natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Eftersom aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 var en forudsætning for gennemførelsen af kapitalforhøjelsen 2004, og fordi begge foranstaltninger blev godkendt af Fraports aktionærer på den samme generalforsamling, er det Kommissionens opfattelse, at de to foranstaltningers tilregnelse skal vurderes samlet (med hensyn til Fraports bidrag).
Resources of local authorities are, for the application of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, State resources [54].
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 og aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 blev vedtaget på Fraports generalforsamling den 2. juni 2004 med 99,992 % af de tilstedeværende aktionærers stemmer.
In that respect, it is constant Commission practice to consider that irrespective of whether a public undertaking is loss-making or profit-making, all its resources are to be considered as State resources [55].
Tyskland hævdede også, at der krævedes et flertal på 74,994 % af stemmerne på generalforsamlingen for at få godkendt beslutningen vedrørende aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004.
Land Rhineland-Palatinate's share in the 2001 capital increase
De offentlige aktionærer ejede kun ca. 70 % af aktierne og kunne derfor ikke udøve bestemmende indflydelse på Fraports beslutninger.
Land Rhineland-Palatinate has financed its share of the 2001 capital increase directly from its general budget.
Det skal i denne forbindelse erindres, at kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 kun ville blive gennemført, hvis Fraports aktionærer godkendte aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004.
Thus, it can be concluded that that measure is financed through State resources and also imputable to the State.
De offentlige myndigheder kunne derfor ikke kontrollere beslutningen om at gennemføre aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 og Fraports kapitalforhøjelse i 2004 uden de private aktionærers væsentlige deltagelse.
Fraport's share in the 2001 capital increase
I lyset af overvejelserne i betragtning 369 ff. finder Kommissionen derfor, at Fraports kapitalforhøjelse i 2004 og aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 ikke kan tilregnes staten.
State resources
Selv om tilregnelse blev bekræftet, og foranstaltningen blev anset for statsstøtte, ville denne støtte være forenelig med det indre marked.
In Germany's opinion, Fraport's share in the 2001 capital increase does not qualify as funding from State resources as at the time Fraport was an independent incorporated company under private law noted at the stock exchange and the public authorities were exercising no continuing control over its funds.
Betragtningerne i afsnit 10.3 og 10.4 nedenfor finder i denne forbindelse tilsvarende anvendelse.
According to the case law, resources of an undertaking are to be considered State resources if the State is capable, by exercising control over such undertakings, to direct the use of their resources [56].
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 — delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz og delstaten Hessen
The Commission considers that in the present case, the State at all material times exercised direct or indirect control over the resources under consideration.
Delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz og delstaten Hessen finansierede deres andele af kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 via deres almindelige budgetter.
The Commission notes that, at the moment the 2001 capital increase was irrevocably decided, Fraport was a company that was in majority publicly owned.
Disse dele af kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 var derfor tydeligvis finansieret af statsmidler og kan tilregnes staten.
Before 11 June 2001, public shareholders held 100 % of Fraport's shares [57].
Som anført i betragtning 336 ff. bruger Kommissionen det markedsøkonomiske princip til at undersøge, om en virksomhed har opnået en økonomisk fordel.
On 11 June 2001, Fraport was listed on the stock exchange and 29,71 % of its shares were sold to private shareholders.
De principper for anvendelsen af det markedsøkonomiske princip, som er anført i betragtning 336 ff., finder tilsvarende anvendelse.
Afterwards, Land Hesse held 32,04 % of the shares, Stadtwerke Frankfurt am Main GmbH (100 % owned by the municipality Frankfurt am Main) held 20,47 % of the shares and the Federal Republic of Germany held 18,32 % of the shares.
Til dokumentation for dette fremlagde Tyskland efter åbningsafgørelsen fra 2008 en vurdering af markedsøkonomiprincippet udført af PwC i 2008.
Thus, the Commission considers that any capital injection granted from Fraport's resources would signify a loss of State resources, thus constituting a transfer of State resources.
Kommissionen bemærker først og fremmest, at delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz ikke selv foretog sin forhåndsberegning vedrørende den forventede rentabilitet eller beregnede sit eget investeringsafkast.
Imputability to the State
Kommissionen finder for det andet, at delstatens situation ikke kan sammenlignes med situationen for Fraports aktionærer.
