natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Overtagelsesudvalget under Fraports bestyrelse bemærkede i denne forbindelse på et møde om kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 den 23. november 2001, dvs. mindre end én måned inden bestyrelsens godkendelse af kapitalforhøjelsen 2001, at Fraport ikke kunne træde ud af FFHG på daværende tidspunkt, fordi »delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz næppe ville acceptere dette« [74].
COMMENTS FROM GERMANY ON THIRD PARTY SUBMISSION
Kommissionen finder følgelig, at kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 kan tilregnes staten.
ON THE COMMENTS FROM RYANAIR
Økonomisk fordel
Concerning the comments from Ryanair, Germany stated that these comprehensively supported its observations and supplemented these from the side of the airline.
En fordel i henhold til traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1, er en økonomisk fordel, som en virksomhed ikke ville have opnået på normale markedsbetingelser, dvs. uden statslig indgriben [75].
Ryanair's comments especially underline, according to Germany, that the contracts with Ryanair are such as any market economy investor would have concluded and that in fact many other European airports have concluded similar agreements with Ryanair.
Det er kun foranstaltningens indvirkning på virksomheden, der er relevant, ikke årsagen til eller formålet med statens indgriben [76].
Furthermore, Germany emphasised that the airport charges as established by FFHG were according to Ryanair absolutely normal in the low-cost carrier sector and were not especially advantageous for Ryanair.
Hver gang en virksomheds finansielle situation forbedres som følge af statslig indgriben, er der tale om en fordel.
ON THE COMMENTS FROM LUFTHANSA AND BDF
Desuden gælder det, at »den kapital, som staten direkte eller indirekte indskyder i en virksomhed på vilkår, der svarer til normale markedsvilkår, ikke kan anses for statsstøtte« [77].
Concerning the comments from Lufthansa, Germany rejected the argument that the results of the study submitted on the effects of Frankfurt Hahn airport on the regional economy and the number of jobs created would be questionable and emphasised instead that the study is based on the well-founded economic research conducted by the expert authors.
Med henblik på at fastslå, om kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 giver FFHG en fordel, som virksomheden ikke ville have fået under normale markedsvilkår, skal Kommissionen i denne sag sammenligne den adfærd, der udvises af de offentlige myndigheder, som yder den direkte investeringsstøtte og indskyder kapital, med den adfærd, der udvises af en markedsøkonomisk operatør, som styres af udsigterne til rentabilitet på lang sigt [78].
Germany submitted that of course the numbers in the study are a forecast and would not necessarily always correspond to the numbers actually realised, especially in the context of the world economic crisis.
Ved vurderingen skal der ses bort fra eventuelle positive virkninger på økonomien i den region, hvor lufthavnen ligger, eftersom Domstolen har præciseret, at det relevante spørgsmål ved anvendelse af det markedsøkonomiske princip er, om »om en privat virksomhed ud fra udsigterne til rentabel drift under lignende omstændigheder ville have foretaget en sådan kapitalforhøjelse, idet der herved skal ses bort fra ethvert socialt, politisk eller regionalt hensyn til den pågældende sektor« [79].
According to Germany, the forecast was realistic at the moment of publication and led to the conclusion by PwC, from an ex ante perspective, that FFHG has acted as a market economy investor.
I Stardust Marine-dommen fastslog Domstolen, at »(…) der ved bedømmelsen af, om en stat har iagttaget en handlemåde, som en fornuftig investor ville have fulgt under markedsøkonomiske vilkår, og af, om statens handlemåde er økonomisk rationel, skal foretages en vurdering af situationen, som den var på det tidspunkt, da de finansielle støtteforanstaltninger blev truffet, og at der ikke må tages hensyn til omstændighederne, som de har udviklet sig sidenhen« [80].
Germany also rejected the doubts of Lufthansa and BDF that profitability will not be reached at Frankfurt Hahn airport.
I EDF-dommen fastslog Domstolen endvidere, at »(…) økonomiske vurderinger foretaget efter tildelingen af nævnte fordel, den efterfølgende konstatering af, at den af den pågældende medlemsstat foretagne investering reelt var rentabel, eller efterfølgende begrundelser for valget af den fremgangsmåde, som blev fulgt, ikke tilstrækkelige til at godtgøre, at denne medlemsstat forud for eller samtidigt med denne tildeling har truffet en sådan beslutning i sin egenskab af aktionær« [81].
