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
Republic of Austria v European Commission (C-47/10 P)
Judgment
The main appeal
The second ground of appeal
Findings of the Court
71

Republic of Austria v European Commission (C-47/10 P)

Judgment of 27 Oct 2011law://eu/cjeu/2010/c-47-10/para_71@2026-11-11

71The concept of serious difficulties is an objective one and their existence must be looked for not only in the circumstances in which the contested measure was adopted but also in the assessments upon which the Commission relied (see Bouygues and Bouygues Télécom v Commission, paragraph 63).

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-47/10 P · ECLI:EU:C:2011:698
Decided: 27 Oct 2011
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Republic of Austria
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: R. Silva de Lapuerta
Advocate General: Y. Bot
Bench: 5 judges
K. Lenaerts, R. Silva de Lapuerta, G. Arestis, J. Malenovský, T. von Danwitz
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62010CJ0047

Topics

History · 1 version

27 Oct 2011Reading

Connections

Cited by 25: European Commission v Tempus Energy Ltd and Tempus Energy Technology Ltd (C-57/19 P); Ryanair DAC and Ryanair Sun S.A. v European Commission (T-398/21); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-743/21); Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) v European Commission (T-827/22); Penya Barça Lyon : Plus que des supporters (PBL) and Issam Abdelmouine v European Commission (C-224/23 P); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-333/21); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-769/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-225/21); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-737/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-14/21); Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) v European Commission (T-332/21); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-268/21); Ryanair DAC and Condor Flugdienst GmbH v European Commission (T-34/21); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-111/21); Interessengemeinschaft der Hoteliers und Gastronomen Region 10 eV (Ighoga Region 10) and Others v European Commission (T-582/20); Set SpA v European Commission (T-794/19); Tirreno Power SpA v European Commission (T-793/19); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-657/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-577/20); Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) v European Commission (T-718/20); Achema AB and Achema Gas Trade UAB v European Commission (T-193/19); Ja zum Nürburgring eV v European Commission (C-647/19 P); Ryanair DAC and Laudamotion GmbH v European Commission (T-677/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-665/20); Ryanair DAC v European Commission (T-465/20)
Cites 14: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)5 provisions; European Commission v Kronoply GmbH & Co. KG and Kronotex GmbH & Co. KG (C-83/09 P); Bouygues SA and Bouygues Télécom SA v Commission of the European Communities (C-431/07); European Commission v Deutsche Post AG (C-399/08 P); Commission of the European Communities v French Republic (C-197/96); Scheucher-Fleisch GmbH and Others v Commission of the European Communities (T-375/04); Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (C-358/98); Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxemburg (C-333/03); European Commission v Scott SA (C-290/07 P); Jose Maria Sison v Council of the European Union (C-266/05 P); Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty; Markku Sahlstedt and Others v Commission of the European Communities (C-362/06); Der Grüne Punkt - Duales System Deutschland GmbH v Commission of the European Communities (C-385/07); British Aggregates Association v Commission of the European Communities and United Kingdom (C-487/06)