A public undertaking may act with more or less independence, according to the degree of autonomy left to it by the State.
Nettonutidsværdien af det forventede udbytte for perioden indtil 2025 beløb sig til […] mio. EUR med et internt afkast på […] %.
Therefore, the mere fact that a public undertaking is under State control is not sufficient for measures taken by that undertaking, such as the funding provided to FFHG through the 2001 capital increase, to be considered as imputable to the State.
I lyset af den lange planlægningshorisont, og eftersom delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz allerede havde investeret flere gange i FFHG uden succes, ville ingen fornuftig privat investor i delstatens sted efter Kommissionens opfattelse for det tredje have besluttet at indskyde yderligere kapital i FFHG uden på forhånd at foretage en sensitivitetsvurdering.
It is also necessary to examine whether the public authorities must be regarded as having been involved, in one way or another, in the adoption of this measure.
Tabel 22
On that point, the Court indicated that the imputability to the State of a measure taken by a public undertaking might be inferred from a set of indicators arising from the circumstances of the case and the context in which that measure was taken [58].
Rentabilitetsvurdering af delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' kapitalforhøjelse i 2004
Such indicators can be the integration of the undertaking into the structures of the public administration, the nature of its activities and the exercise of the latter on the market in normal conditions of competition with private operators, the legal status of the undertaking (in the sense of it being subject to public law or ordinary company law), the intensity of the supervision exercised by the public authorities over the management of the undertaking, or any other indicator showing, in the particular case, an involvement by the public authorities in the adoption of a measure or the unlikelihood of their not being involved, having regard also to the compass of the measure, its content or the conditions which it contains [59].
PwC Report: Rheinland-Pfalz, 24. oktober 2008, s. 21.
As stated in recital 135 and the following, Germany submitted that the measures taken by Fraport in relation to Frankfurt Hahn airport were not imputable to the State.
Vurderingen af markedsøkonomiprincippet i forbindelse med kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 og aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004 er desuden baseret på forventningen om betydelig vækst, hvad angår FFHG's årsresultat (se tabel 23).
In this regard, Germany referred especially to §76 of the AktG and to judgments under German law according to which the management board of an Aktiengesellschaft has a large discretion to act with regard to the day-to-day business of the company and insofar acts independently of its shareholders.
Tabel 23
Germany also referred to a judgment of the German Federal Court, the Bundesgerichtshof, in which that court noted that the public shareholders were not able to have an influence on individual decisions taken in day-to-day business, but could only provide the general framework and guiding supervision of Fraport.
Sammenligning af FFHG's forventede årlige resultater i forretningsplanerne, som PwC har anvendt i vurderingen af markedsøkonomiprincippet for kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 og kapitalforhøjelsen 2004
According to Germany, this special nature of the Aktiengesellschaft was also recognised in relation to EU public procurement law in the Court's judgment in case Stadtwerke Brixen AG [60].
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2004
Therefore, as regards the involvement of the public shareholders in the decision-making at the general meeting of shareholders, Germany argued that a vote by the meeting of shareholders did not constitute anything more than a mere exercise of their lawful rights and obligations as shareholders.
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 — årlige ændringer i %
Germany also rejected the notion that any of the other indications from the Stardust Marine judgment, mentioned in recital 315, were present.
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2001
As a preliminary remark, the Commission points out that the fact that a State owned company is a company incorporated under private law alone cannot — having regard to the autonomy which that legal form is capable of conferring upon it — be regarded as sufficient to exclude imputability of its actions to the State [61].
Kapitalforhøjelsen 2001 — årlige ændringer i %
No distinction should be drawn between cases where aid is granted directly by the State and cases where it is granted by public or private bodies established or appointed by the State to administer the aid [62].
PwC's rapport af 24. oktober 2008, s. 45, og Kommissionens vurdering [98].
In addition, the Commission notes that the judgment rendered by the German Bundesgerichtshof in 1999 [63] concerns criminal proceedings.
Ifølge investeringsrapporterne for delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz var det desuden sociale og strukturpolitiske mål, der lå til grund for delstatens investering i Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn, bl. a. jobskabelse og opfyldelse af transportpolitiske mål, snarere end rentabilitetshensyn.
