natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Det skal derfor fastslås, om den pågældende organisations handlinger skal anses for resultatet af en adfærd, der kan tilregnes offentlige myndigheder.
The resources used to cover the losses of SEA Handling were of public origin, because they came from SEA, 99,12 % of whose capital was owned during the period under investigation by the Municipality and the Province of Milan.
Kommissionen bekræfter sin oprindelige vurdering, nemlig at foranstaltningerne ganske rigtigt kan tilregnes de italienske myndigheder og mere specifikt Milano kommune.
The fact that the transfers were made by SEA rather than by the abovementioned local authorities does not mean they were not of public origin.
For det første erkendte de italienske myndigheder i deres bemærkninger af 15. september 2010, at kommunen øvede kontrol over SEA, idet den udnævnte medlemmer til SEA's bestyrelse og revisorudvalg.
It thus needs to be determined whether the actions of the organisation in question are to be considered the result of conduct imputable to public authorities.
For det andet bekræfter Kommissionen den bevisværdi af tilregnelsen, som den henviser til i sin indledningsbeslutning.
The Commission confirms its initial assessment that the measures are indeed imputable to the Italian authorities, and more specifically to the Municipality of Milan.
Dette bevis er gyldigt for hele den undersøgte periode og for alle de kapitaltilførsler, der er omfattet af denne afgørelse.
First, in their observations of 15 September 2010 the Italian authorities acknowledged that the Municipality exercised control over SEA, appointing the members of its board of directors and audit board.
Som en foreløbig bemærkning påpeger Kommissionen, at Domstolen i Stardust Marine-dommen slog fast, at det er… nødvendigt at undersøge, om de offentlige myndigheder på den ene eller den anden måde må anses for at være impliceret i vedtagelsen af disse foranstaltninger.
Second, the Commission reaffirms the value of the evidence of imputability referred to in the opening decision.
Der kan i så henseende ikke stilles krav om bevis for, at de offentlige myndigheder konkret ved en anvisning har tilskyndet en offentlig virksomhed til at træffe de pågældende støtteforanstaltninger.
That evidence is valid for the entire period under investigation, and for all the injections of capital considered in this Decision.
For det første er der nemlig på grund af de tætte forbindelser mellem staten og de offentlige virksomheder en reel risiko for, at der via disse tildeles statsstøtte, som er svær gennemskuelig og i strid med traktatens regler om statsstøtte.
As a preliminary remark the Commission would point out that the Court of Justice held in the Stardust Marine judgment that It is … necessary to examine whether the public authorities must be regarded as having been involved, in one way or another, in the adoption of those measures.
Domstolen fandt også, at Kommissionen for at påvise tilregnelse kunne bygge sine argumenter på enhver anden omstændighed, som i det konkrete tilfælde indicerer, at de offentlige myndigheder er impliceret deri, eller som tværtimod sandsynliggør, at de ikke er impliceret i vedtagelsen af en foranstaltning.
On that point, it cannot be demanded that it be demonstrated, on the basis of a precise inquiry, that in the particular case the public authorities specifically incited the public undertaking to take the aid measures in question.
Den første kategori af bevis bestående af utallige dokumenter viser, at SEA's dækning af SEA Handlings tab blev udført på anmodning fra kommunen eller i det mindste med dens aktive inddragelse.
In the first place, having regard to the fact that relations between the State and public undertakings are close, there is a real risk that State aid may be granted through the intermediary of those undertakings in a non-transparent way and in breach of the rules on State aid laid down by the Treaty.
Kommissionen bekræfter sin vurdering af de pågældende dokumenter, som tydeligt viser, at Milano kommune var involveret i ledelsen af SEA Handling via SEA, især med henblik på at fastholde beskæftigelsesniveauet.
The Court also found that to demonstrate imputability the Commission could base its reasoning on 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.
Dette fremgår især tydeligt af protokollen over fagforeningsaftalen mellem SEA og fagforeningerne af 4. april 2002, hvori det hedder, at SEA … forpligter sig … til at bære dækningen af tabene for at få balance i SEA Handling SpA's finanser og aktiver, og at disse forpligtelser garanteres af den aftale, der er underskrevet af Milano kommune, bl.a. i dennes kapacitet af majoritetsaktionær (i SEA SpA), af de ydede bidrag, af de finansielle midler, som ikke er begrænset ifølge loven, som SEA SpA kan overføre til SEA Handling SpA, og af SEA's solide aktiver og finanser.
