natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ifølge den aftale forpligtede Real Madrid sig til at bygge en parkeringskælder.
By letter dated 9 July 2015, Real Madrid sent its observations on that study.
Real Madrid opfyldte ikke denne forpligtelse.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE CONTESTED MEASURE
Den 29. november 1996 indgik Real Madrid og Madrids regionale myndigheder (Comunidad de Madrid) en aftale om bytte af fast ejendom (convenio de permuta de suelo) (»bytteaftalen fra 1996«).
On 29 July 2011, the Madrid City Council (Ayuntamiento de Madrid) and Real Madrid signed an agreement settling a legal dispute between them in relation to a 1991 agreement and a real estate property swap that had been the object of subsequent agreements between them in 1996 and 1998 (hereinafter: the ‘2011 settlement agreement’ or ‘the measure under consideration’).
I den aftale forpligtede Real Madrid sig til at overføre en grund på 30000 m2 i »Ciudad Deportiva«-området til Madrids regionale myndigheder og kommunalbestyrelse.
On 20 December 1991 the Madrid City Council, the Gerencia Municipal de Urbanismo and Real Madrid concluded an agreement concerning the remodelling of Real Madrid's stadium, the Santiago Bernabéu (hereinafter: the ‘1991 agreement’).
Til gengæld skulle Madrids kommunalbestyrelse overføre nogle offentligt ejede grunde samt rettighederne til andre offentligt ejede grunde til Real Madrid.
By that agreement, Real Madrid undertook to carry out the construction of an underground carpark.
De grunde og rettigheder, som Madrids kommunalbestyrelse skulle overføre, skulle udvælges senere.
Real Madrid failed to comply with that obligation.
Parterne fastsatte værdien af byttehandlen til 27 mio. EUR.
On 29 November 1996, Real Madrid and the regional government of Madrid (Comunidad de Madrid) entered into a land swap agreement (convenio de permuta de suelo) (hereinafter: the ‘1996 swap agreement’).
Den 29. maj 1998 indgik Real Madrid og Madrids kommunalbestyrelse en ny aftale med henblik på at gennemføre byttehandlen ifølge bytteaftalen fra 1996 (»gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998«).
By that agreement, Real Madrid agreed to transfer to the Community of Madrid and the Madrid City Council a plot of land of 30000 square metres located in the ‘Ciudad Deportiva’ area.
Ifølge denne aftale skulle Madrids regionale myndigheder overtage den ene halvdel af Ciudad Deportiva-grunden (15000 m2), mens de resterende 15000 m2 skulle overtages af Madrids kommunalbestyrelse.
In exchange, the Madrid City Council undertook, for its part, to provide Real Madrid with some plots of publicly owned land as well as rights in other plots of public land.
Følgelig overførte Real Madrid disse grunde i Ciudad Deportiva.
The plots of land and rights to be transferred by the Madrid City Council were to be identified at a later occasion.
Jordlod B-32 udgør et areal på 70815 m2.
The parties set the value of the swap transaction at EUR 27 million.
Den tekniske afdeling i Madrid kommune havde i 1998 i forbindelse med byttehandlen vurderet værdien af B-32 til 595194 EUR.
On 29 May 1998, Real Madrid and the Madrid City Council concluded a new agreement with the aim to implement the swap that was envisaged by the 1996 swap agreement (hereinafter: the ‘1998 implementation agreement’).
Ifølge Spanien havde den tekniske afdeling i Madrid kommune i vurderingen af jordlod B-32 i 1998 taget hensyn til områdets udvikling og udviklingspotentiale.
Consequently, Real Madrid transferred those plots of land in the Ciudad Deportiva.
De havde navnlig taget højde for, at der kun var udført byplanlægning for området, men endnu ikke udstykning, samt at man ikke havde startet noget byggeri.
In return, the Madrid City Council undertook to provide Real Madrid with land which would match its obligations towards the club, namely the transfer of plots of land worth approximately EUR 13500000.