Germany stated that the forecast when profitability will be achieved may have to be adapted with time due to multiple factors, such as the investment and expansion decisions of the undertaking.
For at kunne anvende det markedsøkonomiske princip må Kommissionen gå tilbage til det tidspunkt, hvor hver beslutning om at forhøje FFHG's kapital blev truffet.
In any case, PwC has put forward reliable evaluations that all the measures under investigation were economically reasonable.
Kommissionen skal også basere sin vurdering på de oplysninger og antagelser, som FFHG's offentlige aktionærer havde adgang til på det tidspunkt, hvor beslutningen om de finansielle dispositioner blev truffet.
The claim by Lufthansa and BDF that no real MEOT justification exists are therefore unfounded according to Germany, especially since Lufthansa did not have access to the MEOT of PwC.
Kommissionen anerkender, at det kan være vanskeligt for den pågældende medlemsstat og for de pågældende operatører at fremlægge fuldstændigt samtidig dokumentation for ordninger indgået mange år tilbage, og vil tage dette i betragtning ved anvendelse af det kriterium, der skal tages stilling til i den aktuelle sag.
Concerning the capital increases, Germany stated that there was no closure of Frankfurt Hahn airport; rather, the airport was has been used for civil aviation since 1993 and up until the moment that Fraport got involved.
I denne rapport konkluderedes det, at den overordnede økonomiske situation — selv om de mål, som Fraport havde fastlagt for FFHG hurtigt var blevet opfyldt, og passagertallet var stigende — var under dramatisk forværring, da to af FFHG's største kunder (Malaysian Airlines Cargo og MNG Airlines) flyttede deres aktiviteter fra eller reducerede deres aktiviteter i Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn.
That some airports are being used more by certain airlines than by others is normal, Germany claimed.
På denne baggrund gav Fraport BCG og SD til opgave at udvikle en strategi for FFHG.
In fact, Lufthansa itself has for example an exclusive terminal at Munich airport.
BCG anførte desuden i sin rapport, at investeringerne under realistiske vækstantagelser ikke kunne forventes at blive rentable.
Furthermore, Germany stated that there was no discrimination concerning the marketing support scheme.
For at dokumentere dette beregnede BCG nettonutidsværdien af investeringerne (se tabel 19).
The levels of marketing support granted have been set up in a reasonable, non-discriminatory manner.
NNV [86] (i EUR)
In relation to the question of whether there was any aid coming from State resources, Germany argued that in contrast to what Lufthansa and BDF claimed, no conclusions could be drawn from the annual balance sheets of Fraport in which the undertaking stated that it is a ‘dependent, publicly held undertaking’.
20 % vækst fra 2005
This statement was only included in the annual financial report in order to present the relationship to undertakings and persons close to Fraport, but does not have any implications for the State aid assessment.
10 % vækst fra 2005
In any case, no imputability of the capital increases to the State could be derived from this application.
7 % vækst fra 2005
Concerning the question whether the aid granted to FFHG would be compatible with the internal market, Germany stated that Lufthansa's and BDF's argument that civil use began only six years after the termination of military use would be incorrect as well as irrelevant.
I henhold til de trafikprognoser, der er opstillet af Fraports eksterne ekspert, ville yderligere vækst kræve yderligere infrastrukturinvesteringer [87].
Civil use had started directly in 1993 and the infrastructure for civil use was already there.
Det samlede beløb til de nødvendige udgifter blev anslået til […] mio. EUR og ville have omfattet udvidelsen af start- og landingsbanen, rullebaner, forpladser og andre infrastrukturforanstaltninger.
The expansion of the infrastructure in order to make the airport ready for commercial passenger traffic was inevitable.
Som BCG har oplyst, blev der imidlertid ikke udført en detaljeret vurdering til støtte for denne betydelige investeringsplan.
Germany rejected Lufthansa's and BDF's argument that Frankfurt Hahn airport did not help to decongest Frankfurt Main airport and pointed out that Lufthansa and BDF had not substantiated their claim with any evidence.
BCG fandt derfor, at investeringen indebar høje risici og anbefalede, at risiciene blev delt med endnu en investor, eller at man overvejede at sælge Fraports andel af FFHG.
Germany especially opposed the argument of Lufthansa and BDF that it was doubtful whether Frankfurt Hahn airport generated a great number of jobs.
Tyskland indgav en vurdering af markedsøkonomiprincippet udført af PwC med henblik på at dokumentere, at kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 var i overensstemmelse med markedsvilkårene.