The first category of evidence, consisting of numerous documents, indicates that the coverage of losses of SEA Handling by SEA was carried out at the request of the Municipality, or at least with its active involvement.
På samme måde viser alle dokumenter, der er nævnt i indledningsbeslutningen (afsnit 2.4.2 og 3.1.1.2), at Milano kommune greb ind i driften af SEA Handling via SEA, især med henblik på at fastholde beskæftigelsesniveauet.
The Commission confirms its assessment of the documents in question, which clearly show that the Municipality of Milan was involved in the management of SEA Handling, through SEA, especially with a view to maintaining employment levels.
Kommissionen mener, at de skridt, som de italienske myndigheder har truffet, især på mødet den 26. marts 2002, var retningsgivende for SEA's beslutninger med hensyn til koncernens datterselskab SEA Handling.
This is particularly evident from the record of the union agreement between SEA and the unions dated 4 April 2002, which states that SEA … undertakes … to bear the coverage of losses in order to balance the finances and assets of SEA Handling SpA and that those commitments are guaranteed by the agreement signed by the Municipality of Milan, among other things in its capacity as the absolute majority shareholder (in SEA SpA), by the contributions made, by the financial resources not subject to legal limitations transferable by SEA SpA to SEA Handling SpA, and by the solidity of the assets of the assets and finance of SEA.
I aftalen, der blev indgået den dag, gav Milano kommune specifikke løfter med direkte virkning for driften af SEA Handling og SEA's rolle i ledelsen af dens datterselskab.
In the same way, all the documents mentioned in the opening decision (Sections 2.4.2 and 3.1.1.2) demonstrate that the Municipality of Milan was intervening in the running of SEA Handling through SEA, especially with a view to maintaining employment levels.
Desuden lovede kommunen at overvåge anvendelsen af aftalen og evaluere gennemførelsen af den med jævne mellemrum.
The Commission considers that the steps taken by the Italian authorities, particularly at the meeting of 26 March 2002, guided the decisions taken by SEA with regard to its subsidiary SEA Handling.
Milano kommunes involvering er derfor ikke en harmløs og betydningsløs faktor, sådan som de italienske myndigheder og SEA giver udtryk for.
In the agreement reached on that date, the Municipality of Milan gave specific commitments with a direct impact on the running of SEA Handling and on SEA’s role in the management of its subsidiary;
SEA kunne ikke ignorere de forpligtelser og krav, som den offentlige myndighed og majoritetsaktionær havde accepteret i den aftale, men måtte huske på dem, når koncernen traf sine foranstaltninger vedrørende ledelsen af SEA Handling.
moreover, the Municipality undertook to monitor the application of the agreement, evaluating its implementation at regular intervals.
Kommissionen mener også, at Milano kommunes forpligtelse afgivet i aftalen af 26. marts 2002 var mere end »retningsgivende« for foranstaltningerne til at dække tabene, og at den forpligtelse faktisk udløste foranstaltningerne.
The involvement of the Municipality of Milan is therefore not a harmless factor of no importance, as the Italian authorities and SEA suggest.
Kommissionen afviser den udtalelse, at Milano kommune ikke påtog sig nogen rolle, da den indgik førnævnte forpligtelse, og blot bekræftede den beskæftigelsesbeskyttelsesstrategi, som SEA havde valgt over for fagforeningerne.
SEA could not ignore the commitments and requirements that the public authority and controlling shareholder had accepted in that agreement, but had to bear them in mind when it took the measures regarding the management of SEA Handling.
Det forhold, at kommunen ikke deltog i underskrivelsen af fagforeningsaftalerne, som fulgte aftalen af 26. marts 2002, berettiger ikke til at se bort fra den betydelige indflydelse, den havde på disse efterfølgende fagforeningsaftaler.
The Commission also considers that the measures to cover losses were more than ‘guided’ by the commitment given by the Municipality of Milan in the agreement of 26 March 2002, and that they were in fact the result of that commitment.
Mere specifikt er referencerne i fagforeningsaftalerne af 4. april 2002 og 9. juni 2003 til kommunens forpligtelse tilstrækkelig dokumentation for betydningen af aftalen af 26. marts 2002 og dens indflydelse på de efterfølgende fagforeningsaftaler.
The Commission rejects the statement that the Municipality of Milan did not take on any role when it gave the abovementioned commitment, and simply confirmed the employment protection strategy adopted by SEA to the unions.
SEA udtalte, at fagforeningsaftalen af 4. april 2002 stadig fandt anvendelse, og at den skulle fortsættes for at overholde bestemmelserne deri.
