Provisional text
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Tenth Chamber)
24 September 2026 ( * )
[para_4]( Reference for a preliminary ruling – State aid – Aid schemes for undertakings with high natural gas or electricity consumption – National provisions excluding from those schemes undertakings in difficulty within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty – Concept of ‘undertaking in difficulty’ – National extraordinary administration scheme )
[para_5]In Joined Cases C‑503/25 and C‑504/25,
[para_6]REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Regional Administrative Court, Lombardy, Italy), made by decision of 18 July 2025, received at the Court on 22 July 2025, in the proceedings
[para_7]Acciaierie d’Italia SpA, in extraordinary administration,
[para_8]v
[para_9]Cassa per i servizi energetici e ambientali (CSEA),
[para_10]other parties:
[para_11]Ministero delle Imprese e del Made in Italy,
[para_12]Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Sicurezza energetica,
[para_13]Autorità di regolazione per energia reti e ambiente (ARERA),
[para_14]THE COURT (Tenth Chamber),
[para_15]composed of J. Passer (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, E. Regan and B. Smulders, Judges,
[para_16]Advocate General: A. Rantos,
[para_17]Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,
[para_18]having regard to the written procedure,
[para_19]after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
[para_20]– Acciaierie d’Italia SpA, in extraordinary administration, by D. Astorre, F. Cintioli and G. Lo Pinto, avvocati,
[para_21]– the Italian Government, by S. Fiorentino, acting as Agent, and by G. Aiello, L.G.V. Delbono and F. Montanaro, avvocati dello Stato,
[para_22]– the European Commission, by I. Barcew and C. Molinari, acting as Agents,
[para_23]having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,
[para_24]gives the following
Judgment
[para_26]1 These requests for a preliminary ruling concern the interpretation of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty (OJ 2014 C 249, p. 1).
[para_27]2 The requests have been made in proceedings between Acciaierie d’Italia SpA (‘ADI’), a company placed under the Italian ‘amministrazione straordinaria’ (‘extraordinary administration’) scheme, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the Cassa per i servizi energetici e ambientali (CSEA) (Energy and Environmental Services Fund, Italy) concerning the rejection by CSEA of ADI’s requests for access to the advantages provided for by national law for undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity for 2025.
Legal context
European Union law
The FEU Treaty
3 Article 107 TFEU provides:
[para_32]‘1. Save as otherwise provided in the Treaties, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.
[para_33]…
3. The following may be considered to be compatible with the internal market:
[para_35]…
[para_36](c) aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest;
[para_37]…’
[para_38]The Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty
[para_39]4 Points 1, 20 and 23 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty state:
[para_40]‘1. In these guidelines, the [European] Commission sets out the conditions under which State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty may be considered to be compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 107(3)(c) [TFEU].
[para_41]…
[para_42]20. For the purposes of these guidelines, an undertaking is considered to be in difficulty when, without intervention by the State, it will almost certainly be condemned to going out of business in the short or medium term. Therefore, an undertaking is considered to be in difficulty if at least one of the following circumstances occurs:
[para_43]…
[para_44](c) Where the undertaking is subject to collective insolvency proceedings or fulfils the criteria under its domestic law for being placed in collective insolvency proceedings at the request of its creditors.
[para_45]…
[para_46]…
[para_47]23. Given that its very existence is in danger, an undertaking in difficulty cannot be considered an appropriate vehicle for promoting other public policy objectives until such time as its viability is assured. Consequently, the Commission considers that aid to undertakings in difficulty may contribute to the development of economic activities without adversely affecting trade to an extent contrary to the common interest only if the conditions set out in these guidelines are met, even if such aid is granted in accordance with a scheme that has already been authorised.’
The Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy
[para_49]5 The Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020 (OJ 2014 C 200, p. 1) (‘the Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy’) provide in point 16 thereof:
[para_50]‘… Energy aid may not be awarded to firms in difficulty as defined for the purposes of these Guidelines by the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty’.
The Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy
[para_52]6 The Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy 2022 (OJ 2022 C 80, p. 1; ‘the Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy’), which replaced the Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy, provide in point 14:
[para_53]‘Aid for …energy must not be awarded to undertakings in difficulty as defined by the Commission Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty’.
Italian law
The provisions on extraordinary administration
[para_56]– Legislative Decree No 270/1999
[para_57]7 Decreto legislativo n. 270 – Nuova disciplina dell’amministrazione straordinaria delle grandi imprese in stato di insolvenza, a norma dell’articolo 1 della legge 30 luglio 1998, n. 274 (Legislative Decree No 270 on the new rules for the extraordinary administration of large undertakings in a state of insolvency pursuant to Article 1 of Law No 274 of 30 July 1998) of 8 July 1999 (GURI No 185, of 9 August 1999, p. 11) (‘Legislative Decree No 270/1999’), states, in Article 1, entitled ‘Nature and purpose of extraordinary administration’:
[para_58]‘Extraordinary administration is the collective procedure applicable to large commercial undertakings in a state of insolvency, the objective of which is to preserve productive assets through the continuation, relaunch or transformation of business activities.’
[para_59]8 Article 2 of that legislative decree, entitled ‘Undertakings under extraordinary administration’, provides, in paragraph 1 thereof:
[para_60]‘Undertakings … may be admitted into extraordinary administration under the conditions and in accordance with the detailed rules laid down in this legislative decree, subject to the provisions on insolvency and where they satisfy the following cumulative conditions:
(a) having a workforce of no less than 200 salaried employees …;
[para_62](b) having outstanding debt amounting to no less than two-thirds of both the total assets on the balance sheet and the revenue … for the last financial year.
[para_63]…’
[para_64]9 Article 3 of that legislative decree, entitled ‘Finding of insolvency’, provides, in paragraph 1 thereof:
[para_65]‘If an undertaking meeting the conditions laid down in Article 2 is insolvent, the court [having jurisdiction], ruling on the application made by the undertaking, one or more creditors or the Public Prosecutor’s Office, or of its own motion, shall declare that insolvency by judgment in closed session.
[para_66]…’
[para_67]10 Article 27 of that legislative decree, entitled ‘Conditions for admission to the procedure’, is worded as follows:
[para_68]‘1. Undertakings declared insolvent pursuant to Article 3 shall be placed under the extraordinary administration procedure where they demonstrate realistic prospects of restoring the economic equilibrium of their activities.
2. It must be possible to achieve that result by means of any of the following:
(a) a plan for the negotiated transfer of parts of the undertaking …
(b) a procedure for the economic and financial restructuring of the undertaking …
[para_72]…’
[para_73]– Decree-Law No 347/2003
[para_74]11 Decreto-legge n. 347 – Misure urgenti per la ristrutturazione industriale di grandi imprese in stato di insolvenza (Decree-Law No 347 laying down urgent measures for the industrial restructuring of large undertakings in insolvency) of 23 December 2003 (GURI No 298 of 24 December 2003, p. 4) (‘Decree-Law No 347/2003’), converted into law, following amendments, by legge n. 39 – Conversione in legge, con modificazioni, del decreto-legge 23 dicembre 2003, n. 347 (Law No 39 converting into law, with amendments, Decree-Law No 347 of 23 December 2003) of 18 February 2004 (GURI No 42 of 20 February 2004, p. 5), states, in Article 1, entitled ‘Conditions for admission’:
[para_75]‘1. The provisions of this [decree-law] shall apply to insolvent undertakings subject to the provisions on insolvency, which intend to use the procedure … referred to in Article 27(2)(b) of [Legislative Decree No 270/1999], or the plan … referred to in Article 27(2)(a) of that [legislative decree], provided that … they satisfy the following two cumulative conditions by having:
(a) a salaried workforce … of at least 500 persons …;
(b) outstanding debt … of at least EUR 300 million.’