In this regard Germany argued that it could not be doubted that Frankfurt Hahn airport had had considerable influence on the economic and social development of the structurally weak region around it.
Dette dokument underbygger dog ikke Tysklands argument om, at FFHG's aktionærer handlede som fornuftige investorer som vurderet i betragtning 348 ff.
Furthermore, Germany dismissed the discriminatory effects which Lufthansa and BDF claimed the passenger fees and marketing support to have.
status quo: Fraport foretager ingen yderligere investeringer
Germany ensured that these had been established on the basis of economic considerations and calculations and were available to airlines in a uniform and non-discriminatory way.
alternativt scenarie 1: begrænsede investeringer i udvidelsen af start- og landingsbanen under meget pessimistiske trafikprognoser
Germany lastly rejected the doubts raised by Lufthansa and BDF with regard to the single-till-approach at Frankfurt Hahn airport.
alternativt scenarie 2: samme investeringer, men under best case-trafikprognoser.
Germany stated that this approach was economically justified, as the MEOT by PwC had shown, and that it would not have been possible to attract airlines to Frankfurt Hahn airport if the passenger fees would have been so high as to guarantee a profitable operation of the airport from the beginning.
PwC beregnede imidlertid ikke nettonutidsværdien af de forskellige scenarier, så de blev sammenlignelige.
Concerning the claims that Lufthansa and BDF advance in relation to aid granted to Ryanair through the 1999, 2002 and 2005 Ryanair agreements, Germany referred to the detailed MEOTs carried out by PwC and stated that these agreements cannot constitute State aid as they are complying with the market economy investor principle.
Nettonutidsværdien (NNV) i tabel 20 viser, at NNV2001-2015 i alle scenarier ville være negativ.
According to Germany, the calculations presented by Lufthansa and BDF are implausible and based on wrong passenger numbers.
De prognoser, der lå til grund for PwC's rentabilitetsvurdering viser også, at de alternative scenarier kun under meget optimistiske trafikprognoser, som forudsatte uforholdsmæssig høj vækst, ville føre til underskud, der var mindre ([…] mio. EUR) end under status quo-scenariet (uden at tage hensyn til behovet for en yderligere investering på […] mio. EUR).
Germany again pointed out that it was not possible to operate an airport like Frankfurt Hahn profitably from the very beginning, but only on a medium- to long-term basis.
I worst case-scenariet ville nettonutidsværdien af det alternative scenarie være endnu højere ([…] mio. EUR) end under status quo-scenariet.
Germany also stated that the doubts which Lufthansa and BDF raised in relation to the question whether the aid to Ryanair could be justified were unfounded.
Tabel 20
Germany moreover argued that even if the marketing support would constitute an advantage to Ryanair, which it did not, according to Germany, even in that case such aid would be compatible with the internal market on the basis of the criteria set out in recital 79 of the 2005 Aviation Guidelines.
Rentabilitetsvurdering af kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 [88][…]
ON THE COMMENTS FROM AIR FRANCE AND THE AEA
Kilde:
Germany pointed out in relation to the comments from AEA that these were not substantiated with any evidence.
PwC's rapport af 24. oktober 2008, s. 39, og Kommissionens vurdering [89].
Furthermore, Germany argued that even if, as AEA stated, there were negative effects for competing airports, then these airports had not complained about this and had not even commented on the 2008 opening decision.
Tyskland hævdede videre, at Fraports udtræden var blevet overvejet, men først var mulig i 2005, og derfor ikke blev anset for realistisk.
ASSESSMENT — EXISTENCE OF AID
Kommissionen minder også om, at rentabilitetsprognosen for Fraports investering i FFHG blev væsentligt ringere efter beslutningen om at indgå aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2001 (dvs. efter august 1999).
By virtue of Article 107(1) of the 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, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’
Tabel 21
The criteria in Article 107(1) of the Treaty are cumulative.
Sammenlignende vurdering af FFHG's årlige resultater i henhold til forretningsplanen for aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2001 i forhold til kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 [90][…]
Therefore, in order to determine whether the measure in question constitutes aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty all of the following conditions need to be fulfilled.
PwC's rapport af 24. oktober 2008, s. 32 og 39, og Kommissionens vurdering [91].