The fact that the Municipality did not take part in the signing of the union agreements which followed the agreement of 26 March 2002 is no justification for ignoring the significant influence it had on those subsequent union agreements.
Endvidere hævdede de italienske myndigheder også, at SEA Handling ikke kunne fritage sig selv fra at overholde de aftaler, der tidligere var indgået med fagforeningerne, så selskabet kunne ikke afskedige personale, hvilket i Kommissionens øjne viser omfanget af disse aftaler og dermed inddragelsen af de offentlige myndigheder.
More specifically, the references in the union agreements of 4 April 2002 and 9 June 2003 to the commitment given by the Municipality are sufficient proof of the meaning of the agreement of 26 March 2002 and its influence on the subsequent union agreements.
Endelig har Kommissionen identificeret andre beviser for, at Milano kommune hele tiden var involveret, da SEA traf vigtige beslutninger om SEA Handling.
SEA stated that the union agreement of 4 April 2002 was still applicable and that it had to continue to adhere to its provisions.
I referatet fra mødet i SEA's bestyrelse af 31. maj 2007 hedder det om forelæggelsen for SEA's bestyrelse af forretningsplanen (som ifølge de italienske myndigheder også skulle tjene som forretningsplan for SEA Handling), at planen allerede var blevet forelagt SEA's majoritetsaktionær, som havde givet udtryk for sin holdning.
Further, the Italian authorities have also argued that SEA Handling could not exempt itself from compliance with the agreements concluded previously with union organisations, so that it could not dismiss personnel, which in the Commission’s view demonstrates the scope of those agreements and thus the involvement of the public authorities.
Derefter udtalte bestyrelsesformanden ifølge referatet fra SEA Handlings bestyrelsesmøde den 13. juni 2008 med hensyn til gennemførelsen af SEA Handlings strategiske plan for 2009-2016, at den strategiske plan var aftalt med kommunen/aktionæren.
Finally, the Commission has identified other evidence that shows that the Municipality of Milan was involved at all times when SEA took important decisions with regard to SEA Handling.
Kommissionen mener, at begge dokumenter gør det klart, at kommunens rolle rakte ud over en normal aktionærs, som ville være blevet informeret om bestyrelsens driftsmæssige beslutninger og ville have evalueret dem primært gennem selskabets interne organer og dets officielle meddelelser.
In the minutes of the meeting of the SEA board of directors report dated 31 May 2007, with regard to the submission to the board of the SEA business plan (which, according to the Italian authorities, was also to serve as the business plan of SEA Handling), it is stated that the plan had already been submitted to SEA’s majority shareholder, which had expressed its opinion.
At det udtrykkeligt nævnes, at forretningsplanen allerede var aftalt med aktionæren, bekræfter dennes dominerende rolle i SEA's strategiske valg.
Subsequently, as recorded in the minutes of the meeting of SEA Handling’s board of directors dated 13 June 2008 with regard to the implementation of SEA Handling’s 2009-2016 strategic plan, the chairman of the board stated that the strategic plan had been agreed with the Municipality/shareholder.
Denne rolle afspejles også i de forhold, der beskrives i betragtning 51 i indledningsbeslutningen, betragtning 35 i denne afgørelse (et medlem af byrådets forretningsudvalg havde bedt SEA's bestyrelsesformand og Milanos borgmester om at møde for byrådets transportudvalg for at forklare, hvordan de agtede at relancere SEA Handling) og i betragtning 69 og 70 i indledningsbeslutningen (med henvisning til de klare forbindelser mellem SEA's og SEA Handlings topledelse, hvis udnævnelse styres af kommunen).
The Commission considers that both documents make it clear that the Municipality’s role went beyond that of a normal shareholder, who would have been informed of the operating decisions of the board of directors and would have evaluated them primarily through the company’s internal bodies and its official communications.
Kommissionen bekræfter også gyldigheden af det andet bevis, den havde fundet for tilregnelsen, nemlig SEA's bestyrelsesmedlemmers og direktørers særlige afhængighed af Milano kommune.
The insistence on the fact that the business plan had been previously agreed with the shareholder confirms the shareholder’s predominant role in SEA’s strategic choices.
I modsætning til de italienske myndigheder anser Kommissionen kun udtalelser til pressen for gyldig dokumentation, når de omhandler verificerede fakta.