[para_78]12 Article 2 of that decree-law, entitled ‘Immediate admission to extraordinary administration’, provides:
[para_79]‘1. A company which satisfies the conditions referred to in Article 1 may apply …, at the same time, to bring an action for a declaration of insolvency before the court having jurisdiction …, by way of the restructuring … referred to in Article 27(2)(b) of [Legislative Decree No 270/1999] or transfer … referred to in Article 27(2)(a) [of that legislative decree].
[para_80]2. By decree, the Minister for Production Activities, after assessing the conditions laid down in Article 1, shall immediately admit the undertaking to the extraordinary administration procedure … In the case of undertakings … which operate … an industrial establishment of strategic national interest …, admission … [shall take place] by decree of the President of the Council of Ministers or of the Minister for Economic Development …
[para_81]…’
13 Article 4(1) of that decree-law states:
[para_83]‘By a judgment published within 15 days of notification of the decree referred to in Article 2(2) …, the court shall declare the undertaking insolvent …’
Provisions applicable to undertakings with high consumption of natural gas
[para_85]– Law No 167/2017
[para_86]14 Legge n. 167 – Disposizioni per l’adempimento degli obblighi derivanti dall’appartenenza dell’Italia all’Unione europea – Legge europea 2017 (Law No 167 laying down provisions for the fulfilment of obligations arising from Italy’s membership of the European Union – European Law 2017) of 20 November 2017 (GURI No 277 of 27 November 2017, p. 1) (‘Law No 167/2017’), provides in Article 21:
[para_87]‘1. In order to make it possible, in accordance with the criteria set out in the [Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy], to adjust the application to industry of the amounts to cover the general gas network costs which are intended to finance measures aimed at achieving common goals for decarbonisation, by decree of the Minister for Economic Development, … undertakings with high natural gas consumption shall be defined on the basis of criteria and parameters relating to minimum consumption thresholds, the impact of the cost of natural gas on the value of the business and the exposure of the undertakings to international competition. The undertakings that request those amounts, following verification …, shall be added to a special list of undertakings with high natural gas consumption.
[para_88]2. Within [120] days from the date of publication of the decree referred to in paragraph 1, … the [Autorità per l’energia elettrica, il gas et sistema idrico (Authority for Electricity, Gas and the Water Network, Italy)] shall redefine the amounts intended to cover the general gas network costs … taking into account the definition of undertakings with high consumption of natural gas referred to in paragraph 1, in compliance with the requirements and limits laid down in the [Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy] …’
[para_89]– Ministerial Decree No 541/2021
[para_90]15 The purpose of the decreto del Ministro della Transizione ecologica n. 541 (Decree of the Ministry of Ecological Transition No 541) of 21 December 2021 (‘Ministerial Decree No 541/2021’), according to Article 1 thereof, is to establish an aid scheme pursuant to Article 44 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty (OJ 2014 L 187, p. 1), by revising, with effect from 1 April 2022, the amounts intended to cover the general gas network charges applied to undertakings with high consumption of natural gas for the purpose of financing measures aimed at achieving common goals for decarbonisation.
[para_91]16 Article 1 of that ministerial decree, which provides, in paragraph 1 thereof, for the grant of advantages to undertakings with high consumption of natural gas, provides, in paragraph 3 thereof:
[para_92]‘Undertakings in difficulty within the meaning of the [Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty] shall not be eligible for the support referred to in paragraph 1.’
Provisions applicable to undertakings with high consumption of natural gas
[para_94]17 Decreto-legge n. 131 – Misure urgenti in materia di energia, interventi per sostenere il potere di acquisto e a tutela del risparmio (Decree-Law No 131 laying down urgent measures in the field of energy, interventions in favour of purchasing power, and protection of savings) of 29 September 2023 (GURI No 228 of 29 September 2023, p. 1) (‘Decree-Law No 131/2023’), converted into law, following amendments, by legge n. 169 – Conversione in legge, con modificazioni, del decreto-legge 29 settembre 2023, n. 131 (Law No 169 converting into law, following amendments, Decree-Law No 131 of 29 September 2023) of 27 November 2023 (GURI No 278 of 28 November 2023, p. 1), was adopted, inter alia, in order to bring the national legislation into line with the Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy.
