natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Derimod gælder reglerne for det indre marked og for konkurrencen ikke for aktiviteter, der ikke er af økonomisk art, og påvirker derfor på ingen måde forsyningspligtydelser, som ikke er af økonomisk art. Med henvisning til undervisning inden for det nationale undervisningssystem fastslog EF-Domstolen i Humbel-dommen, at staten, når den organiserer og driver et sådant system, ikke derved søger at drive virksomhed mod betaling, men at varetage sine opgaver over for befolkningen på det sociale, kulturelle og uddannelsesmæssige område [13].
On the contrary, internal market and competition rules do not apply to non-economic activities and therefore have no impact on services of general interest to the extent that these services indeed constitute non-economic activities. With regard to national education the European court of Justice ruled that the State, in establishing and maintaining such a system, is not seeking to engage in gainful activity but is fulfilling its duty towards its own population in the social, cultural and educational field [13].
Det kan således fastslås, at første type aktiviteter ikke er af økonomisk art. Det betyder, at den ikke er omfattet af konkurrencereglerne og reglerne for det indre marked, og dermed heller ikke falder ind under traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1.
Thus, the former can be considered not to involve any economic activity. This would result in the activity in cause not being subject to the competition and internal market rules, thus not falling under the scope of Article 87(1).
VEDTAGET FØLGENDE BESLUTNING:
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1
Italien underretter senest to måneder efter meddelelsen af denne beslutning Kommissionen om, hvilke foranstaltninger der er planlagt eller truffet for at efterkomme beslutningen.
The Republic of Italy shall inform the Commission, within two months of the date of notification of this Decision, of the measures already taken and planned to comply with it.
Italien giver disse oplysninger på vedlagte spørgeskema.
It will provide this information using the questionnaire attached in Annex 1 of this Decision.
EF-Domstolens dom af 27. september 1988 i sag C-263/86, den belgiske stat mod Humbel og Edel, Sml. 1988, s. 5365, præmis 9-10 og 15-18.
judgment of the Court of 27 September 1988 on the case C263/86, E.C.R. 1988, p.5365, points 9-10; 15-18
Domstolens dom af 7. december 1993 i sag C-109/92, Wirth mod Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Sml. 1993 I, s. 6447.
judgment of the Court of 7 December 1993 on the case C109/92, E.C.R. 1993, p.I-6447
Investeringer foretaget på Shetlandsøerne af Shetland Leasing and Property Developments Ltd (Det Forenede Kongerige)
Investments of Shetland Leasing and Property Developments Ltd in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom)
(meddelt under nummer K(2005) 4649)
(notified under document number C(2005) 4649)
under henvisning til traktaten om oprettelse af Det Europæiske Fællesskab, særlig artikel 88, stk. 2, første afsnit,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community and in particular the first paragraph of Article 88 (2) thereof,
under henvisning til Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 659/1999 af 22. marts 1999 om fastlæggelse af regler for anvendelsen af EF-traktatens artikel 93 [1], særlig artikel 14,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [1], and in particular Article 14 thereof,
efter at have opfordret interesserede parter til at fremsætte deres bemærkninger i overensstemmelse med artikel 88, stk. 2, første afsnit, og
Having invited interested third parties to present their observations, in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 88 (2),
I SAGSFORLØB
I PROCEDURE
I januar 2004 blev Kommissionen af en britisk statsborger underrettet om nogle investeringer, som var blevet foretaget på Shetlandsøerne med de shetlandske myndigheders deltagelse, og som muligvis udgjorde statsstøtte.
In January 2004 the Commission was informed by a citizen of the United Kingdom of investments made with the involvement of authorities of the Shetland Islands of the United Kingdom which possibly constituted State aid.
I sine breve af 17. februar 2004 og 1. september 2004 bad Kommissionen Det Forenede Kongerige om yderligere oplysninger om disse investeringer, og Det Forenede Kongerige svarede med sine breve af 30. april 2004 og 13. december 2004.
By letters of 17 February 2004 and of 1 September 2004 the Commission requested the United Kingdom to provide information about these investments, to which the United Kingdom replied by letters of 30 April 2004 and 13 December 2004.
I sit brev af 20. april 2005 meddelte Kommissionen Det Forenede Kongerige, at den havde besluttet at indlede en formel undersøgelsesprocedure i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 88, stk. 2.
The Commission informed the United Kingdom by letter of 20 April 2005 of the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure under Article 88 (2) of the EC Treaty.
Det Forenede Kongerige fremsatte sine bemærkninger til sagen i sit brev af 19. maj 2005.
The United Kingdom gave its comments on the case by letter of 19 May 2005.
Kommissionens beslutning om at indlede den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure blev offentliggjort i Den Europæiske Unions Tidende den 10. juni 2005 [2].
The Commission decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 10 June 2005 [2].
Kommissionen opfordrede samtidig alle interesserede parter til at fremsætte deres bemærkninger til sagen.
The Commission invited any interested parties to submit their observations on the case.
Den har ingen bemærkninger modtaget.
No comments were received.
II BESKRIVELSE
II DESCRIPTION
Shetlandsøernes amtsråd (Shetland Islands Council - SIC), der er offentlig myndighed på Shetlandsøerne, har oprettet to fonde, Shetland Development Trust (Development Trust) og Shetland Islands Council Charitable Trust (Charitable Trust).
The Shetland Islands Council (SIC), a public authority in Shetland, set up two trusts, the Shetland Development Trust (Development Trust) and the Shetland Islands Council Charitable Trust (Charitable Trust).
Development Trust blev oprettet for at være hovedkilden til finansiering af økonomiske udviklingsprojekter på Shetlandsøerne. Det stiller finansieringsmidler til rådighed i form af lån.
The Development Trust was established to serve as the main means for financing economic development projects in Shetland; it makes funding available through loans.
Fondsbestyrelsen består af amtsrådsmedlemmerne plus to uafhængige.
The trustees are the councillors of SIC plus two independent trustees.
Charitable Trust er en forvaltningsfond, som tilhører SIC og yder lån til velgørende formål.
The Charitable Trust is the trust fund of the SIC that grants loans for charitable purposes.
Charitable Trust’s fondsbestyrelse består af amtrådsmedlemmerne plus to uafhængige.
The trustees of the Charitable Trust are the councillors of SIC, plus two independent trustees.
Både Charitable Trust’s og Development Trust’s midler stammer fra en reservefond, der blev oprettet af SIC.
The funding of both the Charitable Trust and the Development Trust is derived from a reserve fund set up by the SIC.
Denne reservefond finansieres selv ved hjælp af en aftale, som blev indgået den 12. juli 1974 mellem SIC og de olieselskaber, der benytter havneanlæggene i Sullum Voe.
This reserve fund itself is funded from an agreement concluded on 12 July 1974 between the SIC and oil companies using the harbour facilities of Sullum Voe.
Aftalen går ud på, at selskaberne skal betale afgift »for importen af råolie og som godtgørelse for de ulemper, den forvolder«.
This agreement states that fees are paid by these companies ‘in respect of the import of crude oil and as compensation for disturbance caused thereby’.
Til erhvervs- og udviklingsformål har SIC oprettet Shetland Leasing and Property Ltd (SLAP), som er et aktieselskab med erhvervsformål, der helt og holdent ejes af Charitable Trust.
For commercial and development activities the SIC has set up Shetland Leasing and Property Ltd (SLAP), which is a trading company with limited liability, operating for profit and wholly owned by Charitable Trust.
SLAP har til opgave at anbringe kapital i lokale virksomheder, at yde lån til den lokale industri til bankrente og at opføre industribygninger til udlejning til markedspriser.
The tasks of SLAP are to take equity holdings in local businesses, to make loans to local industry at commercial rates and to construct industrial buildings for lease at commercial rents.
Da SLAP er et aktieselskab med erhvervsformål, som ejes helt af Charitable Trust, finansieres dets aktiviteter dels af Charitable Trust, dels af dets eget udbytte.
As a commercial limited company wholly owned by the Charitable Trust, SLAP obtains the funding for its activities from the Charitable Trust and from its own profits.
Til bestemte projekter kommer der også finansieringsmidler fra Development Trust.
For some specific projects funds are also provided by the Development Trust.
I 1999 besluttede SLAP’s bestyrelse at investere i en virksomhed ved navn Shetland Seafish Ltd. Denne virksomhed blev oprettet den 7. oktober 1999 ved en økonomisk sammenslutning af Williamson Ltd og Ronas Ltd. Begge virksomheder var på det tidspunkt tabsgivende og blev betragtet som insolvente.
In 1999 the board of SLAP decided to invest in a company named Shetland Seafish Ltd This company was established on 7 October 1999 as a result of a financial merger between Williamson Ltd and Ronas Ltd. Both companies were loss-making at the time and were considered insolvent.
Ved at oprette Shetland Seafish Ltd og slå de to tabsgivende virksomheder sammen forventede man, at udbyttet ville vokse, og den nye virksomhed i løbet af kort tid ville blive udbyttegivende.
By setting up Shetland Seafish Ltd and merging both loss-making companies it was expected that profits would grow and that the new company would be profit making within a short time.
Det blev anslået at Shetland Seafish Ltd i slutningen af 2002 ville få et udbytte på over 460000 GBP.
It was projected that by the end of 2002 Shetland Seafish Ltd would be generating a profit in excess of GBP 460000.
SLAP investerede i Shetland Seafish Ltd ved at opkøbe 156250 stamaktier (62,5 %) på hver 1 GBP og 1000000 referenceaktier (100 %) på hver 1 GBP.
SLAP invested in Shetland Seafish Ltd by acquiring 156250 shares (62,5 %) of the ordinary shares of GBP 1 each and 1000000 preference shares of GBP 1 each (100 %).
I juni 2000 vedtog SLAP’s bestyrelse endnu engang at investere i Shetland Seafish Ltd, da denne virksomhed havde besluttet at overtage aktiviteterne i Whalsay Ltd, en tabsgivende fiskeforarbejdningsvirksomhed med hjemsted på Shetlandsøerne.
In June 2000 the board of SLAP decided to invest once more in Shetland Seafish Ltd when the company decided to take over the activities of Whalsay Ltd, a loss-making fish-processing company based in Shetland.
SLAP’s finansiering af denne overtagelse bestod i, at SLAP overtog endnu 2000000 præferenceaktier i Shetland Seafish Ltd, som SLAP tegnede i to omgange. I november 2000 erhvervede SLAP 1200000 præferenceaktier og den 16. februar endnu 800000 præferenceaktier.
The funding of this takeover by SLAP consisted in SLAP’s acquiring 2000000 additional preference shares in Shetland Seafish Ltd, which were subscribed by SLAP in two tranches; in November 2000 SLAP acquired 1200000 Preference Shares and on 16 February another 800000 Preference Shares.
Fra den 16. februar 2001 bestod Shetland Seafish Ltd’s tegnede aktiekapital således af 250000 stamaktier og 3000000 præferenceaktier, der blev ejet i samme forhold af de samme aktionærer som ved den oprindelige aktieudstedelse i 1999.
As from 16 February 2001, the issued shared capital of Shetland Seafish Ltd thus comprised 250000 Ordinary shares and 3000000 Preference shares, held in the same proportions and by the same shareholders as at the initial issuing of shares in 1999.
Ifølge en særlig erklæring, som Shetland Seafish Ltd’s bestyrelse vedtog den 17. december 1999, giver præferenceaktierne i Shetland Seafish Ltd »ret til et fast, ikke-kumulativt præferentielt udbytte på 10 % om året (eksklusive den dermed forbundne skattegodtgørelse) af den aktuelt indbetalte kapital eller den dertil henførte godtgørelse, og det påløber fra tegningstidspunktet og udbetales (hvis der er overskud til udlodning) hvert år den 31. januar for de tolv forudgående måneder; aktierne kan indløses til pari (dvs. 1 pund pr. præferenceaktie) plus eventuelt ubetalt præferentielt udbytte efter selskabets valg på et hvilket som helst tidspunkt efter årsdagen for præferenceaktiernes tildeling.«
According to a special resolution adopted in 17 December 1999 by the board of Shetland Seafish Ltd the preference shares in Shetland Seafish Ltd have ‘the right to a fixed non-cumulative preferential dividend at the rate of 10 % (net of associated tax credit) per annum on the capital for the time being paid up or credit as paid up thereon accruing from the date of subscription therefore and to be paid (to the extent that there are profits available for distribution) annually on 31 January in each year in respect of the 12 months ending on that date; and may be redeemed at par (i.e. at 1 per preference share) plus any unpaid preferential dividend, at the option of the Company at any time after the first anniversary of the date of the allotment of the preference shares.’
Af de forelagte oplysninger fremgår det, at Shetland Seafish Ltd har været tabsgivende siden 1999.
From the data provided it is clear that Shetland Seafish Ltd has been loss making since 1999.
I sine breve af 30. april 2004 og 13. december 2004 hævdede Det Forenede Kongerige, at investeringerne skulle betragtes som private investeringer, da SLAP er et privat foretagende, og både SIC og SLAP på investeringstidspunktet havde berettigede forventninger om, at de involverede beløb kunne betragtes som private midler.