This role is also reflected in the facts set out in paragraph 51 of the opening decision, in paragraph 35 of this Decision (a member of the municipal executive had asked the chairman of SEA and the mayor of Milan to appear before the municipal Committee on Transport to explain how they intended to relaunch SEA Handling), and in paragraphs 69 and 70 of the opening decision (with reference to the strict links between the top management of SEA and SEA Handling, whose appointment is controlled by the Municipality).
Hverken de italienske myndigheder eller SEA har bestridt de pågældende fakta, og de har heller ikke kommenteret det forhold, at Milanos borgmester Letizia Moratti i 2006 opfordrede til og sørgede for, at den daværende bestyrelsesformand og administrerende direktør Bencini sagde op to år før udløbet af sit mandat.
The Commission also confirms the validity of the second piece of evidence of imputability found, namely the particular dependency of SEA’s directors and managers on the Municipality of Milan.
Under alle omstændigheder påpeger Kommissionen, at generaladvokaten i Stardust Marine-sagen udtalte, at beviset for statsstøtte »på grund af de bevismæssige vanskeligheder og den klare risiko for, at reglerne omgås,« måske endda kan findes i form af »presseartikler«.
Contrary to the Italian authorities’ contentions, the Commission considers statements made in press reports as valid evidence only when they report verified facts.
Ifølge SEA stammer presseforlydenderne og de fakta, der omtales deri, fra 2006 og kan ikke bevise noget vedrørende kommunens indflydelse på SEA.
Neither the Italian authorities nor SEA have disputed the facts in question, nor have they commented on the fact that in 2006 the mayor of Milan, Letizia Moratti, called for and secured the resignation of the then chairman and managing director, Mr Bencini, two years prior to the natural conclusion of his term.
Kommissionen mener, at beviset for bestyrelsesmedlemmernes afhængighed illustrerer det generelle samarbejdsscenarie i SEA og dermed den baggrund, som de årlige beslutninger om dækning af SEA Handlings tab blev truffet på.
In any event, the Commission points out that in Stardust Marine the Advocate General said that ‘Because of the difficulties of proof and the obvious danger of circumvention’ evidence of State aid might be inferred even from ‘press reports’.
Under alle omstændigheder dækker Kommissionens undersøgelse også perioden efter 2006.
According to SEA, the press reports and the facts reported therein date from 2006 and cannot prove anything regarding the Municipality’s influence on SEA;
For det tredje deler Kommissionen med hensyn til blankoopsigelserne, der blev afleveret af SEA's bestyrelsesmedlemmer til Milanos borgmester, ikke SEA's og de italienske myndigheders mening om, at disse breve, som angiveligt kun havde moralsk værdi og ikke retslig gyldighed, ikke ville kunne påvirke bestyrelsesmedlemmernes handlinger.
the Commission considers that the evidence of the dependency of the directors indicate the general context of the working of SEA, and thus the context in which the annual decisions to cover SEA Handling’s losses were taken.
Kommissionen mener, at denne praksis ikke kan have haft andet formål end at stramme Milano kommunes kontrol over SEA's bestyrelsesmedlemmer og entydigt skærpe dens beføjelser til at stille bestyrelsesmedlemmerne til ansvar, hvilken magt kommunen kun burde have udøvet inden for grænserne af sine rettigheder som aktionær i SEA.
In any event, the Commission’s investigation also covers the period after 2006.
Selv om brevene kun havde moralsk værdi, hvilket ikke synes at være tilfældet, ville de stadig bekræfte de offentlige myndigheders indblanding i driften af SEA.
Third, with regard to the blank resignations submitted by SEA directors to the mayor of Milan, the Commission does not share the view of SEA and the Italian authorities that those letters, which allegedly had only a moral value and no legal validity, were not likely to influence the actions of members of the board of directors.
Under alle omstændigheder påpeger Kommissionen, at de italienske myndigheder på side 37 i deres bemærkninger af 15. september 2010 gentog, at brevene frem for ren moralsk værdi juridisk set hindrede det pågældende bestyrelsesmedlem i at søge kompensation for uretmæssig afsættelse i henhold til den italienske civillovbog.
The Commission considers that this practice can have had no other purpose than to tighten the Municipality of Milan’s control over SEA’s directors, unequivocally reinforcing its power to hold the directors to account, a power which the Municipality ought to have exercised only within the limits of its rights as a shareholder in SEA.
Kommunen, som styrer generalforsamlingen, fører også stram kontrol med bestyrelsesmedlemmerne, eftersom disse, trods det at de har handlet i selskabets interesse, kan afsættes af generalforsamlingen uden at være berettiget til kompensation for uretmæssig afsættelse.
