natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Disse argumenter hjalp heller ikke med analysen af princippet om den private investor.
Only SAGAT Handling, whose share of the Italian ground handling market was very small, made a profit, and that profit was modest.
Man måtte snarere stille det spørgsmål, om der var andre operatører, der var sammenlignelige med SEA Handling, hvis aktionærer, også de private, havde truffet beslutninger, der svarede til SEA's beslutninger.
In any event, SEA handling’s economic performance could not be compared with those of operators in the sector in Italy or in Europe such as SAGAT Handling, Fraport Ground Services Austria, Swissport or Menzies.
SAGAT Handlings og SEA Handlings aktiviteter var forskellige med hensyn til kompleksitet.
Nor did these arguments help with the analysis for purposes of the private investor test;
Menzies Aviation og Swissport var uafhængige ground handling-selskaber, der opererede i form af et internationalt netværk, og deres økonomiske indikatorer kunne ikke på pålidelig vis sammenlignes med SEA Handlings af årsager, som de italienske myndigheder allerede havde forklaret.
it had to be asked, rather, whether there were other operators comparable to SEA Handling whose shareholders, even if private, had taken decisions similar to those of SEA.
Det var blevet hævdet, at personaleomkostningerne havde en uforholdsmæssig stor virkning for SEA Handlings omsætning sammenlignet med branchegennemsnittet, og at der var dokumentation for manglende opfyldelse af princippet om den private investor, mens de italienske myndigheder mente, at man med dette argument ikke tog hensyn til forskelligheden blandt operatørerne.
The activities of SAGAT Handling and of SEA Handling presented different levels of complexity.
Nærmere bestemt ville operatører, der var skabt som følge af adskillelse af ground handling- og lufthavnsforvaltningsydelserne, som SEA Handling, uvægerligt opleve højere personaleomkostninger end nye aktører, i hvert fald i de første driftsår.
Menzies Aviation and Swissport were independent ground handling undertakings operating in the form of an international network, and their economic indicators could not be reliably compared to those of SEA Handling for reasons already explained by the Italian authorities.
For datterselskaber af en koncessionshaver, som tilbød den fulde vifte af ground handling-ydelser, blev personaleomkostningernes gennemsnitlige andel af omsætningen sat til 70-75 %.
It had been argued that staff costs had an excessive impact on SEA Handling’s turnover compared to the industry average, and that this was evidence of a failure to comply with the private investor test; the Italian authorities contended that this argument took no account of the diversity between different operators.
Den større omkostning skyldtes, at disse selskaber brugte højt kvalificeret personale med omfattende viden om branchen og de regler og procedurer, der gjaldt for den, og kunne levere hele viften af ground handling-ydelser.
More specifically, operators that had been created following the separation of ground handling and airport management services, like SEA Handling, were inevitably going to experience a higher labour cost compared to new players, at least during their first years of operation.
Som sådan ville aktionæren/koncessionshaveren trods ønsket om gradvis at reducere personaleomkostningernes andel tillægge det større vægt at bevare den akkumulerede ekspertise og integreringen med ground handling-ydelserne, som begge var af betydelig strategisk værdi for koncernen.
For subsidiaries of an airport manager which offered the full range of ground handling services, this average impact of staff costs on turnover had to be set at 70-75 %.
De italienske myndigheder påpegede også, at de nye aktører på markedet ikke var påvirket af historiske omkostninger som følge af tidligere indgåede kontrakter.
The higher cost was due to the fact that such undertakings used highly qualified personnel with extensive knowledge of the industry and of the rules and procedures by which it was governed, and were able to provide the entire range of ground handling services.
De italienske myndigheder ville også gerne fremlægge personaleomkostningernes andel af omsætningen, som var meget anderledes end det af […] beskrevne.
As such, the shareholder/airport manager, despite wanting to gradually reduce the impact of labour costs, would attach greater importance to the preservation of accumulated expertise and integration with ground handling services, both of which were of significant strategic value to the group.
I perioden 2002-2011 havde der således været en positiv udvikling, og tallet nåede lige under 80 % i 2010, hvilket nærmer sig gennemsnittet for de uafhængige ground handling-operatørers på lige under 70 %.
The Italian authorities also pointed out that new market players were not affected by historic costs resulting from pre-existing contracts.