Senere, i 1998, overførte Madrids kommunalbestyrelse jordlod 33 og 34 til klubben.
For this purpose plots located in the area Julian Camarillo Sur (plots 33 and 34) and plot B-32 in the Las Tablas area (plot B-32) were to be transferred to Real Madrid.
Jordlod B-32 var endnu ikke blevet overført, fordi Madrid kommunalbestyrelse i 1998 endnu ikke havde det juridiske ejerskab til den jordlod.
Plot B-32 consists of an area of 70815 square metres.
I denne henseende skulle overførslen ifølge gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998 gennemføres syv dage efter, at Madrids kommunalbestyrelse blev registreret som ejer af jordlod B-32 i den spanske tingbog (Registro de la Propiedad).
For the purpose of that swap, the technical services of the municipal administration of Madrid had estimated the value of plot B-32 in 1998 at EUR 595194.
Den 28. juli 2000 erhvervede Madrids kommunalbestyrelse det juridiske ejerskab til jordlod B-32.
That valuation was performed on the basis of legislation which lays down a methodology to determine the value of urban real property (Real Decreto 1020/1993 [3]).
Jordlod B-32 blev imidlertid først registreret i tingbogen som værende Madrids kommunalbestyrelses ejendom den 11. februar 2003.
According to Spain, the technical services of the municipal administration of Madrid had taken into account in the valuation of plot B-32 in 1998 the level of and potential for development of the area.
Overførslen af jordlod B-32 fandt aldrig sted.
They had in particular had regard to the fact that only the urban planning had been concluded for the area but not yet its urban development and the fact that no building activity had started yet.
I henhold til byplanlægningsreglerne er B-32 klassificeret til almen sportsbrug (equipamiento básico deportivo).
Later on, in 1998, the Madrid City Council transferred plots 33 and 34 to the club.
Denne klassificering indgik oprindeligt i den partielle byplan (plan parcial) for området »UZI 0.08 Las Tablas« af 28. juli 1995.
Plot B-32 was not yet transferred because in 1998 the Madrid City Council did not yet hold legal ownership of that plot.
Den blev efterfølgende indarbejdet i arealudnyttelsesplanen for Madrid (Plan General de Ordenación Urbana de Madrid, »PGOU«), som blev vedtaget den 17. april 1997 af Madrids kommunalbestyrelse og Madrids regionale myndigheder.
On this point, the 1998 implementation agreement stipulated that the transfer should be effectuated seven days after the registration of the Madrid City Council as owner of plot B-32 in the Spanish Property Registry (Registro de la Propiedad).
Parterne i gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998 var bekendt med, at jordlod B-32 var klassificeret til almen sportsbrug, men ifølge Spanien mente de ikke, at denne klassifikation udelukkede overførsel til privat ejerskab, og eftersom Real Madrid havde til hensigt at opføre sportsinfrastruktur på området, havde Madrids kommunalbestyrelse antaget, at jordlod B-32 kunne overføres, hvis klassifikationen for jordlodden blev garanteret og overholdt af Real Madrid.
On 28 July 2000, the Madrid City Council acquired legal ownership of plot B-32.
Ifølge artikel 64 i lov nr. 9/2001 af 17. juli 2001 om den selvstyrende region Madrids jord (Ley 9/2001 del Suelo de la Comunidad de Madrid, »lov nr. 9/2001«) skulle jordlod, faciliteter, bygninger og anlæg bruges i overensstemmelse med deres kvalifikation, klassifikation eller byplanstatus.
However, plot B-32 was only registered in the Property Registry as property of the Madrid City Council on 11 February 2003.
I artikel 7.7.2.a i PGOU beskrives grunde klassificeret til sportsbrug som offentligt ejede grunde.
The transfer of plot B-32 did not ultimately take place.
Lov nr. 9/2001 var allerede trådt i kraft, da Madrids kommunalbestyrelse blev registreret som ejer af jordlod B-32 i 2003 og var forpligtet til at overføre grunden til Real Madrid.
