464 COMPETITION LAW IN TOURISM The aid consists in direct grants with an incentive rate of up to 50% of the eligible expenses, with 50% of the approved incentive being paid upfront. F.2.4. Under the Guidelines on Rescue and Restructuring and article 107(2)(b) TFEU The huge impact of confinement measures and the resurgence of national borders were felt by the air transport sector throughout the EU and Portugal was not an exception. Thus, as referred above, the Portuguese State notified and was authorised to grant an aid scheme to Transportes Aéreos Portugueses, SGPS, S.A. (“TAP”), the sole shareholder of TAP Air Portugal 138, to solve its urgent liquidity needs. Moreover, the Portuguese State notified aid to be granted by Azores to SATA Air Açores – Sociedade Açoriana de Transportes Aéreos S.A. (“SATA”), as its sole shareholder. The European Commission has provisionally authorised the individual aid concerning the provision of public service obligations or services of general economic interest related to air transport to the Region Açores and to the management of airports in the same Region and will monitor it constantly. Conversely, the Commission informed the Portuguese authorities of the opening of investigation proceedings concerning “past and planned public financing in favour of SATA” (capital increases since 2017 and guaranteed rescue loan not addressing the services of general economic interest) under article 108(2) TFEU139 . In summary, the Commission has concluded that “at the present stage” the overall aid “and in particularly, the rescue aid to the beneficiary [SATA group], are not compatible with the internal market” but considered the essentiality of the PSO (SGEI) obligations and the nature of OR of the Region. Given their relevance for the present purposes and without prejudice to the fact that the General Court of the EU has annulled the Commission’s decision concerning TAP under the Guidelines on Rescue and Restructuring140, both 138 State aid SA.57369 (2020/N) COVID-19 – Portugal Aid to TAP; decision dated 10 June 2020. 139 See above note 7. 140 On 19 May 2021, the General Court of the EU (General Court) has upheld an action brought by the airline Ryanair for annulment of the Commission’s decision mentioned above in 139, while suspending the effects of the annulment pending the adoption of a new decision by the Commission [Case T-465/20 Ryanair DAC v Commission (TAP;COVID-19)]. More precisely, the General Court ruled that the Commission failed to state the reasons for the contested decision to the requisite legal standard and that that inadequacy of the statement of reasons requires the annulment of the decision. As for the temporal effect of the annulment of the contested decision, the General Court applied the second paragraph of Article 264 TFEU and considered that there are
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==