natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Úř. věst.
This has proven to be true from an ex post perspective, since a new investor was only found in 2012.
Jedná se o nevládní organizaci registrovanou podle pravidel směrnice Evropského parlamentu a Rady 2003/35/ES ze dne 26. května 2003 o účasti veřejnosti na vypracovávání některých plánů a programů týkajících se životního prostředí a o změně směrnic Rady 85/337/EHS a 96/61/ES, pokud jde o účast veřejnosti a přístup k právní ochraně (Úř. věst.
Like the 2005 Participation Agreement, the 2009 Additional Agreement also contains a limit for the operating losses and investment costs to be paid by Hansestadt Lübeck.
L 156, 25.6.2003, s. 17).
On the basis of those considerations, the Commission concludes that there was no economic advantage granted to Infratil and thus the measure did not constitute State aid.
Před zahájením řízení byla opatření prošetřována ve věcech CP 31/2009 (SA.27585) a CP 162/2010 (SA.31149).
Economic advantage
Úř. věst.
Where an airport has public resources at its disposal, aid to an airline can, in principle, be excluded where the relationship between the airport and the airline satisfies the MEO test.
C 241, 10.8.2012, s. 56.
Under the 2014 Aviation Guidelines [57], the existence of aid to an airline using a particular airport can, in principle, be excluded if the price charged for the airport services corresponds to the market price (‘first approach’), or if it can be demonstrated through an ex ante analysis — that is to say one founded on information available when the aid is granted and on developments foreseeable at the time — that the airport/airline arrangement will lead to a positive incremental profit contribution for the airport and is part of an overall strategy leading to profitability at least in the long term (‘second approach’).
Spolkový svaz německých komerčních letišť (Bundesverband der deutschen Verkehrsflughäfen).
The second approach means that it must be assessed whether, at the date when an agreement was concluded, a prudent market economy operator would have expected the agreement to be incrementally profitable.
Společnost Yasmina byla 100 % dceřinou společností investiční společnosti 3 Y Logistic und Projektbetreuung GmbH (dále jen „3Y“), kterou vlastnila fyzická osoba, konkrétně saúdskoarabský občan Adel Mohammed Saleh M.
This to be measured by the difference between the incremental revenues expected to be generated by the agreement (that is, the difference between the revenues that would be achieved if the agreement were concluded and the revenues that would be achieved in the absence of the agreement) and the incremental costs expected to be incurred as a result of the contract (that is, the difference between the costs that would be incurred if the agreement were concluded and the costs that would be incurred in the absence of the agreement), the resulting cash flows being discounted with an appropriate discount rate.
Alghanmi.
As regards the first approach (a comparison with the ‘market price’), the Commission does not consider that, at the present time, an appropriate benchmark can be identified to establish a true market price for services provided by airports [58].
Yasmina byla zřízena za účelem odkoupení a provozování letiště Lübeck.
It therefore considers an ex ante incremental profitability analysis to be the most relevant approach for the assessment of arrangements concluded by airports with individual airlines.
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Hansestadt Lübeck v.
It should be noted that, in general, the application of the MEO principle based on an average price on other, similar markets may prove helpful if such a price can be reasonably identified or deduced from other market indicators.
Hansestadt Lübeck, C-524/14 P, ECLI:EU:C:2016:971.
Moreover, the liberalisation of the air transport market complicates any purely comparative analysis.
Viz internetové stránky letiště Lübeck: http://www.flughafen-luebeck.de/images/02-unternehmen/06-zahlen_fakten_daten/02-monatsstatistik/ab2000.pdf (Stav: 22. května 2015).
As can be seen in this case, commercial practices between airports and airlines are not always based exclusively on a published schedule of charges.
Rada hanzovního města Lübeck sestává ze zástupců občanů města.
Rather, these commercial relations vary to a great extent.
Úř. věst.
They include sharing risks with regard to passenger traffic and any related commercial and financial liability, standard incentive schemes and changing the spread of risks over the term of the agreements.
2012/S 156-261107, 16.8.2012 (http://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:261107-2012:TEXT:EN:HTML&tabId=1).
Consequently, one transaction cannot really be compared with another based on a turnaround price or price per passenger.
Rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 19. ledna 2005, N644i/2002 – Německo – Ausbau der kommunalen wirtschaftsnahen Infrastruktur nach Teil II Ziffer 7 des Rahmenplans der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ (i) Errichtung oder Ausbau von Regionalflughäfen ( Úř. věst.
In addition, benchmarking is not an appropriate method to establish market prices if the available benchmarks have not been defined with regard to market considerations or the existing prices are significantly distorted by public interventions.