In its letters of 30 April 2004 and 13 December 2004, the United Kingdom stated that the investments should be considered as private investments, as SLAP is a private body and at the time of the investments both the SIC and SLAP had legitimate expectations that the monies involved should be considered as private funds.
For det andet hævdede Det Forenede Kongerige, at hvis de involverede beløb skal betragtes som offentlige midler, er de investeringer, SLAP har foretaget, investeringer, som en normal privat virksomhed kunne have foretaget.
Secondly the United Kingdom stated that if the monies involved are considered to be public funds, the investments made by SLAP are investments which could have been decided upon by a normal private operator.
Til støtte for denne påstand har Det Forenede Kongerige forelagt to rapporter om de pågældende investeringer: rapporten om Shetland Seafish-sammenslutningen og Whalsay-rapporten.
To support this statement the United Kingdom had provided two reports issued with regard to the investments in question: the Shetland Seafish Merger Report and the Whalsay Report.
Rapporten om Shetland Seafish -sammenslutningen
Shetland Seafish Merger Report
Rapporten af 27. september 1999 om Seafish-sammenslutningen er udarbejdet af M. Goodlad og S. Gillani til SLAP’s direktører og drejer sig om en foreslået strukturomlægning og sammenslutning af L.A.
The Seafish Merger Report of 27 September 1999 is a report by Mr. M. Goodlad and Mr. S. Gillani to the Directors of SLAP on ‘A proposed restructure and merger of L.A.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited’.
Ifølge rapportens tal og prognoser skulle sammenslutningen af L.A.
According to the figures and the prognoses in the report, the merger of L.A.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited ved oprettelse af Shetland Seafish Ltd begynde at give udbytte i løbet af tre år.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited, through the establishment of Shetland Seafish Ltd would begin to yield profits within three years.
Whalssay-rapporten
Whalsay Report
Begrundelse for den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure
Grounds of the formal investigation procedure
Kommissionen mente ikke, det kunne fastslås på grundlag af tallene og oplysningerne i de rapporter, Det Forenede Kongeriges myndigheder havde forelagt, om disse investeringer kunne betragtes som udbyttegivende, og om SLAP havde optrådt som en normal privat investor.
The Commission considered that it could not be established from the figures and data contained in the reports submitted by the authorities of the United Kingdom whether these investments could be considered to be profitable investments and whether SLAP had acted like a normal private investor.
Da investeringerne desuden var til de involverede virksomheders klare fordel, og disse virksomheder lå i direkte konkurrence med andre fiskeforarbejdningsvirksomheder både i Det Forenede Kongerige og andre medlemsstater, fandt Kommissionen, at investeringerne måtte være statsstøtte i den i EF-traktatens artikel 87 anvendte betydning.
As, furthermore, the investments were clearly for the benefit of the companies involved and those companies were in direct competition with other fish-processing companies both within the United Kingdom and in other Member States, the Commission considered that the investments appeared to be State aid within the meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty.
Da investeringerne blev foretaget i 1999 og 2000, blev de vurderet på grundlag af retningslinjerne for gennemgangen af statsstøtte til fiskeri- og akvakultursektoren fra 1997 [3].
As the investments were made in 1999 and 2000, they were assessed in the light of the 1997 Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture [3].
Ifølge disse retningslinjers punkt 2.3 skal støtte, der ikke opfylder betingelserne i retningslinjerne, bedømmes i hvert enkelt tilfælde.
According to point 2.3 of those Guidelines, aid that does not fulfil the conditions laid down therein must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Ifølge punkt 1.2 er statsstøtte, der ydes uden krav om en forpligtelse fra modtagernes side, og som har til formål at forbedre deres driftsøkonomi og bevirker en forbedring af deres indkomst, at betragte som driftsstøtte og derfor uforenelig med fællesmarkedet.
According to point 1.2., State aid which is granted without imposing any obligation on the part of the recipients and which is intended to improve the situation of undertakings and increase their business liquidity and which has the effect of improving the recipient’s income is, as operating aid, incompatible with the common market.
Ifølge retningslinjerne kan driftsstøtte kun erklæres for forenelig med fællesmarkedet, hvis den er forbundet med en omstruktureringsplan, der skønnes at være forenelig med fællesmarkedet.
According to the Guidelines, operating aid can only be declared compatible with the common market if such aid is linked to a restructuring plan compatible with the common market.
Da Kommissionen ikke har fået en sådan omstruktureringsplan forelagt, fandt den, at investeringerne var uforenelige med fællesmarkedet.
As such a restructuring plan was not submitted, the Commission considered that the investments were incompatible with the common market.
BEMÆRKNINGER FRA DET FORENEDE KONGERIGE
III COMMENTS FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM
I sit svar af 19. maj 2005 erklærer Det Forenede Kongerige, at SLAP bør betragtes som et privat foretagende.
In its reply of 19 May 2005, the United Kingdom contends that SLAP should be considered as a private body.
Det hævder desuden, at alt bevismateriale i sagen allerede var blevet sendt til Kommissionen, at oplysningerne i rapporten om Seafish-sammenslutningen må betragtes som tilstrækkeligt grundlag for de opstillede hypoteser, og at de hypoteser, der opstilles i rapporten, må betragtes som forsigtige, og at de oprindelige forretningsmæssige argumenter for sammenslutningen, således som de fremstilles i rapporten, var rimelige i betragtning af SLAP’s egenskab af privat investor.
It further states that all evidence concerning the case had already been forwarded to the Commission, that the information contained in the Seafish Merger Report is considered sufficient as a basis for the assumptions made, that the assumptions made in the report should be considered conservative and prudent, and that the original business case for the mergers as set out in the report was justifiable in the context of SLAP’s capacity as a private investor.
Det Forenede Kongerige hævder, at tilbagebetaling af støtten ikke bør forlanges, hvis Kommissionen vedtager en negativ beslutning, da det ville stride mod princippet beskyttelse af berettigede forventninger.
The United Kingdom maintains that if the Commission adopts a negative decision, recovery of the aid should not be required, as it would be contrary to the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.
Det Forenede Kongerige henviser til slut til Kommissionens beslutning 2003/612/EF af 3. juni 2003 om lån til opkøb af fangstkvoter på Shetlandsøerne (Det Forenede Kongerige) [4] og fremfører, at de britiske myndigheder hele tiden har optrådt sådan, at det med rimelighed kunne konkluderes, at fonden er en privat fond, der omfattes af reglerne for Fællesskabets strukturfonde.
With reference to Commission Decision 2003/612/EC of 3 June 2003 on loans for the purchase of fishing quotas in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom) [4], the United Kingdom closes by saying that the UK authorities have consistently acted in such a way that it could reasonably be concluded that the fund is a private fund under the rules governing the Community Structural Funds.
IV VURDERING
IV ASSESSMENT
Det må først afgøres, om foranstaltningen kan betragtes som statsstøtte, og om denne statsstøtte i så fald er forenelig med fællesmarkedet.
It must be determined first whether the measure can be regarded as State aid and, if this is the case, whether this aid is compatible with the common market.
Kan foranstaltningen betragtes som statsstøtte?
Existence of State aid
I EF-traktatens artikel 87, stk. 1, hedder det: »Bortset fra de i denne traktat hjemlede undtagelser er statsstøtte eller støtte, som ydes ved hjælp af statsmidler under enhver tænkelig form, og som fordrejer eller truer med at fordreje konkurrencevilkårene ved at begunstige visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner, uforenelig med fællesmarkedet i det omfang, den påvirker samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne«.
According to Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, ‘save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’.
Fire betingelser skal være opfyldt, for at en foranstaltning kan klassificeres som statsstøtte: for det første skal foranstaltningen bibringe de virksomheder, der modtager den, visse fordele, for det andet skal støtten ydes af staten eller ved hjælp af statsmidler, for det tredje skal den forvride eller true med at forvride konkurrencen ved at begunstige visse virksomheder, og endelig skal den påvirke handelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
Four conditions are required for classifying a measure as a State aid: first, the measure must provide some advantage to the undertakings which benefit from it; second, the aid must be granted by the State or through State resources; third, it must distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings; and, finally, must affect trade between Member States.
De SLAP-midler, der er blevet benyttet til investeringen, skyldes finansieringsmidler fra Charitable Trust.
The funds of SLAP which have been used for the investment are derived from funding by the Charitable Trust.
Charitable Trust blev oprettet af SIC for på det shetlandske samfunds vegne at modtage den ulempegodtgørelse, olieindustrien var gået ind på betale.
The Charitable Trust was created by the SIC to receive and hold, on behalf of the Shetland community, disturbance receipts which the oil industry had agreed to pay.