[para_95]18 Article 3 of that decree-law, which provides, in paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 thereof, for the grant of advantages to undertakings with high consumption of electricity, provides, in paragraph 3 thereof:
[para_96]‘Undertakings in difficulty within the meaning of the [Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty] shall not be eligible for the support referred to in that article.’
The disputes in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling
[para_98]19 ADI, the parent company of Italy’s leading steel group, was placed under extraordinary administration in accordance with Decree-Law No 347/2003 and declared insolvent by a judgment of the Tribunale fallimentare di Milano (Milan Insolvency Court, Italy) of 29 February 2024. By two applications made to CSEA on 14 November 2024, it requested that it be included on the list of undertakings with high electricity consumption and on the list of undertakings with high gas consumption for 2025, in order to be able to benefit, as had been the case in previous years, from the support provided for, for the former, by Article 3 of Decree-Law No 131/2023 and, for the latter, by the provisions of Article 21(1) of Law No 167/2017 and Article 3(1) of Ministerial Decree No 541/2021, read together.
[para_99]20 On 2 December 2024, CSEA notified two preliminary opinions to ADI rejecting its applications, by which it stated that ADI should be classified as an ‘undertaking in difficulty’ within the meaning of point 20(c) of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, since it was placed under extraordinary administration.
[para_100]21 ADI submitted observations on those preliminary opinions. By two decisions of 17 December 2024, CSEA, on the same ground, formally rejected ADI’s applications for inclusion on the lists.
[para_101]22 ADI brought two actions before the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Regional Administrative Court, Lombardy, Italy), which is the referring court, seeking annulment of those decisions and of their preliminary acts. It argued, in essence, that an undertaking under extraordinary administration cannot be regarded as being an undertaking in difficulty within the meaning of point 20 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, since such an undertaking would have been admitted to insolvency proceedings the specific purpose of which is the continuation, relaunch or transformation of its activities.
[para_102]23 The referring court notes that the concept of ‘undertaking in difficulty’, within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, refers to undertakings which, without State intervention, would certainly be forced to abandon their activities in the short or medium term and could not therefore be regarded as an appropriate instrument for promoting the objectives pursued by other public policies while their profitability has not been restored. It asks whether an undertaking placed under extraordinary administration, in accordance with the rules laid down by the national legislation at issue, falls within that concept. It points out that that scheme is intended to preserve the continuity of the undertaking and enable it to relaunch in order to prevent its activities from ceasing.
[para_103]24 In those circumstances, the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Regional Administrative Court, Lombardy) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice, in Case C‑503/25, for a preliminary ruling:
[para_104]‘Do Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and the [Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty], interpreted correctly, preclude national legislation that prevents undertakings under [extraordinary] administration within the meaning of Article 2 of Decree-Law No [347/2003] from being eligible for the support provided for undertakings with high natural gas consumption pursuant to the combined provisions of Article 21 of Law No [167/2017] and Article 1(3) of Ministerial Decree No [541/2021]?’
[para_105]25 On the same grounds as those set out in paragraph 23 of the present judgment, the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Regional Administrative Court, Lombardy) also decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling in Case C‑504/25:
[para_106]‘Do Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and the [Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty], interpreted correctly, preclude national legislation that prevents undertakings under [extraordinary] administration within the meaning of Article 2 of Decree-Law No [347/2003] from being eligible for the support provided for undertakings with high electricity consumption by Article 3 of [Decree-Law No [131/2023]?’
Procedure before the Court
[para_108]26 By decision of the President of the Court of 22 August 2025, Cases C‑503/25 and C‑504/25 were joined for the purposes of the written and oral parts of the procedure and for the purposes of the judgment.
Admissibility of the requests for a preliminary ruling
[para_110]27 The Italian Government submits, in essence, that the requests for a preliminary ruling are inadmissible on the ground, first, that they do not contain reasons justifying the Court’s intervention and, second, that they concern matters of national law.
[para_111]28 According to settled case-law, in the context of the cooperation between the Court and the national courts provided for in Article 267 TFEU, it is solely for the national court before which a dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine, in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court. Consequently, where the questions submitted concern the interpretation of EU law, the Court is, in principle, bound to give a ruling (judgment of 11 June 2026, Centro Petroli Roma – II , C‑386/24, EU:C:2026:471, paragraph 56 and the case-law cited).
[para_112]29 It follows that questions relating to EU law enjoy a presumption of relevance. The Court may refuse to rule on a question referred by a national court for a preliminary ruling only where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of EU law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it (judgment of 30 April 2026, Kotaňák , C‑748/24, EU:C:2026:358, paragraph 28 and the case-law cited).
[para_113]30 In the present case, it is apparent from the orders for reference that the disputes in the main proceedings concern the application to an undertaking placed under extraordinary administration, within the meaning of the provisions of Italian law on collective procedures, of the exclusion, for undertakings in difficulty, from access to the advantages provided for in favour of undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity, under the relevant national legislation. In that regard, as is apparent from paragraph 23 of the present judgment, after noting that that legislation refers to the concept of ‘undertaking in difficulty’ within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, the referring court set out the reasons which led it to inquire about the interpretation of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU and the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty.
[para_114]31 Accordingly, it is not obvious that the interpretation of EU law sought by means of a reference for a preliminary ruling bears no relation to the actual facts or the purpose of the main proceedings. The requests for a preliminary ruling do not concern purely domestic matters of law and set out reasons capable of justifying an answer from the Court of Justice.
[para_115]32 The present requests for a preliminary ruling are therefore admissible.
Consideration of the questions referred
[para_117]33 By its questions, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, read in conjunction with the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides for the exclusion of undertakings placed under the extraordinary administration scheme from access to the advantages provided for by national law for undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity on the ground that they fall within the concept of an ‘undertaking in difficulty’, within the meaning of point 20 of those guidelines.
[para_118]34 Article 107(1) TFEU lays down the principle that State aid is incompatible with the internal market, save as otherwise provided in the Treaties. Among those derogations, that provided for in Article 107(3)(c) concerns aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
[para_119]35 By adopting the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, the Commission limits the exercise of its discretion as to the compatibility of State aid under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU. The Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty define the conditions under which State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty may be considered by the Commission to be compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU. Accordingly, the Commission cannot, in principle, depart from those rules under pain of being found, where appropriate, to be in breach of general principles of law, such as equal treatment or the protection of legitimate expectations (see, to that effect, judgment of 28 June 2005, Dansk Rørindustri and Others v Commission , C‑189/02 P, C‑202/02 P, C‑205/02 P to C‑208/02 P and C‑213/02 P, EU:C:2005:408, paragraph 211). In that sense, the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty form part of the legal framework to be interpreted by the Court of Justice in order to answer the referring court’s questions.
[para_120]36 It should also be noted that EU law does not in principle preclude national legislation which makes access to State aid subject to stricter conditions than EU rules (see, to that effect, order of 30 May 2018, Yanchev , C‑481/17, EU:C:2018:352, paragraphs 22 to 24).
[para_121]37 In the present case, as regards the conditions for access to the advantages provided for by national law for undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity, it is apparent from the relevant legislation, as presented by the referring court, that that legislation expressly excludes undertakings in difficulty, within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, from access to those advantages, in particular Article 1(3) of Ministerial Decree No 541/2021 in the field of natural gas, and Article 3(3) of Decree-Law No 131/2023 in the field of electricity.
[para_122]38 By those exclusions, the Italian Republic did not lay down stricter conditions for access than those required by EU law on State aid, but merely aligned its rules in the field of State aid for energy with the requirements contained in the Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy, and then in the Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy which replaced them, points 16 and 14 of which, respectively, set out, in essence, the Commission’s position that such aid cannot be granted to ‘undertakings in difficulty’ within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty.
[para_123]39 As regards the concept of ‘undertaking in difficulty’ within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, point 20 of those guidelines states that an undertaking falls within that concept where it is practically certain that, in the absence of State intervention, it will be forced to abandon its activities in the short or medium term, which is the case, in particular, as set out in point (c) thereof, ‘where the undertaking is subject to collective insolvency proceedings or fulfils the criteria under its domestic law for being placed under the collective insolvency procedure at the request of its creditors.’
[para_124]40 It follows that an undertaking which is placed under an extraordinary administration scheme, such as that provided for by the Italian legislation at issue in the main proceedings, must be regarded as falling within the concept of an ‘undertaking in difficulty’ within the meaning of point 20 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty. That scheme constitutes, according to the very wording of Article 1 of Legislative Decree No 270/1999, a ‘collective procedure’ applicable to ‘undertakings in a state of insolvency’ and admission to that scheme also appears, in the light of the wording of Articles 3 and 27 of that legislative decree and Articles 1, 2 and 4 of Decree-Law No 347/2003, which it is for the referring court to ascertain, to be subject to a prior declaration, by decision of the court having jurisdiction, of insolvency on the part of the undertaking concerned.
[para_125]41 It is irrelevant, in that regard, that the extraordinary administration scheme at issue in the main proceedings pursues the objective of ensuring the return to viability of the undertaking concerned. The objective of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty themselves is, as is stated, moreover, in their title and point 1 thereof, to enable, as far as possible in the context of Article 107 TFEU, the ‘rescue or restructuring’ of undertakings in difficulty, and therefore the restoration of their economic viability. Therefore, the fact that the collective insolvency proceedings provided for by the laws of the Member States pursue an objective of restoring the economic viability of the undertakings subject to them in no way calls into question the fact that those undertakings fall within the concept of ‘undertaking in difficulty’ within the meaning of point 20 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty.
[para_126]42 Moreover, it should be noted that extraordinary administration is expressly classified as ‘insolvency proceedings’ in Annex A to Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ 2015 L 141, p. 19).
[para_127]43 Nor is the interpretation set out in paragraph 40 of the present judgment called into question by the argument put forward by ADI and the Italian Government that, in essence, it would be illogical for an undertaking in difficulty which benefits from a protective scheme designed to restore its economic viability, in this case the extraordinary administration scheme, to find itself, for that reason alone, deprived of certain aid from which it previously benefited, in this case the advantages granted to undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity, thus aggravating further the financial difficulties it encounters. That line of argument is the result of confusion, since it ultimately amounts to treating the energy aid at issue in the main proceedings as aid for restructuring and rescue. As is apparent from point 23 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, an undertaking in difficulty cannot be considered to be an appropriate vehicle for promoting other public policy objectives until such time as its viability is assured. Thus, the Commission states, in point 23 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, that aid to undertakings in difficulty can contribute to the development of economic activities without adversely affecting trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest only if the conditions laid down in those guidelines are met.
[para_128]44 Nor is the judgment of 28 April 2022, Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging (Pre-pack procedure) (C‑237/20, EU:C:2022:321), relied on by the Italian Government, capable of calling that interpretation into question. Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 16), which is the subject of the interpretation made by the Court in that judgment, pursues objectives unrelated to those pursued by EU law on State aid.
[para_129]45 In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the question referred in each of the joined cases is that Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, read in conjunction with the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which provides for the exclusion of undertakings placed under the extraordinary administration scheme from access to the benefits provided for under national law for undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity, on the ground that they fall within the concept of an ‘undertaking in difficulty’, within the meaning of point 20 of those guidelines, since admission to that scheme is conditional upon the insolvency of those undertakings.
Costs
[para_131]46 Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.
On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby rules:
[para_133]Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, read in conjunction with the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty
[para_134]must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which provides for the exclusion of undertakings placed under the extraordinary administration scheme from access to the benefits provided for under national law for undertakings with high consumption of natural gas or electricity, on the ground that they fall within the concept of an ‘undertaking in difficulty’, within the meaning of point 20 of those guidelines, since admission to that scheme is conditional upon the insolvency of those undertakings.
[para_135][Signatures]
[para_136]* Language of the case: Italian.