96/236/ECSC: Commission Decision of 31 October 1995 concerning State aid granted by the Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, a regional authority of the Federal Republic of Germany, to the ECSC steel undertaking Hamburger Stahlwerke GmbH, Hamburg (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)
Data as of 2026-07-04 Β· Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. Β· Read the official text β
The contribution to the equity capital of Hamburger Stahlwerke GmbH of DM 20 million, in the form of a loan granted by Freie and Hansestadt Hamburg acting through Hamburgische Landesbank Girozentrale, to the shareholders of Protei Produktionsbeteiligungen GmbH & Co. KG and to that company itself, constitutes State aid. That aid was approved by the Commission in 1984/85.
The loans granted to Hamburger Stahlwerke GmbH on the basis of the DM 20 million enlargement of the credit line, accorded by Hamburgische Landesbank Girozentrale on the instructions of Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg in December 1992, and the loans granted on the basis of the credit line of DM 174 million and the DM 10 million swing accorded by Hamburgische Landesbank Girozentrale on the instructions of Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg in December 1993 represent State aid incompatible with the ECSC Treaty and the Steel Aid Code.
Germany shall recover the aid referred to in Article 2 from the recipient company. Repayment shall be made in accordance with the procedures and provisions of German law, with interest, based on the interest rate used as reference rate in the assessment of regional aid schemes and starting to run pro rata temporis from the date on which the aid was granted. Interest already paid pursuant to the credit line agreement shall be taken into account. The purchase price paid by Venuda Investments BV for the transfer of claims from Hanseatische Landesbank shall be treated as part of the aid recovered.
Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months of being notified of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply therewith.
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Done at Brussels, 31 October 1995. For the Commission Karel VAN MIERT Member of the Commission (1) OJ No L 362, 31. 12. 1991, p. 57. (2) OJ No C 293, 21. 10. 1994, p. 3. (3) Bundesgerichtshof, Judgment of 19 September 1988 - II ZR 255/87, Der Betrieb 1988, p. 2141; lower courts: Hanseatisches Oberlandesgericht Hamburg, Judgment of 24 July 1987 - 11 U 182/86, Der Betrieb 1987, p. 1778 and Landgericht Hamburg, judgment of 15 August 1986 - 3 O 288/84. (4) This decision of the Bundesgerichtshof, taken on 13 July 1992, published on 2 October 1992 in Der Betrieb 1992, p. 2026, covered a case, not connected to the present case, in which a lender had had a comparable contractual relation with its debtor as HLB had with HSW. (5) See Court of Justice, Cases C-40/85, Belgium v. Commission, [1986] ECR 2321, 2345; C-303/88, Italy v. Commission, [1991] ECR, I-1433, 1476 ('ENI Lanerossi`), Commission Decision No 3855/91/ECSC, OJ No L 362, fifth paragraph under II, and communication of the Commission to Member States concerning public undertakings, OJ No C 307, 13. 11. 1993, p. 3, paragraphs 10 to 21. (6) Italy v. Commission, [1991] ECR I-1603 ('Alfa Romeo`). (7) Spain v. Commission, [1994] ECR I-4103 ('Hytasa`), see European Journal of Business Law, 1994, p. 694.
Source: EUR-Lex (Publications Office of the EU), Β© European Union, reuse permitted under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU.