27.7.2011 Official Journal of the European Union L 195/55 COMMISSION DECISION of 14 December 2010 on State aid granted by Germany to the Biria group (C 38/05 (ex NN 52/04)) (notified under document C(2010) 8289) (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2011/471/EU) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) submitted further information concerning another public guarantee to the Biria group and public holdings in companies belonging to the group. thereof (1), (4)  The Commission requested information by letter of 9 September 2003, to which Germany replied by letter dated 14 October 2003, registered as incoming mail on Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic 16 Octqber 2003. The Commission rquested further Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thercof information on 9 December 2003, which Germany ’ ’ provided by letter dated 19 March 2004, registered as incoming mail the same day. Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (?), and having regard to ()  The Commission doubted whether the aid granted to the their comments, Biria group complied with the schemes on the basis of which it had ostensibly been granted, and on 18 October 2004 it issued an information injunction. In response to Whereas: the information injunction Germany submitted further information, by letter dated 31 January 2005, registered as incoming mail the same day. I. PROCEDURE 1.1. Proceedings before the Commission (6)  On 20 October 2005 the Commission initiated a formal investigation in respect of three suspected State aid () On 23 January 2002 and 20 August 2002 the measures. In the same decision the Commission took Commission received a complaint with regard to State the view that several other measures that had been aid given to the Biria group in the form of a public alleged to constitute illegal State aid either did not guarantee. constitute State aid or had been granted in accordance with approved aid schemes. The Commission’s decision to initiate the investigation was published in the Official (2)  There followed an exchange of correspondence between Journal of the European Union (). The Commission invited the Commission and Germany; by letter dated interested parties to submit comments on the supposed 24 January 2003, registered as incoming mail at the aid measures. Comments were submitted by a third party Commission on 28 January 2003, Germany informed who wished to remain anonymous, in a letter dated the Commission that the plan to grant the guarantee, 27 January 2006, registered as incoming mail on which was conditional on the Commission’s approval, 30 January 2006; by Prophete GmbH & Co. KG, had been withdrawn. The complainant was informed Rheda-Wiedenbriick, and Pantherwerke AG, Lohne, by accordingly by letter dated 17 February 2003. letter dated 6 February 2006, registered as incoming mail the same day; and by Vaterland-Werke GmbH & Co. KG, Neuenrade, in two letters, one dated (3) By letters dated 1 July 2003, registered as incoming mail c61 Februzry 2003’ rzglstered as Incoming mall.the S;me on 9 July 2003, and 8 August 2003, registered as day, and one dated 27 February 2006, registered as incoming mail on 5 September 2003, the complainant incoming mail the same day. (") With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 87 and 88 of the EC . Treaty became Articles 107 and 108 respectively of the Treaty on (7). The comments were transmitted to Germany by letters of 6 February 2006 and 2 March 2006. Germany replied to the comments by letter dated 5 April 2006, registered as incoming mail on 7 April 2006, and by letter dated 12 May 2006, registered as incoming mail the same day. the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The two sets of provisions are, in substance, identical. For the purposes of this Decision, references to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU should be understood where appropriate as references to Articles 87 and 88, respectively, of the EC Treaty, and references to the General Court as references to the Court of First Instance. () OJ C 2, 5.1.20006, p. 14. () See footnote 2.