Namely, the financial support should:
Det blev desuden anført, at Fraport ville tilvejebringe »risikokapitalen for at åbne op for fremtidige muligheder«.
be granted by the State or through State resources;
Repræsentanten for delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz (Landrat i Rhein-Hunsrückdistriktet) bemærkede, som det fremgår af referatet af FFHG's bestyrelsesmøde i maj 2001, at »Fraports beslutning om at investere i FFHG ikke afhænger af udsigten til rentabilitet, men af accepten fra overtagelsesudvalget under Fraports bestyrelse, som har givet sin godkendelse«.
favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods;
På denne baggrund konkluderer Kommissionen, at Fraports kapitalforhøjelse i 2001 ikke blev ydet i overensstemmelse med markedsøkonomiprincippet og gav FFHG en fordel.
distort or threaten to distort competition; and
Med hensyn til delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' kapitalforhøjelse bemærker Kommissionen, at Tysklands begrundelse for dens overensstemmelse med markedsvilkårene er baseret på samme grundlag som Fraports begrundelse, som allerede er omhandlet i betragtning 344 ff.
affect trade between Member States.
De argumenter, der er fremsat i den forbindelse, gælder også her.
AID NATURE OF THE MEASURES GRANTED TO THE AIRPORT
Kommissionen bemærker med hensyn hertil for det første, at delstaten siden 1994 uden succes havde investeret flere gange i FFHG.
APPLICABILITY OF STATE AID RULES TO AIRPORTS
Delstaten deltog for det andet i kapitalforhøjelsen under andre betingelser end Fraport (der kunne ikke forventes afkast af investeringen, mens aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2001 var i kraft).
Germany submits that the 2001 PLTA was put into place before the public funding of airports was considered to constitute State aid and was not altered until it was replaced by the 2004 PLTA.
I henhold til investeringsrapporten for Rheinland-Pfalz fra 2003 lå sociale og strukturpolitiske mål for det tredje til grund for delstatens investering i Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn, herunder f.eks. jobskabelse og opfyldelse af transportpolitiske mål, snarere end rentabilitetshensyn.
Hence, the Commission must first establish whether the State aid rules were applicable to the 2001 PLTA at the time it was concluded.
På denne baggrund konkluderer Kommissionen, at delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' kapitalforhøjelse i 2001 ikke blev ydet i overensstemmelse med markedsøkonomiprincippet og gav FFHG en fordel.
In that context, the Commission recalls that an aid measure constitutes existing aid pursuant to Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 where it can be established that at the time the aid measure was put into effect, it did not constitute State aid, and subsequently became aid due to the evolution of the common market and without having been altered by the Member State.
Selektivitet
Indeed, in the past, the development of airports was often determined by purely territorial considerations or, in some cases, military requirements.
For at være omfattet af traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1, skal en statslig foranstaltning »begunstige visse virksomheder eller visse produktioner«.
The operation of airports was organised as part of the administration rather than as a commercial undertaking.
Derfor er kun foranstaltninger, der begunstiger virksomheder, og som giver en fordel på en selektiv måde, omfattet af begrebet statsstøtte.
Competition between airports and airport operators was also limited and developed gradually.
I denne sag var Fraports og delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' kapitalforhøjelser i 2001 kun til fordel for FFHG.
Taking into account those conditions, the financing of airports and airport infrastructure by the State was for some time considered by the Commission as a general measure of economic policy which could not be controlled under the State aid rules of the Treaty.
Begge kapitalforhøjelser var derfor selektive som defineret i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
However, the market environment has changed.
Fordrejning af konkurrencevilkårene og påvirkning af samhandelen
In the Aéroports de Paris judgment, the General Court stated that the operation of an airport, including the provision of airport services to airlines and to the various service providers within airports, is an economic activity [48].
Når støtte, der ydes af en medlemsstat, styrker en virksomheds position i forhold til andre virksomheder, som den konkurrerer med i samhandelen på det indre marked, må det antages, at denne samhandel påvirkes af støtten.
Consequently, since the adoption of that judgment (12 December 2000) it is no longer possible to consider the operation and construction of airports as a task carried out by the administration within the public policy remit, outside the ambit of State aid control.
Ifølge fast retspraksis [92] foreligger der allerede en konkurrencefordrejende foranstaltning, når støttemodtageren konkurrerer med andre virksomheder på konkurrenceudsatte markeder.
In its Leipzig/Halle Airport judgment, the General Court confirmed that it is a priori not possible to exclude the application of State aid rules to airports as the operation of an airport and the construction of airport infrastructure is an economic activity [49].
Som det vurderes i betragtning 304, er drift af en lufthavn en økonomisk aktivitet.