Med hensyn til den støtte, som […] mistænkte dem for, afviste de italienske myndigheder enhver af disse efter deres mening grundløse eller udokumenterede antagelser.
The Italian authorities said the shifts in the impact of labour costs on turnover were very different from what had been described by […]:
For det første blev de tjenesteydelser, som SEA Handling benytter SEA til (push-back-, towing- og shuttleservice), ifølge de italienske myndigheder leveret mod betaling i henhold til en underleverandøraftale, som det kan ses af såvel kundeaftalerne med luftfartsselskaberne som certifikatet fra ENAC.
over the period 2002-2011 the movement had been positive, reaching just under 80 % in 2010, with a trend towards the average for independent ground handling operators, which was just under 70 %.
Der var fri adgang til disse tjenesteydelser forstået på den måde, at enhver anden operatør også kunne købe dem, og udliciteringen af visse tjenesteydelser var almindelig praksis i den italienske ground handling-branche.
Regarding the suspected forms of aid indicated by […], the Italian authorities rejected what they considered mere suppositions put forward without any foundation or supporting evidence.
For det andet hævdede de italienske myndigheder, at den påstand, at SEA Handling benyttede SEA's personale gratis til levering af ground handling-ydelser, var grundløs, og da ground handling-ydelserne blev udskilt, blev også den nødvendige kompetence til levering af disse ydelser overført til SEA Handlings omkostningssteder.
The services for which SEA Handling uses SEA (push-back, tow-in, bussing) were governed by paid subcontracting agreements, concluded on market terms, as shown both in the customer airline agreements and on the certificate issued by ENAC.
For det tredje mente de italienske myndigheder, at påstanden om, at SEA gav nye luftfartsselskaber gunstigere vilkår for adgang til Milanos lufthavne (dvs. rabatter) på den betingelse, at de valgte SEA Handling frem for konkurrenterne, var fuldstændig grundløs, manglede ethvert bevis og da også modsagdes af fakta, eftersom førende luftfartsselskaber som Gulf Air i Malpensa og Air Malta, Air Baltic og Carpatair i Linate havde valgt leverandører, som var konkurrenter til SEA Handling.
Access to those services was provided in a way that did not discriminate against any other operator requesting them, and the outsourcing of certain services was common practice in the Italian ground handling industry.
Hvad endelig angik anvendelsen af SEA's overenskomst på SEA Handlings medarbejdere frem for den nye overenskomst, der specifikt var indgået med ground handling-branchens arbejdstagere, […], selv om denne skulle være mere fordelagtig end forgængeren set fra et økonomisk og juridisk perspektiv, understregede de italienske myndigheder frem for alt, at protesten herover, uanset indholdet og anvendelsen af den pågældende aftale, var irrelevant i det foreliggende tilfælde, fordi den vedrørte en begivenhed, der var opstået uden for den relevante periode.
The affirmation that SEA Handling used SEA staff free for the provision of ground handling services was unfounded, and when ground handling services were hived off all the skills required for the provision of such services had been allocated to SEA Handling’s cost centres.
Under alle omstændigheder bekræfter de, hvad angår overenskomsten, som bestod af en generel, altomfattende del og tre specifikke afsnit, som blev forhandlet separat af hver af de berørte repræsentative foreninger (Assoaeroporti, Assohandlers og Assocatering), at SEA Handling anvendte den generelle del af overenskomsten på sine ansatte sammen med de specifikke regler, der blev forhandlet med Assoaeroporti, fordi SEA Handling ikke kunne fritage sig selv fra at overholde de aftaler, der tidligere var indgået med fagforeningerne som beskrevet i fagforeningsaftalen af 4. februar 2002, ifølge hvilken »SEA Handling vil anvende den overenskomst, som er indgået af Assoaeroporti og fagforeningerne«.
With regard to the alleged concession by SEA of more favourable terms to new airlines for access to the Milan airports (i.e. discounts) on the condition that they favour SEA Handling over its competitors, the Italian authorities considered this claim to be completely unfounded, devoid of any proof and indeed contradicted by the facts, since leading carriers such as Gulf Air at Malpensa and Air Malta, Air Baltic and Carpatair at Linate had chosen providers that were competitors of SEA Handling.