Under urban planning rules, plot B-32 is classified for basic sport use (equipamiento básico deportivo).
Ifølge lov nr. 9/2001 skulle en grund, der var klassificeret til almen sportsbrug, være offentligt ejet.
That classification was initially contained in the Partial Plan (plan parcial) of the territory ‘UZI 0.08 Las Tablas’ of 28 July 1995.
Enhver overførsel til privat ejerskab var udelukket, da grunden ikke kunne overføres, fordi den var offentlig (bien de naturaleza demanial).
It was subsequently contained in the Land use plan of Madrid (Plan General de Ordenación Urbana de Madrid, hereinafter: ‘PGOU’), which was approved on 17 April 1997 by the Madrid City Council and the Community of Madrid.
Derfor mente Madrids kommunalbestyrelse, at det var juridisk umuligt at overføre jordlod B-32 til Real Madrid.
The parties to the 1998 implementation agreement were aware of the classification of plot B-32 for basic sport use but, according to Spain, they were of the opinion that the classification for sport would not exclude its transfer to private ownership and, since Real Madrid had intended to erect sport infrastructure on those premises, the Madrid City Council had assumed that plot B-32 could be transferred if the sport use classification of that plot of land was assured and respected by Real Madrid.
Det var derfor, at den i 2003 ikke overførte grunden som aftalt i gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998.
However, Article 64 of Law 9/2001 of July 17 of the Land of the Community of Madrid (Ley 9/2001 del Suelo de la Comunidad de Madrid, hereinafter: ‘law 9/2001’) established that all plots of land, facilities, constructions and buildings have to be used in accordance with their qualification, classification, or urban legal status.
Endvidere udtalte Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid, at klassifikationen i byplaner som PGOU, betød, at en privat organisation ikke kunne have ejendomsretten til et område, der var klassificeret som B-32 [4].
Article 7.7.2.a of the PGOU describes plots with the designation for sport use as plots of land in public ownership.
Denne dom præciserede den juridiske fortolkning af de byplanmæssige principper.
Law 9/2001 had already entered into effect, when the Madrid City Council was registered as owner of plot B-32 in 2003 and was obliged to transfer the plot to Real Madrid.
Derfor blev jordlod B-32 ikke overført til Real Madrid.
Law 9/2001 required a plot designated for basic sport use to be publicly owned.
I forligsaftalen fra 2011 anerkendte Madrids kommunalbestyrelse og Real Madrid, at der ikke var nogen juridisk mulighed for at overføre jordlod B-32 til Real Madrid (»Existe, aunque no una imposibilidad fisica, sí una imposibilidad jurídica de entregar la parcela«).
Any transfer to a private entity of such a plot would be excluded because the public nature of the plot (bien de naturaleza demanial) would make it inalienable.
Parterne aftalte, at kompensationen skulle betales ved, at Madrids kommunalbestyrelse i stedet for at overføre jordlod B-32 til Real Madrid overførte flere andre jordlodder.
Therefore, the Madrid City Council considered that it was legally impossible to transfer plot B-32 to Real Madrid.
Den tekniske afdeling, der var ansvarlig for Madrids kommunalbestyrelses grundvurdering, vurderede disse to jordlodder til i alt 19972348,96 EUR.
Moreover, in 2004 the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid ruled that the classification made by urban plans, like the PGOU, would prevent any private entity from holding the legal property of an area classified like plot B-32 [4].
Parterne aftalte også, at Real Madrid skyldte Madrids kommunalbestyrelse et beløb på 2812735,03 EUR som kompensation for den manglende opfyldelse af forpligtelsen i henhold til aftalen fra 1991 om at opføre en p-kælder.
That judgment clarified the legal interpretation of the urban planning principles.
I forligsaftalen fra 2011 blev Real Madrid og Madrids kommunalbestyrelse enige om at udligne deres gensidige gæld.
