94/220/EC: Commission Decision of 26 January 1994 requiring France to suspend the payment to Groupe Bull of aid granted in breach of Article 93 (3) of the EC Treaty (Text with EEA relevance)

• Articles: 4

Article 1

France shall suspend forthwith the payment of further aid for Bull, and specifically the planned capital injection amounting to FF 2,5 billion, such aid having been granted in breach of Article 93 (3); it shall communicate to the Commission, within 15 days, the measures which it has taken to comply with this requirement.

Article 2

France shall, within 30 days of notification of this Decision, provide all information relevant to a substantive assessment of the aid referred to in Article 1, and specifically the information requested in the Commission's letter to the French authorities of 17 December 1993.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.

Done at Brussels, 26 January 1994.

For the Commission

Karel VAN MIERT

Member of the Commission

(1) (1990) ECR I, p. 307.

(2) See judgments in Case 77/72 Capolongo, (1973) ECR p. 611, Case 120/73 Lorenz, (1973) ECR, p. 1474 and Case 78/76 Steinicke, (1977) ECR, p. 595.

(3) See judgments in Case 166/77 Simmenthal, (1978) ECR, p. 629 and Case 103/88 Costanzo, (1989) ECR, p. 1839.

(4) See judgments in Case 70/72 Kohlegesetz, (1973) ECR, p. 813 and Case 310/85 Deufil, (1987) ECR, p. 901. See also Commission Communication (OJ No C 318, 24. 11. 1983, p. 3).

(5) OJ No C 31, 3. 2. 1979, p. 9; Annex, paragraph 15.

(6) See judgment in Case C-142/87 Tubemeuse, (1990) ECR, p. 959.

Article 92

(2) and (3).

The Commission points out that, should a negative final decision on this aid be taken subsequently, the Commission may require any unlawful aid that has been paid in breach of the procedural rules provided for in Article 93 (3) to be repaid (4). The abolition of the aid would involve its repayment together with interest, at the commercial rate upon which the French reference rate (5) is based, running from the date on which the unlawful aid was granted. This measure is necessary in order to restore the status quo (6) by removing the financial benefits which the firm receiving the unlawful aid has improperly enjoyed since the date on which the aid was paid,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: