Case T-157/01 Danske Busvognmaend v Commission, cited above.

Neither the Danish government nor Danske Busvognmaend has contested this finding.

REPLY OF THE DANISH GOVERNMENT TO THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY DANSKE BUSVOGNMAEND AND ARRIVA

Danske Busvognmaend considers the aid measures to constitute two separate aid measures.

Court of First Instance judgment in Case T-157/01, Danske Busvognmaend v Commission [2004] ECR II-917.

See Case T-157/01, Danske Busvognmaend v Commission [2004] ECR p. II-917 (hereinafter referred to as the Combus Judgment).

Danske Busvognmaend considers that the conditions set out in the 1999 restructuring guidelines are not fulfilled.

Further to this, Danske Busvognmaend claims that a restructuring plan cannot be drawn up in arrears

According to Danske Busvognmaend, these reports affirm that a private investor would not have acted as the Danish government did in a similar situation.

Danske Busvognmaend considers that no restructuring plan was available when the capital injection of 1999 was made.

Danske Busvognmaend considers that the prospect of Combus achieving viability and profitability has not been demonstrated.

Danske Busvognmaend considers that no restructuring plan has been provided by the Danish government prior to the first capital injection in 1999.

Danske Busvognmaend takes the view that the subsequent course of events was not that officially stated by the Transport Minister.

In addition to the factual circumstances provided for by the Commission, Danske Busvognmaend refers to three reports presented subsequently to the Combus judgment in Denmark [37].

Case T-157/01 Danske Busvognmaend v Commission [2004] ECR II-917, paragraph 57.