102Likewise, the applicants maintain that the contested decision breaches the obligation to state reasons by failing to specify exactly what the advantage received by the private investors was (Joined Cases C-329/93, C-62/95 and C-63/95 Germany and Others v Commission [1996] ECR I-5151, paragraph 56). On that point, they complain that the contested decision, without seeking to determine what economic advantage they could receive when they had no operational responsibility for the vessel, nevertheless finds that they were beneficiaries of the aid simply because they received income tax concessions in stating in recital 39 that, although it is doubtful whether any of the private individual investors can be held responsible for the misuse of the aid, they have nevertheless benefited and continue to benefit from the tax concessions as owners of a vessel which was bought on attractive terms.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.