C 126, 12.5.2005, s. 10).
Such distortions appear to be present in the aviation industry, for reasons explained in paragraphs 57 to 59 of the 2014 Aviation Guidelines:
Územní povolení umožňující rozvoj letiště Lübeck, které bylo vydáno dne 20. ledna 2005 a zahrnovalo různá infrastrukturní opatření, bylo různými stranami soudně napadeno.
‘Publicly owned airports have traditionally been considered by public authorities as infrastructures for facilitating local development and not as undertakings operating in accordance with market rules.
V předběžném řízení vrchní soud přijal dvě rozhodnutí s platností zákona: jedná se o rozhodnutí Vrchního správního soudu (OVG) v Schleswigu 4 MR 1/05 ze dne 18. července 2005 a rozhodnutí Vrchního správního soudu (OVG) v Schleswigu 101/05 ze dne 21. října 2005.
Those airports' prices consequently tend not to be determined with regard to market considerations and in particular sound ex ante profitability prospects, but essentially having regard to social or regional considerations.
Důvěrné informace.
In those circumstances, the Commission has strong doubts that at the present time, an appropriate benchmark can be identified to establish a true market price for services provided by airports.
C 350, 10.12.1994, s. 5).
Moreover, as the Union courts have recalled, benchmarking by reference to the sector concerned is merely one analytical tool amongst others to determine if a beneficiary has received an economic advantage which it would not have obtained in normal market conditions [61].
Komise („Stardust Marine“), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294.
Ryanair essentially argued that the MEO test can be applied based on a comparison with the commercial arrangements of other European airports.
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Bundesverband deutscher Banken v.
In particular, it compared charges paid by Ryanair at Bournemouth, Grenoble, Knock, Maastricht, Nîmes and Prestwick airports with the charges paid by Ryanair under the agreements at Lübeck airport.
Komise (Helaba I), T-163/05, ECLI:EU:T:2010:59.
The study did not assess whether the sample of benchmark airports fulfilled all the criteria spelled out in the 2014 Aviation guidelines, as it only assessed traffic volumes, type of airport traffic and prosperity of the surrounding area [62].
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Altmark Trans GmbH a Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v.
In its 2012 Opening decision, the Commission compared the charges laid down in the March and October 2010 Side letters with charges at Hamburg airport, which led to doubts as to the market conformity of the charges laid down in the Side letters.
Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, C-280/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:415.
The Commission notes that traffic volume in Lübeck is much lower than in Hamburg airport.
Zpráva společnosti Oxera, Economic MEOP assessment: Lübeck airport (Ekonomické posouzení podle zásady tržně jednajícího hospodářského subjektu: letiště Lübeck), 6. února 2015.
In fact, Hamburg is the airport with the most traffic in Northern Germany.
Podnikatelský plán „Takeoff Konzept“ ze dne 21. prosince 2009, viz http://www.luebeck.de/stadt_politik/rathaus/wahlen/files/M21_Take_off_Konzept_HL-Umdruck_17-156_WA_Ltsh.pdf.
Hamburg is used for all segments of air transport, whereas Lübeck was specialised in low cost carriers which required fewer check-incounters and facilities for transfer passengers, no passenger busses, less luggage handling personnel and facilities, less cleaning personnel, and allowed for a shorter circulation time.
C 46, 25.2.2009, s. 6).
In addition to those considerations, the airport infrastructure must be open to all airlines and not dedicated to a specific airline in order to exclude that the advantage resulting from compatible aid to the airport operator is passed on to a specific airline.
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Itálie a SIM 2 Multimedia v.
The Commission also notes in this context that price differentiation is a standard business practice.
Komise, spojené věcí C-328/99 a C-399/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:252; rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 17. září 2008, státní podpora N 321/2008, N 322/2008 a N 323/2008 – Řecko – Vente de certains actifs d'Olympic Airlines/Olympic Airways Services (Úř. věst.
Such differentiated pricing policies should, however, be commercially justified.
C 18, 23.1.2010, s. 9); rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 12. listopadu 2008, státní podpora N 510/2008 – Itálie – Prodej aktiv letecké společnosti Alitalia (Úř. věst.
The Commission considers that arrangements concluded between airlines and an airport can be deemed to satisfy the MEO test when they incrementally contribute, from an ex ante point of view, to the profitability of the airport.
C 46, 25.2.2009, s. 6); rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 4. dubna 2012, SA.34547 – Francie – Reprise des actifs du groupe SERNAM dans le cadre de son redressement judiciaire (Úř. věst.