Once an airport operator engages in economic activities, regardless of its legal status or the way in which it is financed, it constitutes an undertaking within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, and the Treaty rules on State aid therefore apply [50].
På den ene side konkurrerer lufthavnene om at tiltrække luftfartsselskaber og den tilhørende flytrafik (passagerer og fragt), og på den anden side konkurrerer lufthavnsselskaberne indbyrdes om at få overdraget administrationen af en bestemt lufthavn.
FFHG has been engaged in constructing, maintaining and operating Frankfurt Hahn airport.
Især med hensyn til lavprisflyselskaber og charterselskaber kan også lufthavne, som ikke ligger i det samme opland og endog i forskellige medlemsstater, konkurrere om at tiltrække de pågældende luftfartsselskaber.
In this context, it has offered airport services and charged users — commercial aviation operators as well as non-commercial general aviation users — for the use of the airport infrastructure, thereby commercially exploiting the infrastructure.
I betragtning af Frankfurt Hahn lufthavns størrelse (se tabel 1) og dens nærhed til andre lufthavne i EU, navnlig Frankfurt Main lufthavn, Luxembourg lufthavn, Zweibrücken lufthavn, Saarbrücken lufthavn og Köln-Bonn lufthavn [93], finder Kommissionen, at de omhandlede foranstaltninger kan påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
Therefore, it must be concluded that FFHG has been engaged in an economic activity as from the date of the Aéroports de Paris judgment (that is to say 12 December 2000) onward.
Med hensyn til konkurrencen om luftfragt bemærker Kommissionen, at fragt sædvanligvis er mere mobil end passagertransport [95].
Moreover, the 2001 PLTA was not amended until it was replaced by the 2004 PLTA.
Generelt vurderes oplandet for fragtlufthavne at have en radius på mindst 200 km og to timers kørsel.
Hence, at that time the public authorities could legitimately consider that a PLTA to cover annual losses of FFHG did not constitute State aid.
Eftersom det er lettere at skifte fragtlufthavn end passagerlufthavn, fordi det er tilstrækkeligt, at luftfragt leveres til et bestemt område og derefter transporteres videre ad vej eller jernbane til slutdestinationen, er der efter Kommissionens opfattelse en større risiko for konkurrencefordrejning og påvirkning af samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
In the light of the considerations in recitals 292 and following, the Commission concludes that, at the time the 2001 PLTA, was put into place public authorities could legitimately consider that a PLTA to cover annual losses of FFHG did not constitute State aid.
På grundlag af argumenterne i betragtning 360-364 har den økonomiske fordel, som FFHG er blevet tildelt, styrket virksomhedens position over for konkurrenterne på Unionens marked for leverandører af lufthavnstjenester.
In 2001, Fraport and Land Rhineland-Palatinate increased FFHG's capital by EUR 27 million.
På denne baggrund skal den fordel, som FFHG har opnået via kapitalforhøjelsen 2001, anses for at kunne fordreje konkurrencen og påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
Fraport contributed EUR 19,7 million; Land Rhineland-Palatinate contributed EUR 7,3 million.
Konklusion
The capital increase was approved first by the supervisory board of Fraport (as regards its contribution) on 14 December 2001 and subsequently by a resolution of the shareholders of FFHG dated 9 January 2002 [52].
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 på 27 mio. EUR foretaget af Fraport og delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz udgør statsstøtte i henhold til traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
The capital increase by Fraport and the Land became effective on 9 January 2002.
FORANSTALTNING 3: KAPITALFORHØJELSEN 2004 OG FORANSTALTNING 4: AFTALEN OM OVERFØRSEL AF OVER- OG UNDERSKUD 2004
Notion of undertaking and economic activity
I 2004 blev FFHG's kapital forhøjet med yderligere 42 mio. EUR (Fraport investerede 10,21 mio. EUR, delstaten Hessen investerede 20 mio. EUR, og delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz investerede 11,79 mio. EUR).
As was analysed in recitals 293 and following, since 12 December 2000 FFHG has to be considered as an undertaking exercising an economic activity for the purposes of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz og delstaten Hessen indgik aftale om denne kapitalforhøjelse i 2002 med forbehold af en ny aftale om overførsel af over- og underskud mellem FFHG og Fraport for perioden indtil den 31. december 2014 (dvs. aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004).
State resources and imputability
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 og aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 — Fraport
The concept of State aid applies to any advantage granted through State resources by the State itself or by any intermediary body acting by virtue of powers conferred on it [53].