In those proceedings, the question at last instance was whether a former employee of Fraport could be charged with the offence of ‘corruption of an employee’ or ‘corruption of a public official’, so the question arose whether Fraport was to be viewed as an ‘other administration’ according to the German criminal code [64].
På baggrund af disse specifikke faktorer vedrørende delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' beslutning om at indskyde yderligere kapital i FFHG (betragtning 376-380) finder Kommissionen, at delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' kapitalforhøjelse i 2004 ikke var i overensstemmelse med markedsøkonomiprincippet og gav FFHG en fordel.
Also as concerns the other judgment of the Bundesgerichtshof presented by Germany [65], the Commission notes that that judgment, as the case of Parking Brixen [66], concerned the criterion of public control over an undertaking in the sense of Union public procurement rules.
Vurdering af markedsøkonomiprincippet — delstaten Hessen
It does not concern the question of imputability under State aid law.
Tyskland påpegede, at denne udvikling gjorde det muligt fuldt ud at udnytte de eksisterende vækstmuligheder inden for rammerne af licensen til døgndrift for Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn sammen med den planlagte indførelse af lufthavnssystemet Frankfurt Main lufthavn — Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn.
Furthermore, while it may be that the management board of an Aktiengesellschaft can act independently of its public shareholders when day-to-day business decisions are taken, because of its shareholder structure (with 70 % of its shareholders being public) and the consortium agreement between its public shareholders Fraport nevertheless considers itself as a ‘dependent, publicly held undertaking’ [67] (as reported in each annual financial report between 2001 and 2006).
Med deltagelsen i kapitalforhøjelsen 2004 kunne delstaten Hessen yderligere støtte lufttrafikudviklingen i Rhein-Main-området.
Moreover, several factors indicate that the 2001 capital increase is in fact imputable to the State.
Kommissionen bemærker for det første, at delstaten Hessen ikke på forhånd udarbejdede en specifik forhåndsvurdering.
First of all, the Commission considers that the 2001 capital increase cannot be considered out of context, but must be viewed in the light of the political and legal situation of Fraport at that time.
Årsagen til delstatens investering i Frankfurt Hahn lufthavn, som f.eks. udvikling af lufttrafikken i Rhein-Main-området eller andre vigtige social- og strukturpolitiske hensyn, kan desuden ikke tages i betragtning, når der foretages en vurdering af markedsøkonomiprincippet.
Those circumstances and facts clearly indicate that the measure would not have been adopted but for the involvement of the State.
På baggrund af disse specifikke faktorer vedrørende delstaten Hessens beslutning om at blive aktionær i FFHG (betragtning 383-384) finder Kommissionen, at delstaten Hessens kapitalforhøjelse i 2004 ikke var i overensstemmelse med markedsøkonomiprincippet og gav FFHG en fordel.
According to the minutes of Fraport's supervisory board meeting on 26 September 1997, the authorities of Land Rhineland-Palatinate offered Fraport to become involved in Frankfurt Hahn airport, since ‘Land Rhineland-Palatinate wished, through the involvement of [Fraport] in [FFHG] to strengthen the development of employment opportunities, and since it expected an increase in air traffic’.
På baggrund af disse betragtninger konkluderer Kommissionen, at delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' og delstaten Hessens kapitalforhøjelser i 2004 giver FFHG en fordel.
After Fraport had become a shareholder in FFHG with a share of 64 % on 1 January 1998, according to the minutes of the supervisory board meeting of 10 May 1999, ‘the government of Land Rhineland-Palatinate [has] turned to the prime minister of Land Hesse with the request for a stronger commitment of [Fraport] at Hahn [airport]’.
Eftersom delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' og delstaten Hessens kapitalforhøjelser i 2004 alene skete til fordel for FFHG, er disse foranstaltninger pr. definition selektive i henhold til traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
For this purpose, Fraport was to take over the shares which Holding Hahn and Weiss and Freytag still held in the airport (see recital 17).
Af de grunde, der er anført i betragtning 360 ff., er Kommissionen af den opfattelse, at enhver selektiv økonomisk fordel, der blev indrømmet FFHG, kunne fordreje konkurrencen og påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
The minutes state furthermore that Fraport should not be penalised ‘if it does not reach regional political goals, e.g. number of employment opportunities’ and that ‘the negotiations between Fraport and the Land about points of discussion have begun’.
Delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz' og delstaten Hessens kapitalforhøjelser i 2004 til fordel for FFHG udgør statsstøtte i henhold til traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
Finally, the minutes express that ‘public funds should be used as much as possible’ for the development of the airport and that, in order to speed up the process of collecting these funds, ‘Land Rhineland-Palatinate has already established a working group in the Ministry of Economy, of which Fraport is also a member’.
Aftalen om overførsel af over- og underskud 2004, hvorunder Fraport overtog alle underskud, som FFHG havde pådraget sig i perioden 2004-2009, og Fraports kapitalforhøjelse i 2004 kan ikke tilregnes staten.
Those minutes show that Fraport was being used as a vehicle by Land Rhineland-Palatinate and Land Hessen in order to pursue regional and structural political goals, such as creating more jobs in the region.
Som anført i betragtning 293 må det — selv om FFHG skal anses for en virksomhed i henhold til traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1 — erindres, at ikke alle en lufthavnsejers og operatørs aktiviteter nødvendigvis er af økonomisk art [99].
Since that resolution required a majority of votes representing at least three quarters of the authorised capital taking part in the vote, and the public authorities held 100 % of the shares at the time (see recital 305), that resolution was effectively taken by the public authorities.
Sådanne aktiviteter omfatter f.eks. sikkerhed, flyvekontrol, politi, toldvæsen, osv.
Therefore, through the political involvement of the two Länder, directly on a political level and indirectly through the supervisory board and as the public shareholders of Fraport, Fraport was involved with FFHG and signed the 2001 PLTA for taking over the losses of FFHG until at least 2005.
Finansieringen skal nøje begrænses til at godtgøre de omkostninger, som de giver anledning til, og må ikke i stedet anvendes til at finansiere andre økonomiske aktiviteter [101].
Furthermore, §13 of FFHG's articles of association [71] stated that until 31 December 2027 any sale of shares by one of the shareholders would have to be authorised in writing by the other shareholders.
Finansiering af aktiviteter, der hører ind under offentlige opgaver, eller af infrastruktur, der hænger direkte sammen med disse aktiviteter, udgør derfor normalt ikke statsstøtte [102].
Since FFHG only had two shareholders at that time, Fraport and Land Rhineland-Palatinate, this meant that Fraport needed the agreement in writing from Land Rhineland-Palatinate in order to sell its shares.
Det er fast retspraksis, at der foreligger en fordel, når offentlige myndigheder fritager virksomheder for omkostninger i tilknytning til deres økonomiske aktiviteter [104].
It should be noted that Land Hesse was at that point in time not yet FFHG's shareholder, but a shareholder of Fraport (with a 45,2 % shareholding).
Hvis det derfor i et givet retssystem er almindeligt, at flyselskaber eller lufthavnsselskaber afholder omkostningerne til bestemte tjenester, mens nogle flyselskaber eller lufthavnsselskaber, der leverer de samme tjenester på vegne af de samme offentlige myndigheder ikke skal afholde disse omkostninger, kan sidstnævnte opnå en fordel, selvom disse tjenester i sig selv anses for at være af ikkeøkonomisk karakter.
Against that political and legal background, it then became evident in January 2001 [73] that further investments into FFHG were urgently needed in order to allow FFHG to become profitable.
Der skal derfor udføres en analyse af den gældende juridiske ramme for lufthavnsoperatøren for at vurdere, hvorvidt luftfartsselskaber eller lufthavnsoperatører under den pågældende juridiske ramme skal dække omkostningerne ved leveringen af visse aktiviteter, der i sig selv kan være ikkeøkonomiske, men som hænger sammen med udøvelsen af deres økonomiske aktiviteter.
Moreover, Land Rhineland-Palatinate directly induced Fraport to adopt the 2001 capital increase.
Ifølge Tyskland henhører omkostningerne til sikkerhedskontrol under det offentlige myndighedsområde i henhold til § 8 i Luftsicherheitsgesetz (lov om luftfartssikkerhed, »LuftSiG«).
In a proposal for the supervisory board's meeting from 20 June 2001, it is noted that, in view of the capital increase of EUR 27 million in connection with the development of Frankfurt Hahn airport, the shareholder Land Rhineland-Palatinate had insisted that the investments to be financed by the 2001 capital increase were the condition for the continuation of the public infrastructure investments, such as for the construction of the road leading towards Frankfurt Hahn airport amounting to approximately EUR […] million.
Kommissionen er enig i, at foranstaltninger i henhold til § 8 i LuftSiG i princippet kan anses for aktiviteter, der henhører under det offentlige myndighedsområde.
In that regard, the committee on the acquisitions of Fraport's supervisory board noted in a meeting on the 2001 capital increase, dating from 23 November 2001, so less than a month before the supervisory board approved the 2001 capital increase, that Fraport could not disengage itself from FFHG at that time, since it was ‘not to be expected that Land Rhineland-Palatinate would agree to that’ [74].
Med hensyn til omkostningerne til gennemførelsen af sådanne foranstaltninger er Tyskland tilsyneladende af den opfattelse, at de alle skal bæres af de relevante offentlige myndigheder.
Consequently, the Commission considers that the 2001 capital increase is imputable to the State.
Kommissionen bemærker imidlertid, at det i henhold til § 8, stk. 3, i LuftSiG kun er omkostninger til anlæg og vedligeholdelse af de nødvendige områder og lokaler til gennemførelse af aktiviteterne, jf. § 5 i LuftSiG, der kan dækkes.
Economic advantage
Alle andre omkostninger, herunder navnlig omkostninger til sikkerhedskontrol, skal bæres af lufthavnsoperatøren.
An advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty is any economic benefit which an undertaking would not have obtained under normal market conditions, that is to say, in the absence of State intervention [75].
I det omfang offentlig finansiering ydet til FFHG har fritaget denne virksomhed for omkostninger, den skulle afholde i henhold til § 8, stk. 3, i LuftSiG, er den offentlige finansiering ikke fritaget for kontrol ifølge EU's statsstøtteregler.
Only the effect of the measure on the undertaking is relevant, not the cause nor the objective of the State intervention [76].
Statsmidler og spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt foranstaltningen kan tilregnes staten
Whenever the financial situation of the undertaking is improved as a result of State intervention, an advantage is present.
For så vidt som delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz ikke kun overførte indtægterne af de beløb, luftfartsselskaberne betalte for sikkerhedskontrol, til FFHG, blev de ydede midler betalt over delstatens budget.
Furthermore, ‘capital placed directly or indirectly at the disposal of an undertaking by the State in circumstances which correspond to normal market conditions cannot be regarded as State aid’ [77].
Kommissionen finder derfor, at investeringerne finansieres med statsmidler og kan tilregnes staten.
In this case, in order to determine whether the 2001 capital increase grants an advantage to FFHG that it would not have received under normal market conditions, the Commission has to compare the conduct of the public authorities providing the direct investment grants and capital injections to that of a MEO who is guided by prospects of profitability in the long-term [78].
Kommissionen bemærker, at de omhandlede omkostninger dækkede en andel af de omkostninger, FFHG havde pådraget sig i forbindelse med sin økonomiske aktivitet.
The assessment should leave aside any positive repercussions on the economy of the region in which the airport is located, since the Court has clarified that the relevant question for applying the Market Economy Operator ('MEO') principle is whether ‘in similar circumstances a private shareholder, having regard to the foreseeability of obtaining a return and leaving aside all social, regional-policy and sectoral considerations, would have subscribed the capital in question’ [79].
Operatøren af en lufthavn skal normalt bære alle omkostninger vedrørende opførelsen og driften af lufthavnen (med undtagelse af de omkostninger, der henhører under det offentlige myndighedsområde, og som generelt ikke skal afholdes af lufthavnsoperatøren under de gældende regler).
In Stardust Marine the Court stated 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.’ [80].
Dækningen af disse omkostninger fritager derfor FFHG for en økonomisk byrde, virksomheden ellers skulle have båret, og giver derfor FFHG en økonomisk fordel.
Furthermore, the Court declared in the EDF case that, ‘[…] for the purposes of showing that, before or at the same time as conferring the advantage, the Member State took that decision as a shareholder, it is not enough to rely on economic evaluations made after the advantage was conferred, on a retrospective finding that the investment made by the Member State concerned was actually profitable, or on subsequent justifications of the course of action actually chosen.’ [81].