Press and Information Division
PRESS RELEASE No 31/2001
12 July 2001
Judgment of the Court of First Instance in Joined Cases T-12/99 and T-63/99
UK Coal (formerly RJB Mining) v Commission
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE DISMISSES ACTIONS BROUGHT BY RJB
MINING AGAINST DECISIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION
AUTHORISING AID GRANTED BY GERMANY TO ITS COAL INDUSTRY FOR
1998 AND 1999
According to the Court, the European Commission was not required to take account of the
impact of the merger which took place in 1998 in the German coal industry when assessing
aid granted by Germany to that industry for 1998 and 1999
On 29 July 1998, the Commission approved the merger of three German coal producers:
RAG Aktiengesellschaft (RAG), Saarbergwerke (SBW) and Preussag Anthrazit GmbH. That
merger forms part of an agreement concerning coal (the "Kohlekompromiss") concluded by those
three producers and the German authorities, which provides for the grant of State aid by the
German Government. In February 2000 the Commission initiated a formal procedure with a view
to obtaining information from the German Government on aid which may have been linked to the
merger, in particular with regard to the purchase of SBW by RAG for DEM 1.
In an action brought by RJB Mining, a mining company in competition with RAG established in
the United Kingdom, the Court of First Instance annulled the decision approving the merger
on 31 January 2001 on the ground that the Commission had failed to assess sufficiently the
extent to which the price of DEM 1 for the sale of SBW to RAG strengthened RAG's financial
power (see Press Release No 2/2001; appeals have been brought against that judgment).
On 2 December 1998 the Commission adopted a decision on German aid to the coal industry
for 1998. In that decision, the Commission authorised "operating aid" amounting to
DEM 5 252 000 000 and "aid for the reduction of activity" totalling DEM 3 164 000 000.
On 22 December 1998 the Commission adopted a decision on German aid to the coal industry
for 1999. In that decision, the Commission authorised "operating aid" amounting to
DEM 5 214 000 000 and "aid for the reduction of activity" totalling DEM 3 220 000 000.
Because of a large reduction in demand in the United Kingdom since 1990, RJB Mining has
attempted to find a market for some of its surplus production, in particular in Germany. RJB
Mining asked the Court to annul the Commission decisions of 2 December 1998 (Case T-12/99)
and 22 December 1998 (Case T-63/99) for a number of breaches of the ECSC Treaty and the
Code. It also claimed that the Commission, in its assessment of the German aid to the coal
industry for 1998 and 1999, failed to have sufficient regard to whether the merger involved
unnotified State aid.
Today the Court of First Instance dismissed those actions, holding that the Commission did
not manifestly err in its assessment when authorising the State aid.
Noting that the merger became effective in 1998, the Court found that the State aid complained
of by RJB Mining amounting to DEM 1 billion, if its existence were to be established, should be
considered to have been received by RAG during the same year. The Court therefore held that
the Commission could not be criticised for a manifest error of assessment in not having
taken account of the possible aid so far as concerns its decision relating to 1999.
As regards the decision relating to 1998, the Court found that the Commission did not receive in
that year precise information that RAG had received aid of DEM 1 billion. In addition, the very
assessment of the alleged amount of DEM 1 billion raised complex economic and financial
questions which the Commission could not decide before adopting the decision on the aid relating
to 1998.
The Court observed that adoption of that decision could be delayed no longer inasmuch as it
authorised, at the end of 1998 and after the event, aid already paid in the course of the same
year. If account had been taken of the periods necessary for carrying out and completing an
investigation into the impact of the merger, the system governing the authorisation of annual
aid would have been undermined.
The same reasoning held for the assessment of the synergies alleged to be achieved by the
merger.
NB: an appeal, limited to points of law, may be brought before the Court of Justice of
the European Communities against this decision of the Court of First Instance within
two months of its notification.
|
Available in English, French and German.
For the full text of the judgment, please consult our Internet page www.curia.eu.int
For further information please contact Fionnuala Connolly:
Tel: (00 352) 4303 3355; Fax: (00 352) 4303 2731 |