Ifølge Domstolens retspraksis kan der principielt ikke bestå en berettiget forventning hos støttemodtagerne om, at den pågældende støtte er lovlig, medmindre denne støtte er ydet i overensstemmelse med proceduren i artikel 1, stk. 3, i del I i protokol 3 [46], og det er endvidere fastsat, at en påpasselig erhvervsdrivende normalt må være i stand til at forvisse sig om, at denne procedure er fulgt [47]. Ikke desto mindre har Domstolen også accepteret, at en modtager af uanmeldt og dermed ulovlig støtte under ekstraordinære omstændigheder kan påberåbe sig en berettiget forventning om, at støtten var lovlig for at modsætte sig tilbagebetaling heraf [48].
In principle, the case-law of the Court of Justice has stated that a legitimate expectation that aid is lawful cannot be invoked unless that aid has been granted in compliance with the procedure laid down in Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 [46], remarking that a diligent business man should normally be able to determine whether that procedure has been followed [47].Notwithstanding this, the Court has also accepted that in exceptional circumstances a recipient of aid which is granted unlawfully because it was not notified may rely on legitimate expectations that the aid was lawful in order to oppose its repayment [48].