As a consequence, plot B-32 was not transferred to Real Madrid.
Først blev et beløb på 92037,59 EUR i ejendomsskat, som Real Madrid havde betalt siden 2002 for jordlod B-32, lagt til Real Madrids krav på 22693054,44 EUR for jordlod B-32.
By the 2011 settlement agreement, the Madrid City Council and Real Madrid acknowledged that there was a legal impossibility to transfer plot B-32 to Real Madrid (‘Existe, aunque no una imposibilidad fisica, sí una imposibilidad jurídica de entregar la parcela’).
Derefter blev de 2812735,03 i udestående gæld i henhold til aftalen fra 1991 fratrukket Real Madrids krav, hvilket resulterede i et krav for Real Madrid hos Madrids kommunalbestyrelse på 19972357,00 EUR.
As a result, the Madrid City Council agreed to compensate Real Madrid for its failure to transfer plot B-32 under the 1998 agreement with an amount which represented the 2011 value of plot B-32.
Dette krav blev modregnet i grundenes værdi på 19972348,96 EUR som kompensation for Real Madrid for den manglende overførsel af jordlod B-32.
The technical services in charge of land valuation of the Madrid City Council valued plot B-32 in 2011 in a valuation report issued on 27 July 2011 at EUR 22693054,44.
Resultatet var et tilgodehavende på 8,04 EUR for Real Madrid hos Madrids kommunalbestyrelse.
That valuation of plot B-32 used the same general criteria for determining the value of municipal assets, as those which had been applied in 1998, taking account of the same land classification and assuming the transferability of the plot.
I henhold til en efterfølgende aftale, som blev indgået i september 2011 mellem Madrids kommunalbestyrelse og Real Madrid (»byudviklingsaftalen fra 2011«), forpligtede Real Madrid sig til at overføre Mercedes Arteaga-/Jacinto Verdaguer-ejendommene, som indgik i den faste ejendom, som blev overført til Real Madrid i henhold til forligsaftalen fra 2011, tilbage til Madrids kommunalbestyrelse, at overføre et indkøbscenter, som den ejer, til Madrids kommunalbestyrelse samt til at foretage en engangsbetaling på 6,6 mio. EUR til Madrids kommunalbestyrelse.
The parties agreed that the compensation would be paid by replacing the transfer of plot B-32 with the transfer by the Madrid City Council of several other plots of land to Real Madrid.
Til gengæld forpligtede Madrids kommunalbestyrelse sig til at overføre en grund på 5216 m2, som den ejede, foran Real Madrids Bernabéu stadion til Real Madrid, hvor Real Madrid agtede at opføre et indkøbscenter og et hotel.
Those plots consisted of an estate located between the streets Rafael Salgado, Paseo de la Castellana and Concha Espina of 3600 square metres; several pieces of the ‘Mercedes Arteaga, Jacinto Verdaguer’ areas in the neighbourhood of Carabanchel totalling 7966 square metres; and an area of 3035 square metres in the ‘Ciudad Aeroportuaria Parque de Valdebebas’.
I forbindelse med sidstnævnte overførsel ændrede kommunalbestyrelsen og de regionale myndigheder PGOU og omklassificerede området foran stadionet for at give mulighed for tættere byggeri og kommerciel anvendelse.
The technical services in charge of land valuation of the Madrid City Council valued those plots together at EUR 19972348,96.
En nylig dom fra Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid af 2. februar 2015 [5] annullerede denne ændring af PGOU.
The parties also agreed that Real Madrid owed the Madrid City Council an amount of EUR 2812735,03, as compensation for its failure to comply with its contractual obligation under the 1991 agreement to construct an underground carpark.
BEGRUNDELSE FOR INDLEDNING AF DEN FORMELLE UNDERSØGELSESPROCEDURE
Under the 2011 settlement agreement, Real Madrid and the Madrid City Council agreed to offset their mutual debts.