The airport should demonstrate that, when setting up an arrangement with an airline (for example, an individual contract or an overall scheme of airport charges), it is capable of covering all costs stemming from the arrangement, over the duration of the arrangement, with a reasonable profit margin on the basis of sound medium-term prospects [64].
C 305, 10.10.2012, s. 5).
In order to assess whether an arrangement concluded by an airport with an airline satisfies the MEO test, expected non-aeronautical revenues stemming from the airline's activity must be taken into consideration together with airport charges, net of any rebates, marketing support or incentive schemes.
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Ryanair Ltd. v.
Similarly, all expected costs incrementally incurred by the airport in relation to the airline's activity at the airport have to be taken into account.
Komise, T-123/09, ECLI:EU:T:2012:164.
Such incremental costs may encompass all categories of expenses or investments, such as incremental personnel, equipment and investment costs induced by the presence of the airline at the airport [65].
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Ryanair Ltd v.
The Commission considers in its constant decision making practice that costs which the airport would have to incur anyway, independently from the arrangement with the airline, should not be taken into account in the MEO test [66].
Komise, T-123/09, ECLI:EU:T:2012:164, bod 156.
According to the Charleroi judgement [67] when assessing the measures in question the Commission has to take into account all the relevant features of the measures and their context.
Směrnice Rady 2001/23/ES ze dne 12. března 2001 o sbližování právních předpisů členských států týkajících se zachování práv zaměstnanců v případě převodů podniků, závodů nebo částí podniků nebo závodů (Úř. věst.
In other words, the Commission has to analyse the expected impact of the agreement with Ryanair on FLG, taking into account all relevant features of the measure in question.
L 82, 22.3.2001, s. 16).
The Court declared in the Stardust Marine judgment that, ‘[…] in order to examine whether or not the State has adopted the conduct of a prudent investor operating in a market economy, it is necessary to place oneself in the context of the period during which the financial support measures were taken in order to assess the economic rationality of the State's conduct, and thus to refrain from any assessment based on a later situation.’ [68].
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB], 18.8.1896, § 613a 242.
In order to apply the MEO test, the Commission has to place itself at the time when the agreement was concluded.
Hloubková prověrka (due diligence) je přezkum potenciálního cíle pro sloučení, akvizici, privatizaci nebo obdobnou transakci v oblasti podnikových financí obvykle prováděný kupujícím.
The Commission has also to base its assessment on the information and assumptions which were at the disposal of FLG when the agreement was concluded.
Sdělení Komise o pojmu státní podpora uvedeném v čl. 107 odst. 1 Smlouvy o fungování Evropské unie (Úř. věst.
Application of the MEO principle to the 2000 Agreement
C 262, 19.7.2016, s. 1), 94. bod odůvodnění.
Preliminary remarks
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Řecko v.
The Commission notes that Air Berlin argued that the agreements between Ryanair and Lübeck airport were not profitable as the losses of FLG increased continuously (see Table 8) after the arrival of Ryanair.
Komise, T-415/05, ECLI:EU:T:2010:386, bod 146.
As Ryanair and Wizz Air were the only airlines flying regular lines from the airport, Air Berlin concluded that FLG's losses must be attributable to these airlines.
Tamtéž.
The Commission notes that even if a significant correlation between the number of Ryanair passengers at Lübeck airport and the losses incurred by FLG could be established, such correlation would not necessarily imply that the losses result from the operation of Ryanair at Lübeck airport.
Soud konstatoval, že hospodářská nesystematičnost by mohla naznačovat hospodářskou návaznost.
Germany stated that more than […] % of the losses between 2000 and 2005 resulted from investments necessary to adapt the airport to increased passenger numbers.
Rozhodnutí Soudního dvora, Komise v.
Such investments were necessary to increase the airport value in the event of the envisaged privatisation and to prepare the airport to attract any airline.
Španělsko, C-610/10, ECLI:EU:C:2012:781, bod 106.
In addition, the Commission recalls that the MEO test is based on an ex ante assessment.
Zákon o úpadku (Insolvenzordnung) ze dne 5. října 1994 (BGBl. I S.
According to the case law of the Court of Justice, the conduct of a private market operator, which is used to assess the conduct of a public operator, does not need to be aimed at short-term profitability but can be guided by prospects of profitability in the longer term [69].
2866) ve znění článku 16 zákona ze dne 20. listopadu 2015 (BGBl. I S. 2010).
Even where an airport is loss-making over the period of Ryanair's operation, it is still possible that an airport airline agreement is incrementally profitable to an airport on an ex ante basis.
Viz rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 27. února 2008 o státní podpoře C 46/07 (ex NN 59/07), kterou Rumunsko uplatnilo ve prospěch podniku Automobile Craiova (dříve Daewoo Romania) (Úř. věst.
As a final remark, the Commission notes that in the context of the present investigation, Ecorys was asked to compile a report on the profitability of the 2000 Agreement between FLG and Ryanair [70].
L 239, 6.9.2008, s. 12).
However, the report was based on a total cost approach, rather than an incremental cost approach and will therefore not be taken into consideration.
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Španělské království v.
Assessment of incremental costs and revenues
Komise, C-342/96, ECLI:EU:C:1999:210, bod 41; rozsudek Soudního dvora, Syndicat français de l'Express international (SFEI) a další v.
As a time frame for assessing the agreement in question a MEO would have chosen as a starting point the date of the signature of the agreement, i.e. 29 May 2000.
La Poste a další, C-39/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, bod 60.
As an end date a MEO would have taken the end date as stipulated in the 2000 Agreement, i.e. 31 May 2010.
Viz například rozsudek Tribunálu, Alitalia v.
For the purpose of assessing the agreement in question and given the findings in recitals 282 to 301, both the existence and the amount of possible aid in this agreement have to be assessed in the light of the situation prevailing at the time it was signed and, more specifically, in the light of the information available and developments foreseeable at that time.
Komise, T-296/97, ECLI:EU:T:2000:289; rozsudek Tribunálu, WestLB v.
At the time of the negotiation of the agreement, FLG expected the business of Ryanair at Lübeck airport to lead to increased passenger numbers, thereby increasing non-aeronautic revenues, to the expansion of non-aeronautic services, as well as to the attraction of further airlines.
Komise, spojené věci T-228/99 a T-233/99, ECLI:EU:T:2003:57; rozsudek Tribunálu, Scott SA v.
Even though FLG was making losses in the years preceding the agreement, Ryanair's business at the airport was expected to lead to moderate profits in the medium- to long-term.
Komise, T-366/00, ECLI:EU:T:2007:99; rozsudek Soudního dvora, Itálie a SIM 2 Multimedia v.
Germany provided data on the ex ante expected growth of passenger numbers as well as the expected incremental costs and revenues, in a best-case and worst-case scenario.
Komise, spojené věci C-328/99 a C-399/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:252; rozsudek Tribunálu, Air France v.
Incremental revenues that a private investor would reasonably expect from the agreement include:
Komise, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194.
additional aeronautical revenues from passengers and landing charges paid by Ryanair and
zpráva o politice hospodářské soutěže, 1993, s. 255.
additional non-aeronautical revenues from, for example, car parking, franchised shops, or directly operated shops.
Rozhodnutí Komise C(2013) 3546 final ze dne 19. června 2013, SA.36197(N/2013) – privatizace ANA – Aeroportos de Portugal, Úř. věst. C 256, 5.9.2013, s. 3.
Applying the ‘single-till’ principle, the Commission takes the view that both aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues should be taken into account [71].
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Belgie v.
Germany submitted that based on the charges stipulated in the 2000 Agreement, the airport expected to have average aeronautical revenues of EUR […] per passenger.
Komise, C-40/85, ECLI:EU:C:1986:305.
FLG estimated revenues from non-aviation business as representing […] % of aviation business income.
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Francie v.
Incremental costs that a private investor would reasonably expect from the agreement would include:
Komise („Stardust Marine“), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, bod 71.
incremental operational costs directly caused by the Ryanair agreement,
Ocenění provedené společností Berenberg Consult GmbH (dceřiný podnik společnosti Hamburger Privatbank Berenberg).
costs for marketing services,
Viz bod 403 XXIII. zprávy Evropské komise o politice hospodářské soutěže, 1993; bod 4.2.3.1 sdělení Komise o pojmu státní podpora uvedeném v čl. 107 odst. 1 Smlouvy o fungování Evropské unie (Úř. věst.
investment costs directly linked to the Ryanair agreement.
C 262, 19.7.2016, s. 1).
Germany stated that it was necessary to increase the number of staff of FLG to handle the expected passenger numbers.
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 53.
FLG expected incremental operational and personnel costs of EUR […] per passenger.
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 59.
Based on the 2000 Agreement, FLG expected incremental marketing costs for the period 2000-2012 of EUR […] in the best case and EUR […] in the worst case.
Rozhodnutí Komise 2011/60/EU ze dne 27. ledna 2010 o státní podpoře C 12/08 (ex NN 74/07) – Slovensko – Dohoda mezi letištěm Bratislava a společností Ryanair, 88. a 89. bod odůvodnění (Úř. věst.
