Brussels, 16/09/2013 (Agence Europe) - On 12 September, the General Court confirmed the Commission's decision of 2009 (case T-347/09) that the transfer, free of charge, by Germany, of natural heritage land to environmental protection organisations constitutes state aid. The General Court, like the Commission, considers that, to the extent that those organisations directly offer goods and services in competitive markets, they must be regarded as undertakings.
In 2007, as part of a plan to bring down the significant costs arising from the maintenance and development of areas of natural national heritage, Germany decided to transfer, free of charge, up to 125,000 hectares of such areas to the Länder and other environmental protection organisations, like the German Environment Foundation. When revenue from authorised exploitation of the land exceeds actual expenditure, the difference has to be paid to the federal state or reinvested in heritage conservation; the support granted by the federal government for major environmental projects could not exceed 75% of a project's eligible costs. In 2009, the Commission decided that the measures at issue constituted state aid, but that they were compatible with the common market as compensation for services rendered. Germany opposed this decision and argued that it was wrong to consider the organisations in question as undertakings (because they were non-profit-making and worked for the general interest) or that the measures had given them a competitive advantage.
The General Court found against Germany and pointed out that through the activities authorised under the measures at issue - such as the sale of wood, leases for hunting and fishing and tourism - the environmental protection organisations “pursue a separate interest, severable from the exclusively social objective of the protection of the environment” and “since, in carrying out those activities, the environmental protection organisations are in competition with operators run for profit”. It also points out that giving land to these organisations free of charge for commercial use gave them a competitive advantage over other companies active in the sectors in question. It concluded that the Altmark case (according to which a state measure for the benefit of an undertaking entrusted with a service of general economic interest may, under certain conditions, escape classification as state aid) “does not make it possible to classify the measures at issue as not being aid”. (FG/transl.fl)