Kommissionen drog i åbningsafgørelsen den foreløbige konklusion, at kompensationen til Real Madrid fra Madrids kommunalbestyrelse i henhold til forligsaftalen fra 2011 udgjorde statsstøtte til fordel for Real Madrid som omhandlet i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
First, an amount of EUR 92037,59 of property taxes, which Real Madrid had been paying since 2002 for plot B-32, was added to Real Madrid's claim of EUR 22693054,44 for plot B-32.
I bemærkninger fremsendt til Kommissionen, før den formelle undersøgelsesprocedure blev indledt, gjorde Spanien gældende, at Madrids kommunalbestyrelse, fordi det juridisk ikke var muligt at opfylde dens forpligtelse i henhold til gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998 til at overføre jordlod B-32 til Real Madrid, havde en retlig forpligtelse til at kompensere Real Madrid med 2011-værdien af den pågældende grund.
Then, the EUR 2812735,03 of outstanding debts under the 1991 agreement was deducted from Real Madrid's claim, leading to a claim of Real Madrid against the Madrid City Council of EUR 19972357,00.
For Kommissionen rejste dette spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt det faktisk ikke var muligt at overføre grunden til Real Madrid, og hvilke konsekvenser der i henhold til den spanske civilret kunne være ved, at en part i en kontrakt ikke var i stand til at opfylde sin kontraktlige forpligtelse.
That claim was offset against the value of EUR 19972348,96 of the estates compensating Real Madrid for the inability to transfer plot B-32.
Kommissionen konstaterede i åbningsafgørelsen, at bestemmelserne om omstødelse af kontrakter i den spanske civilret ikke nødvendigvis medfører en forpligtelse til at betale kompensation for den part, der ikke kan opfylde sine forpligtelser.
The result was a remaining net claim of EUR 8,04 for Real Madrid against the Madrid City Council.
Kommissionen fandt endvidere, at det var tvivlsomt, om den værdi af jordlod B-32, der blev lagt til grund for forligsaftalen fra 2011, afspejlede markedsprisen.
Under a subsequent agreement concluded in September 2011 between the Madrid City Council and Real Madrid (hereinafter: the ‘2011 urban development agreement’), Real Madrid undertook to transfer the Mercedes Arteaga/Jacinto Verdaguer properties, which formed part of the real estate assets transferred to Real Madrid by the 2011 settlement agreement, back to the Madrid City Council, to transfer a shopping mall complex it owns to the Madrid City Council and to make a one off payment of EUR 6,6 million to the Madrid City Council.
Selv om de spanske myndigheder fremsendte vurderingsrapporter, der dokumenterede den høje værdi af angiveligt sammenlignelige grunde, som f.eks. var klassificeret til forskellige anvendelser, men som ikke var offentlige, kunne de ikke sammenlignes, fordi de pågældende områder godt kunne overføres til private og dermed var salgbare.
In return, the Madrid City Council undertook to transfer to Real Madrid an area of land of 5216 square metres it owned in front of Real Madrid's Bernabéu Stadium, on which Real Madrid intended to construct a shopping mall and a hotel.
Kommissionen spurgte de spanske myndigheder, hvorfor Madrids kommunalbestyrelse ikke havde forsøgt at undgå et krav på mere end 22 mio. EUR.
In the context of the latter transfer, the Council and the Community of Madrid amended the PGOU, reclassifying the area in front of that stadium to enable a more dense coverage by buildings and its commercial use.
Derfor mente Kommissionen også, at der kunne være tale om støtte i disse transaktioner som omhandlet i traktatens artikel 107, stk. 1.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
Kommissionen var også i tvivl om den mulige støttes forenelighed med det indre marked.
In the opening decision, the Commission took the preliminary view that the compensation of Real Madrid by the Madrid City Council under the 2011 settlement agreement constituted State aid in favour of Real Madrid within in the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
I mangel af konkrete retningslinjer for anvendelsen af statsstøttereglerne på kommercielle sportsaktiviteter skulle en vurdering baseres på traktatens artikel 107, stk. 3, litra c), direkte.
