Spanish
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) definitively dismissed this Thursday the appeals in cassation filed by two associations of private postal operators against the decision of the European Commission that endorsed the 1.280 million in public aid granted by Spain to Correos between 2011 and 2020.
The Luxembourg Court thus upholds a previous ruling in which its court of first instance (the General Court of the EU) declared that neither the Professional Association of Correspondence Delivery and Handling Companies (Asempre) nor the Business Organization of Logistics and Transport (Uno) have "standing" to challenge said decision nor "were substantially affected" by the public aid authorized by the Community Executive for Correos from the Spanish State.
The two associations went to the EU Court of Justice to overturn the decision of the European Commission that approved the 1.28 billion euros in public funds directed to Correos in its "universal service obligation" function between 2011 and 2020.
You can also read: Donald Trump and Maria Corina Machado will have lunch this Thursday at the White House
Brussels then concluded that said compensations were state aid "compatible with the internal market" despite the fact that a large part of the amount had already been disbursed to the postal service before it was notified to the community authorities. This analysis contrasted with the one that the Commission itself made regarding public aid to Correos during the period 2004-2010, in which it did consider that there was an "excessive" compensation incompatible with European regulations and ordered the State to recover 167 million euros. In its ruling this Thursday, the Court of Justice states that the previous ruling "sufficiently explained" the reasons why it declared that the granting of aid for the period 2011-2020 "could not substantially affect the competitive position of the members" of the two associations that filed the appeals for cassation. In this line, European judges maintain that the General Court correctly appreciated that "the fact that there were fewer and fewer operators in the postal sector did not demonstrate that the very existence of the appellant's members in the market was threatened." Regarding the "active standing" of both associations to challenge the European Commission's decision, the ruling states that this "could not be inferred from the mere fact that it actively participated" in the prior examination that led to the subsequent endorsement of the aid. It is also not "relevant" in the analysis of whether they were individually affected by the fact that they play "an active role in defending the interests of the postal sector" and have filed "several appeals in Spain to defend the interests of their members".On the other hand, Thursday's ruling indicates that neither of the two associations "can reasonably maintain" that the General Court erred in law by requiring them to bear an "excessive burden of proof" in order to demonstrate that they were "substantially" affected by the public aid to Correos.
Finally, it dismisses the claim based on an "excessive duration" of the case since "no indication has been provided that the alleged failure to observe a reasonable trial period" of the General Court "could have influenced the outcome of the litigation".