Regarding investment costs, Germany stated that the airport infrastructure already existed prior to the agreement with Ryanair and that the initially planned operation of Ryanair at Lübeck airport did not require any additional infrastructure investments.
L 27, 1.2.2011, s. 24).
Germany submitted the following revenues and operating costs for the best case (Table 11) and the worst case (Table 12):
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, body 57–59.
Table 11
Pokud jde o srovnávání odkazem na ziskovost (nikoli ceny) v tomto odvětví, viz rozsudek Tribunálu, Španělsko a Ciudad de la Luz v. Komise, spojené věci T-319/12 a T-321/12, ECLI:EU:T:2014:604, bod 44.
Best-case costs and revenues
Další posuzovaná kritéria viz pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 60.
year
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, body 59 a 63.
passengers
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 63.
aeronautic revenues
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 64.
non-aeronautic revenues
Pokyny pro leteckou dopravu z roku 2014, bod 64; rozhodnutí Komise (EU) 2015/1226 ze dne 23. července 2014 o státní podpoře SA.33963 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) poskytnuté Francií ve prospěch Obchodní a průmyslové komory města Angoulême (Chambre de Commerce et d'Industrie d'Angoulême) a společností SNC-Lavalin, Ryanair a Airport Marketing Services (Úř. věst.
operating costs
L 201, 30.7.2015, s. 48); rozhodnutí Komise (EU) 2015/1584 ze dne 1. října 2014 o státní podpoře SA.23098 (C 37/07) (ex NN 36/07), kterou poskytla Itálie ve prospěch společnosti Società di Gestione dell'Aeroporto di Alghero So.Ge.A.AL S.p.A. a různých leteckých dopravců působících na letišti Alghero (Úř. věst.
Table 12
L 250, 25.9.2015, s. 38); rozhodnutí Komise (EU) 2016/2069 ze dne 1. října 2014 o opatřeních SA.14093 (C 76/2002) provedených Belgií ve prospěch společností Brussels South Charleroi Airport a Ryanair (Úř. věst.
Worst-case costs and revenues
L 325, 30.11.2016, s. 63).
FLG estimated positive financial effects from the 2000 Agreement with Ryanair.
Rozsudek Tribunálu, Ryanair v.
In this regard, Table 13 summarises the revenues from aeronautic and non-aeronautic activities, as well as the costs directly attributable to the operation of Ryanair at the airport and marketing costs.
Komise („Charleroi“), T-196/04, ECLI:EU:T:2008:585, bod 59.
Table 13
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Italská republika v.
Ex ante profitability assessment
Komise Evropských společenství (Alfa Romeo), C-305/89, ECLI:EU:C:1991:142.
profitability assessment
Zpráva byla zmíněna již v oddíle 7.3.1.1 týkajícím se ziskovosti dohody mezi hanzovním městem Lübeck a společností Infratil.
marketing costs
Viz rozhodnutí (EU) 2015/1226.
In the best case, Germany rounded passenger numbers to […], leading to aeronautic revenues of EUR […].
Rozhodnutí (EU) 2015/1584.
In the worst-case scenario, a total of […] passengers was expected, leading to aeronautic revenues of EUR […].
Zpráva společnosti Oxera, Economic MEOP assessment: Lübeck airport (Ekonomické posouzení podle zásady tržně jednajícího hospodářského subjektu: letiště Lübeck), 1. září 2014.
Since non-aeronautic revenues were expected to amount to […] % of aeronautic revenues, non-aeronautic revenues were calculated to be EUR […] in the best case and EUR […] in the worst case.
Rozsudek Tribunálu, British Aggregates Association v.
It was calculated that operating costs would amount to a total of EUR […] in the best case and EUR […] in the worst case.
Komise, T-210/02 RENV, ECLI:EU:T:2012:110, body 82 a 83; rozsudek Soudního dvora, Komise a Španělsko v.
Marketing costs were not calculated on a per passenger basis, but were estimated, in total, to be EUR […] in the best case and EUR […] in the worst case.
Government of Gibraltar a Spojené království, spojené věci C-106/09 P a C-107/09 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:732, body 74 a 75; rozsudek Soudního dvora, Eventech v.
(315) Table 13 shows that revenues stemming from the 2000 Agreement were expected to exceed costs, leading to an annual surplus of EUR […] in the best case and EUR […] in the worst case.
The Partking Adjudicator, C-518/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:9, body 54 a 55.
The Commission finds the approach taken by Germany sound.
Rozsudek Soudního dvora, Komise v.
The estimated average aeronautical revenues were based on the terms of the 2000 Agreement with Ryanair.