Even if the letters had only a moral value, which does not seem to be the case, they would still confirm the public authorities’ interference in the running of SEA.
SEA Handling hævder, at bestyrelsen ikke kan være blevet påvirket af blankoopsigelserne, fordi den ikke imødekom en anmodning fra den offentlige aktionær om at udbetale 250-280 mio. EUR i ekstraordinært udbytte.
In any event, the Commission points out that on p. 37 of their observations of 15 September 2010 the Italian authorities reiterated that, rather than having a purely moral value, the letters legally prevented the director in question from seeking compensation for unfair dismissal under the Italian civil code.
Kommissionen bemærker, at referatet fra SEA's generalforsamling den 24. februar 2006 gjorde det klart, at en udbetaling af ikke over 200 mio. EUR i ekstraordinært udbytte ville gøre det muligt for selskabet at fastholde en gældsætning, der overholdt den gennemsnitlige sats for sammenlignelige selskaber og ville sikre tilstrækkelig finansiel fleksibilitet.
The Municipality, which controls the shareholders’ meeting, also holds tight control over the directors, since even if they have acted in the best interests of the company they can be removed by the general meeting without any entitlement to compensation for unfair dismissal.
For det andet specificeres det i samme dokument, at SEA havde fastsat udbytteniveauet til 200 mio. EUR på et objektivt grundlag, og at dette afspejlede det maksimale beløb, som selskabet kunne udbetale i lyset af de finansielle nøgletal på det tidspunkt.
SEA Handling contends that the board of directors cannot have been influenced by the blank resignations because it did not accept a request made by the public shareholder that it distribute EUR 250-280 million in extraordinary dividends;
Årsberetningen for 2006 bekræfter, at gældsætningen var blevet forøget (fordoblet fra 2005 til 2006), til dels på grund af den faldende likviditet som følge af udbetalingen af ekstraordinært udbytte til aktionærerne.
the Commission observes that the minutes of the SEA general meeting of 24 February 2006 made it clear that a distribution of no more EUR 200 million in extraordinary dividends would allow the company to maintain a rate of debt compliant with the average rate for comparable firms and would ensure sufficient financial flexibility.
Hvis SEA havde udbetalt højere udbytte, ville koncernen have haft større vanskeligheder med at dække SEA Handlings tab det pågældende år.
Second, the same document specifies that SEA had set the level of dividends at EUR 200 million on objective grounds and that it represented the maximum that the company could pay out in the light of the financial indicators at the time.
At en aktionær anmoder om et vist beløb i udbytte ved visse lejligheder, mens ledelsen udbetaler et mindre beløb, forekommer desuden at være normalt forekommende i et selskabs cyklus og står ikke i modsætning til samme aktionærs strenge styring af ledelsen.
The management report for 2006 confirms that indebtedness had been increasing (it had doubled in 2006 as compared to 2005) owing partly to the fall in liquidity caused by the distribution of extraordinary dividends to shareholders.
Kommissionen mener, at denne praksis objektivt afspejler et afhængighedsforhold.
Had SEA paid out higher dividends, it would have been more difficult to cover SEA Handling’s losses that year.
Uden at kunne vurdere den præcise virkning af denne praksis efterfølgende mener Kommissionen dog, at opsigelsesbrevene ved deres blotte eksistens (på forhånd) bestemt var i stand til at påvirke adfærden hos de bestyrelsesmedlemmer, som var udnævnt af Milano kommune.
Moreover, the fact that a shareholder may request a certain amount in dividends on certain occasions whereas the management then pays out a lower figure seems to be a normal occurrence in the life of a company, and is not in contradiction with the strict control of the management by the same shareholder.
De offentlige myndigheder behøvede end ikke henvise til brevene for at øve denne indflydelse, idet det var indlysende, at alene deres eksistens gjorde bestyrelsesmedlemmerne afhængige af Milanos borgmester.
The Commission considers that this practice constitutes an objective reflection of a situation of dependency.
Med hensyn til de italienske myndigheders udtalelser om udpegning af bestyrelsesmedlemmer gentager Kommissionen, at kommunen de facto »udnævner bestyrelsesmedlemmerne«.
Without being able to judge the precise influence of this practice a posteriori, the Commission considers that merely by their existence (a priori) the letters of resignation were certainly capable of influencing the actions of the members of the board of the directors appointed by the Municipality of Milan.