In submissions to the Commission prior to the opening of the formal investigation procedure, Spain argued that, due to the legal impossibility of fulfilling its obligation under the 1998 implementation agreement to transfer plot B-32 to Real Madrid, the Madrid City Council was legally obliged to compensate Real Madrid with the 2011 value of the plot of land in question.
I henhold til denne bestemmelse kan støtte anses for at være forenelig med det indre marked, hvis den i den fælles interesse fremmer udviklingen af visse økonomiske aktiviteter eller områder.
This raised the question for the Commission whether it was indeed not possible to transfer the land to Real Madrid and what consequences Spanish civil law could impose on the impossibility on the part of one party of a contract to fulfil its contractual obligation.
Kommissionen tvivlede på, hvorvidt der var en objektiv fælles interesse, som kunne begrunde selektiv støtte til en meget magtfuld aktør i en meget konkurrencepræget branche.
In the opening decision, the Commission considered that the provisions of nullity of contracts in the Spanish Civil Code do not necessarily lead to an obligation to pay compensation for the party which is not able to fulfil its obligation.
Derfor opfordrede Kommissionen Spanien og interesserede parter til at fremsende relevante oplysninger om, hvorvidt overførslen af jordlod B-32 til Real Madrid i henhold til gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998, faktisk var juridisk umulig for Madrids kommunalbestyrelse, samt om de mulige konsekvenser i henhold til spansk lovgivning.
The Commission furthermore considered that it was doubtful that the value of plot B-32 assumed in the 2011 settlement agreement reflected a market price.
Kommissionen udbad sig også kommentarer om værdien af de grunde, der indgik i forligsaftalen fra 2011 og byudviklingsaftalen fra 2011.
Although the Spanish authorities submitted valuation reports demonstrating the high value of allegedly comparable plots of land, designated e.g. for various uses, but not of a public nature, the comparability would be hampered because the areas referred to by Spain were transferable to private parties and thus marketable.
BEMÆRKNINGER FRA SPANIEN
In the opening decision, the Commission expressed doubts as to the considerable increase of the alleged value of plot B-32 between 1998 and 2011.
Bemærkninger om, hvorvidt det var umuligt at overføre jordlod B-32
This plot of land, which at the time of its acquisition was valued at EUR 595194, had allegedly increased in value to more than EUR 22 million, a 37-fold increase.
Spanien bekræftede, at overførsel af jordlod B-32 var og er juridisk umuligt.
The Commission asked the Spanish authorities why the Madrid City Council had not attempted to avoid a claim of more than EUR 22 million.
Spanien gør gældende, at den juridiske situation med hensyn til, om grunden kan overføres, som minimum var uklar, da aftalen fra 1998 blev indgået.
The Commission also expressed doubts as to whether the value of the properties which were transferred to Real Madrid by the further exchange of land around its Bernabéu Stadium, under the 2011 urban development agreement, was in line with their market value.
Det blev i 2004 klart, at overførsel var juridisk umuligt, da Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid afsagde sin dom nr. 77/2015 (jf. betragtning 20).
Therefore the Commission considered that there could also be aid present in those transactions within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Spanien mener, at dommen vedrørte lovgivning, der allerede var gældende i 1998, da gennemførelsesaftalen fra 1998 mellem Madrids kommunalbestyrelse og Real Madrid blev indgået.
The Commission also expressed doubts regarding the compatibility of any possible aid with the internal market.
Spanien er derfor enige i, at overførsel af jordlod B-32 havde været umuligt fra begyndelsen.
In the absence of specific guidelines on the application of the State aid rules to commercial sport activities, any assessment would have to be based directly under Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Ifølge Spanien ville konsekvenserne af denne juridiske umulighed i henhold til civillovens artikel 1303 være, at de kontraherende parter skulle returnere det, de havde modtaget.
According to that provision, aid may be considered compatible with the internal market if it facilitates, in the common interest, the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas.