Einde inhoudsopgave
State aid to banks (IVOR nr. 109) 2018/2.5.3
2.5.3 Misuse of aid
mr. drs. R.E. van Lambalgen, datum 01-12-2017
- Datum
01-12-2017
- Auteur
mr. drs. R.E. van Lambalgen
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS587001:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Financieel recht / Europees financieel recht
Mededingingsrecht / EU-mededingingsrecht
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
In the case of Caixa Geral de Depositos (SA.35062, 18 December 2012), the Commission considered that the breach of a dividend ban constituted misuse of aid. Another example is the case of the Latvia bank ‘Parex banka’. Latvia had committed that the bank would divest the Wealth Management Business within a certain deadline. However, the divestment did not take place within the agreed deadline. This constituted a breach of the terms of the Parex Final Decision and hence a misuse of the aid granted. The Commission therefore opened the formal investigation procedure (Parex banka, SA.36612, 16 April 2014, para. 60).
In Article 1(g) of the Procedural Regulation, ‘misuse of aid’ is defined as aid used by the beneficiary in contravention of a decision taken pursuant to Article 4 (3) or Article 9(3) or 9(4) of the Procedural Regulation. These provisions refer to: i) the decision not to raise objections, ii) the positive decision and iii) the conditional decision. The result of these decisions is that the aid measure is declared compatible with the common market. The aid measure is authorised for a certain purpose. If, after the aid measure has been authorised, the Member State decides to use the aid for a different purpose, then there is misuse of aid within the meaning of Article 1(g).
The procedure regarding misuse of aid is laid down in Article 20 of the Pro-cedural Regulation. This Article provides that the Commission may, in cases of misuse of aid, initiate the formal investigation procedure. 1