YDERLIGERE OPLYSNINGER FREMSENDT DEN 28. JUNI 2012
Finally, concerning the application to SEA Handling employees of SEA’s collective bargaining agreement rather than the new collective bargaining agreement specifically for workers in the ground handling industry, […], even if this were to prove more advantageous than its predecessor from an economic and regulatory perspective, the Italian authorities emphasised above all that, irrespective of the content and application of the agreement in question, the objection raised was irrelevant in these proceedings, given that it concerned an event that had occurred outside the relevant period.
Efter mødet den 19. juni 2012 indsendte Milano kommune yderligere bemærkninger om sin vurdering af de omhandlede foranstaltninger, herunder om den holdning, at omorganiseringen af SEA Handling var et internt anliggende for SEA-koncernen, den forretningsmodel, som SEA havde valgt til udvikling af lufthavnene under dens forvaltning, og behovet for at skelne mellem de forskellige omhandlede perioder.
In any case, having regard to the collective bargaining agreement, which consisted of a general, all-inclusive part and three specific sections, negotiated separately by each of the representative associations affected (Assoaeroporti, Assohandlers and Assocatering), SEA Handling applied the general part of the agreement to its employees, along with the specific rules negotiated by Assoaeroporti, because SEA Handling could not exempt itself from compliance with the agreements concluded previously with union organisations, as described in the union agreement of 4 February 2002, according to which ‘SEA Handling will apply the collective bargaining agreement signed by Assoaeroporti and union organisations’.
Omorganisering af SEA Handling et internt anliggende for SEA-koncernen
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED ON 28 JUNE 2012
Myndighederne i Milano bekræftede, at SEA på intet tidspunkt havde søgt finansiel støtte til sin genopretning hos aktionærerne Milano kommune og provinsen Milano.
Following the meeting of 19 June 2012, the Municipality of Milan submitted additional observations setting out its assessment of the measures in question, particularly regarding its view that the reorganisation of SEA Handling was an internal matter for the SEA group, the business model chosen by SEA for the development of the airports under its management, and the need to distinguish between the different periods under investigation.
Tværtimod havde de pågældende offentlige myndigheder modtaget betydelige udbytter fra SEA-koncernen, i alt 550 mio. EUR i perioden 2002-2012.
The reorganisation of SEA Handling is an internal matter for the SEA group
Det kunne ikke antages — og det var stadig ikke påvist — at hvis SEA havde besluttet ikke at dække tabene i handling selskabet og i stedet benytte en uafhængig operatør, ville de offentlige myndigheder have modtaget et endnu højere udbytte.
The Milan authorities reaffirmed that at no time had SEA sought financial support for its recovery from its shareholders, the Municipality and Province of Milan.
Dette skyldtes dybest set, at det var vanskeligt at købe alle de ground handling-ydelser til konkurrencedygtige priser hos eksterne leverandører, som SEA som koncessionshaver var forpligtet til at levere til alle luftfartsselskaber og passagerer på ubrudt, tilgængelig og altomfattende vis i overensstemmelse med alle gældende regler, at det var vanskeligt at opretholde tilsynet med servicekvaliteten, hvilket var et krav, som var afgørende for lufthavnens konkurrenceevne og for tilbageerobringen af flytrafikken (som det faktisk var lykkedes SEA at gennemføre takket være den valgte forretningsmodel), og at der var en iboende forbindelse mellem selskabets forretningsmodel og lufthavnens hub-rolle (især efter Alitalias de-hubbing fra Malpensa og behovet for at udvikle et self-hub- eller virtuelt hub-koncept).
On the contrary, the public authorities in question had received substantial dividends from the SEA group, totalling EUR 550 million over the period 2002-2012.
Milano kommune var ikke bekendt med de vurderinger, som Kommissionen havde foretaget, eller uvildige eksperter måtte have foretaget på dens vegne, og som kunne have tjent til at bestride disse udsagn.
It could not be assumed — and it had yet to be shown — that if SEA had decided not to cover the debts of the handling company, and instead to use the services of an independent operator, the public authorities would have received an even higher financial benefit.
Da der ikke er tilgået finansielle midler fra SEA's offentlige aktionærer, og beslutningen om at omorganisere SEA Handling var i overensstemmelse med SEA's strategiske målsætninger, burde endelig enhver konstatering ifølge de milanesiske myndigheder af, at de omhandlede foranstaltninger udgjorde statsstøtte, støttes af beviser for tilregnelsen til staten af hver enkelt beslutning om at dække tabene i hele den omhandlede periode og især i den anden fase (efter 2007), som betragtningerne i indledningsbeslutningen ikke gjaldt, selv om kommunen under alle omstændigheder bestred dem.
