Access to justice in State aid matters in EU Member States

The study finds that in eight of the nine researched EU Member States, there are no instances of NGOs bringing actions against State aid measures. It highlights a systemic lack of standing for non-competitors, limited transparency regarding aid schemes, and inconsistent public consultation practices, which collectively hinder the enforcement of EU environmental law in State aid matters.

• National courts in EU Member States have limited powers in State aid matters; they can assess if a measure qualifies as State aid and was notified to the Commission, but they cannot determine if an aid measure is compatible with the internal market, a task reserved exclusively for the EU Commission.
• In eight of the nine studied Member States, there are no recorded instances of NGOs bringing actions against State aid measures. The Netherlands is the only exception, though a recent Supreme Court ruling (Stichting Karmedia, 2020) has significantly restricted NGO standing.
• There is a general lack of jurisprudence in the studied states that grants standing to parties whose competitive position is not affected by illegal aid, making it unlikely for NGOs (which do not compete on the market) to be admissible.
• Public consultations on the design or granting of State aid measures are not consistently organized across Member States and often occur at the national rather than local level, despite many measures being granted by local authorities.
• Transparency regarding State aid is limited; several countries lack centralized registers combining national and local aid, and information is often withheld due to alleged business secrets.
• Procedural costs for NGOs vary by court type; while administrative court fees are generally low, civil court fees can be prohibitively high when they are based on the amount of aid at stake, as seen in Poland and Bulgaria.
• There is no evidence that national public authorities or courts in the studied states have addressed the interaction between State aid and environmental law following the CJEU's Austria v. Commission (Hinkley Point C) judgment.
• In Austria, the 'Umweltsenat' (Environmental Senate) previously decided that arguments related to infringements of EU State aid law are not admissible in environmental impact assessment procedures.
• In Belgium, NGOs may have standing before the Court of first instance regarding civil acts that violate environmental protection acts, but there is no specific case law on State aid.
• In Germany, the Environmental Appeals Act (UmwRG) does not grant standing for State aid matters, as it only covers an exhaustively defined list of decisions that excludes aid grants.
• In Greece, courts have recognized standing for non-competitors in specific cases, such as dismissed employees challenging limitations on dismissal compensation, though they often confuse the existence of aid with its compatibility.
• In Poland, administrative courts recognize the direct effect of Article 108(3) TFEU and the obligation to protect individuals from unauthorized aid, but no environmental NGO has yet successfully brought a State aid claim.

APA

Fessenko, D., Blok, D. N., Rieff, J., van der Wal, G., Zajdler, R., Bernatt, M., Grzejdziak, L., Sznajder, M., Pogorzelski, R., Delarue, J., & Derenne, C. (2023). Access to justice in State aid matters in EU Member States. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/x4javzkp/clientearth-study-access-to-justice-in-state-aid-matters-in-eu-member-states-where-do-ngos-stand.pdf

Chicago

Fessenko, Dessislava, Doortje Ninck Blok, Joep Rieff, Gerard van der Wal, Robert Zajdler, Maciej Bernatt, Lukasz Grzejdziak, et al. Access to justice in State aid matters in EU Member States. ClientEarth, 2023. https://www.clientearth.org/media/x4javzkp/clientearth-study-access-to-justice-in-state-aid-matters-in-eu-member-states-where-do-ngos-stand.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Fessenko |first1=Dessislava |last2=Blok |first2=Doortje Ninck |last3=Rieff |first3=Joep |last4=van der Wal |first4=Gerard |last5=Zajdler |first5=Robert |last6=Bernatt |first6=Maciej |last7=Grzejdziak |first7=Lukasz |last8=Sznajder |first8=Marta |last9=Pogorzelski |first9=Robert |display-authors=etal |title=Access to justice in State aid matters in EU Member States |publisher=ClientEarth |date=25 May 2023 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/x4javzkp/clientearth-study-access-to-justice-in-state-aid-matters-in-eu-member-states-where-do-ngos-stand.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{fessenko2023access, author = {Fessenko, Dessislava and Blok, Doortje Ninck and Rieff, Joep and van der Wal, Gerard and Zajdler, Robert and Bernatt, Maciej and Grzejdziak, Lukasz and Sznajder, Marta and Pogorzelski, Robert and Delarue, Juliette and Derenne, Catherine}, title = {{Access to justice in State aid matters in EU Member States}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2023}, month = may, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/x4javzkp/clientearth-study-access-to-justice-in-state-aid-matters-in-eu-member-states-where-do-ngos-stand.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }