korogiannakis, dikigoros,

intervener at first instance,

THE COURT (Fourth Chamber),

composed of K. Lenaerts, President of the Chamber, G. Arestis, R. Silva de Lapuerta, J. Malenovský (Rapporteur) and T. von Danwitz, Judges,

Advocate General: Y. Bot,

Registrar: R. Grass,

having regard to the written procedure,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 3 April 2008,

gives the following

Judgment

1         By its appeal, Athinaïki Techniki AE (-Athinaïki Techniki-) is seeking to have quashed the order of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 26 September 2006 in Case T-94/05 Athinaïki Techniki v Commission (-the order under appeal-), by which the Court of First Instance dismissed as inadmissible Athinaïki Techniki-s action seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 2 June 2004 to take no further action on its complaint concerning alleged State aid granted by the Hellenic Republic to the Hyatt Regency consortium in connection with the public contract for the disposal of 49% of the capital of Casino Mont Parnès, of which the appellant was made aware by letter of 2 December 2004 (-the letter in dispute-).

 Legal context

2         Article 87(1) EC provides:

-Save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it af...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here