This was due essentially to the difficulty of obtaining from outsiders, at competitive prices, all the ground handling services which SEA, as airport manager, was required to provide to all airlines and passengers on a continuous, accessible and comprehensive basis, in accordance with the regulations in force; to the difficulty of maintaining supervision over service quality, a requirement which was vital to airport competitiveness and to the recovery of traffic (which SEA had in fact achieved thanks to its chosen business model);
SEA-koncernens forretningsmodel
and to the intrinsic link between the company’s business model and the airport’s hub model (particularly after Alitalia’s de-hubbing from the Milan Malpensa airport and the need to develop a self-hub or virtual hub concept).
Milanos myndigheder gentog, at den valgte model baseret på beslutningen om ikke at udlicitere ground handling-ydelserne ville være gavnlig på langt sigt for lufthavnens udvikling.
The Municipality of Milan was unaware of any assessments made by the Commission, or by independent experts on its behalf, which might serve to dispute these affirmations.
Denne kurs var at foretrække set fra et koncernperspektiv, når det pågældende lufthavnssystem havde funktion af hub.
Finally, given the lack of any financial flows originating with SEA’s public shareholders, and the fact that the decision to reorganise SEA Handling was in line with SEA’s strategic objectives, any finding that the measures at issue constituted State aid should be accompanied by proof of the imputability to the State of every single decision to cover losses made during the entire period in question, and especially in the second phase (post-2007), to which the considerations in the opening decision did not apply, although the Municipality in any event disputed them.
Forvaltningen af et lufthavnssystem baseret på tilstedeværelsen af et hub-luftfartsselskab eller leveringen af en hub-aktivitet krævede på grund af systemets store kompleksitet, at koncessionshaveren skulle levere visse lufthavnsydelser direkte, herunder handling, for at sikre effektiv drift af lufthavnen.
The SEA group business model
Milanos myndigheder nævnte Frankfurt, Wien og Paris som eksempel på sådanne lufthavne.
The Milan authorities reiterated that the chosen model, based on the option not to outsource ground handling services, would benefit long-term airport development.
Valget af model var begrundet i følgende forhold:
This course was preferable from a group perspective when the airport system in question acted as a hub.
Modellen var i overensstemmelse med SEA's mål, som var at udvikle sin hub-aktivitet i Malpensa, hvilket krævede løbende tilsyn, overvågning og styring af de ground handling-ydelser, der blev leveret til hub-luftfartsselskabet, og som var endnu vigtigere i forbindelse med modellen som self-hub eller virtuel hub.
The management of an airport system based on the presence of a hub carrier, or on the provision of hub activity, given the high degree of complexity of the system, required that the manager should provide some airport services direct, including handling, in order to ensure the efficient operation of the airport.
Ifølge self-hub- eller virtuel hub-modellen ville lufthavnen udvikles som hub uden tilstedeværelse af et eller flere hub-luftfartsselskaber.
The Milan authorities cited the examples of Frankfurt, Vienna and Paris airports.
I henhold til denne model var det koncessionshaveren selv, der skulle tilbyde brugerne mulighed for at benytte lufthavnen som hub og koordinere ankommende og afgående flyvninger for alle luftfartsselskaber i lufthavnen, uanset om der var indgået forbindelsesaftaler mellem disse.
The choice was justified by the following considerations:
De største og mest succesrige hub-lufthavne i det kontinentale Europa havde også valgt denne løsning.
It was consistent with SEA’s goal of developing its hub activity at the Milan Malpensa airport, which required continuous supervision, monitoring and management of ground handling services provided to the hub carrier, and was even more important when pursuing a self-hub or virtual hub model.
Modellen var nødvendig for at udvikle fragttrafikken i Milanos lufthavne, som er en sektor, hvor konkurrencen mellem de europæiske lufthavne skærpedes kraftigt.
Under the ‘self-hub’ or ‘virtual hub’ model the airport would be developed as a hub without the presence of one or more hub carriers.
Mulighederne for at tiltrække nye luftfartsselskaber var desuden bestemt af specialiseringsniveauet i handlingydelserne.
Under this model the airport manager itself would offer users the opportunity to use the airport as a hub, and would connect arriving and departing flights operated by all carriers at the airport irrespective of whether any interconnection agreements between carriers were in place.
Den forretningsmodel, som SEA havde valgt, havde muliggjort en konstant vækst i fragtforretningen i Milano, som lå øverst i Italien og på sjettepladsen i Europa med den højeste koncentration af alle fragtluftfartsselskaber fra Mellem- og Fjernøsten, hvor den hastigste økonomiske vækst i verden foregik.
It was supported by the fact that the biggest and best-performing airport hubs in continental Europe had opted for the same solution.
Modellen var i overensstemmelse med den valgte model for forøgelse af kapitalen i lufthavnsledelsesselskabet med henblik på senere privatisering.
It was necessary for developing freight traffic at the Milan airports, a sector in which competition between European airports was seeing strong growth, and the potential for attracting new carriers was also related to the level of specialisation of handling services.
Sondring mellem de omhandlede perioder i forbindelse med vurdering af foranstaltningerne
The commercial model selected by SEA had allowed constant growth in freight activity in Milan, which was in first position in Italy and sixth in Europe, with the highest concentration of all-cargo carriers originating in the Middle and Far East, which were the areas experiencing the fastest economic growth in the world.
Milanos myndigheder nævnte forretningsplanen for 2003-2007, som var blevet fremsendt til Kommissionen efter indledningen af den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure.
It was consistent with the business model chosen for increasing the capital of the airport management company with a view to its subsequent privatisation.
Efter deres mening viste planen, at SEA's handlinger med hensyn til at dække tabene var besluttet i overensstemmelse med princippet om den private investor.
Distinction between the periods under investigation for the purpose of assessment of the measures
Analysen af SEA Handlings forretningsplan for 2003-2007 skal imidlertid under alle omstændigheder påvise, at omorganiseringen af SEA Handling overholdt Fællesskabets rammebestemmelser for statsstøtte til redning og omstrukturering af kriseramte virksomheder (»2004-rammebestemmelserne for omstrukturering«), idet omorganiseringen blev udført med et betydeligt bidrag fra datterselskabet, det finansielle indgreb var begrænset til det nødvendige minimum for at forhindre insolvens som følge af de gældende selskabsretlige regler, og SEA Handling havde lagt alle sine egne kræfter i genopretningen og derved tabt markedsandele til sine konkurrenter og måttet opgive visse perifere aktiviteter uden for sin kerneforretning.
The Milan authorities cited the 2003-2007 business plan, which had been submitted to the Commission after the formal investigation procedure was initiated.
Mens aktionærernes håb om en genopretning inden for den planlagte femårige periode blev beskæmmet af en række ydre omstændigheder i kombination med selskabets vanskelige udgangsposition (idet det ikke var nystiftet, men udskilt fra en eksisterende selskabsdivision i vanskeligheder) og den fulde liberalisering af ground handling-markedet i Italien, viste indsatsen i den første udfordrende periode ikke desto mindre, at genopretning af SEA Handling bestemt var muligt.
In their opinion, the plan showed that SEA’s actions in covering the losses were decided in compliance with the private investor test.
Ved udgangen af den første periode befandt selskabet sig i en økonomisk situation og på et produktivitetsniveau, der var betydelig bedre end i 2002.
However, the analysis of the SEA Handling 2003-2007 business plan must in any event demonstrate that the reorganisation of SEA Handling complied with the Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (‘the 2004 Restructuring Guidelines’), given that the reorganisation was carried out with a significant contribution from the subsidiary, the financial intervention was limited to the minimum needed in order to prevent a situation of insolvency arising under the applicable corporate law regulations, and SEA Handling had put all of its own efforts into the recovery, losing market share to its competitors and giving up certain peripheral activities outside its core business.
Med hensyn til den anden fase af genopretningen henviste Milanos myndigheder til SEA-koncernens strategiske planer for 2007-2012 og 2009-2016.
While the shareholder’s hopes of a recovery within the planned five-year period had been frustrated by a series of external events, combined with the difficult initial situation of the company (which was not formed as a start-up, but as a spin-off of an existing company division in difficulty) and the complete liberalisation of the ground handling market in Italy, nevertheless the efforts made in the first, challenging period showed that the recovery of SEA Handling was certainly possible.
Ifølge SEA-koncernen forventede man at nå breakeven i løbet af 2012.
At the end of that first period, the company found itself in an economic situation and with a productivity level that were significantly better than in 2002.