In that respect, the difference, in this case, focuses primarily on the question whether the Commission had to identify an actual or
potential abuse of the dominant position by the applicant, or whether it was sufficient for it to establish that the State measures in question distorted competition by creating an inequality of opportunities between economic operators, in favour of the applicant.
The question therefore arises as to the extent to which an
abuse, even if only
potential,
of the
dominant position by an undertaking must be identified, that
abuse having a link with the State measure.