Article 2
This Decision is addressed to: RAG Aktiengesellschaft Rellinghauser Straße 1-11 D - 45128 Essen. Done at Brussels, 7 May 2002. For the Commission Mario Monti Member of the Commission (1) Case T-156/98 [2001] ECR II-337. (2) Germany and RAG have lodged an appeal against this judgment before the Court of Justice. (3) Parts of this text have been edited to ensure that confidential information is not disclosed; those parts are enclosed in square brackets and marked with an asterisk. (4) OJ 9, 11.5.1954, p. 345/54. (5) OJ 154, 14.7.1967, p. 11. (6) OJ L 348, 17.12.1991, p. 12. (7) See Case No IV/M.308 Kali+Salz/MDK/Treuhand, OJ C 275, 3.9.1998, paragraph. 9. (8) See Case No IV/M.308 Kali+Salz/MDK/Treuhand, loc. cit., paragraph 10. (9) See Commission decision of 21.12.2000 on German aid to the coal industry for 2000 and 2001, OJ L 127, 9.5.2001, p. 55. (10) OJ L 101, 13.4.1989, p. 35. (11) Proceeding COMP/E-3/36.779 RAG Hüttenvertrag, letter of 8.11.2000. (12) In contrast to estimates of the "value as a going concern" according to the conventional procedure for evaluating an undertaking (e.g. earning capacity value method, discounted cash flow method), which, particularly for an objective sector such as coal production, involves substantial subjective assessments of risks and future developments, and consequently is subject to considerable uncertainties. It should be mentioned in this context, however, that the studies available to the Commission, which were drawn up in accordance with the conventional procedures for assessing the value of undertakings, come up with substantially smaller assessments of value (see recital 60).