Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (C-261/99)
Judgment
22

Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (C-261/99)

Judgment of 22 Mar 2001law://eu/cjeu/1999/c-261-99/para_22@2026-11-12

22It must next be borne in mind that it is settled case-law that recovery of unlawful aid is the logical consequence of a finding that it is unlawful (see, in particular, Case C-183/91 Commission v Greece [1993] ECR I-3131, paragraph 16, and Commission v Portugal, cited above, paragraph 38).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fifth Chamber
Case: C-261/99 · ECLI:EU:C:2001:179
Decided: 22 Mar 2001
Procedure: Infringement action
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities
Defendant: French Republic
Rapporteur: M. Wathelet
Advocate General: S. Alber
Bench: 4 judges
M. Wathelet, P. Jann, S. von Bahr, C.W.A. Timmermans
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 61999CJ0261

Topics

History · 1 version

22 Mar 2001Reading

Connections

Cited by 16: Tirrenia di navigazione SpA v European Commission (T-593/20); VQ v European Central Bank (T-203/18); European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium (C-591/14); Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori Srl v European Commission (T-220/13); Pietro Ferracci v European Commission (T-219/13)2 provisions; European Commission v French Republic (C-63/14)2 provisions; Rousse Industry v European Commission (T-489/11); Deutsche Post AG and Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission (C-463/10 P)2 provisions; Hellenic Republic, Olympiakes Aerogrammes AE and Olympiaki Aeroporia Ypiresies AE v European Commission (T-415/05, T-416/05, T-423/05)2 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (C-39/06); Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (C-441/06)2 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain (C-177/06)2 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (C-207/05); Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic (C-415/03)2 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (C-99/02)2 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain (C-404/00)2 provisions
Cites 6: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)7 provisions; Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic (C-183/91); Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (94/87); 1999/378/EC: Commission Decision of 4 November 1998 on aid granted by France to Nouvelle Filature Lainière de Roubaix (notified under document number C(1998) 3515) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the French text is authentic); Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (C-348/93); Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic (C-404/97)