natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Da det kan konstateres, at foranstaltningerne er selektive både med hensyn til sektoren og internt i denne sektor, er det i modsætning til det, som RATP Dev synes at antyde med henvisningen til Azores-retspraksis [30], ikke nødvendigt også at påvise selektivitetens geografiske karakter.
Article 41 of the CT2 also sets out the operator's obligations with regard to assets, which mainly involve an obligation to use all the assets, an obligation to carry out maintenance and upkeep works on the property earmarked for implementation of the public transport service, and an obligation to draw up a plan of investment in the vehicle fleet for the full term of the contract such as to ensure, particularly for reasons of safety, reliability, availability of the vehicles and optimisation of the maintenance and upkeep costs, that the average age of the fleet does not exceed seven years.
Kommissionen konkluderer dermed, at regionens og STIF's foranstaltninger inden for rammerne af CT1- og CT2-kontrakten er selektive.
Through the CT2, STIF breaks with the model followed in previous years by introducing a public-service contract which, from the outset and in an integrated manner, sets out obligations in respect of both operation and investment, in particular through a unified ‘financial account for the service’.
Det skal kontrolleres, om foranstaltningerne kan fordreje konkurrencevilkårene og påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
The C2 contribution is explicitly designed to compensate for the costs flowing from the obligations linked to investment.
I den efterfølgende periode måtte det materiel, som STIF ydede tilskud til i medfør af tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten, udelukkende anvendes til udøvelsen af de offentlige aktiviteter, der stod opført i STIF's transportplan, i mindst otte år [33].
The Commission deduces from this that the C2 contribution is given in exchange for clearly defined PSOs relating to investment, and that the first Altmark criterion is therefore met.
Kommissionen bemærker imidlertid, at det ræsonnement, der fremføres i betragtning 226, fortsat var relevant efter det ottende driftsår.
Now that it has been established that the C2 contribution satisfies the first Altmark criterion, it remains to be assessed whether it satisfies the second, third and fourth Altmark criteria.
Selv om det antages, at de busser, som STIF ydede tilskud til, kun er blevet brugt til varetagelsen af offentlige tjenesteydelsesopgaver på markedet for kollektiv rutebefordring ad vej i Île-de-France, er det ikke nok til at udelukke enhver risiko for, at konkurrencen er blevet fordrejet og samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne påvirket af den påklagede foranstaltning.
As the criteria are cumulative, the Commission will confine itself to demonstrating that the fourth criterion is not satisfied in order to conclude that the contribution concerned confers an economic advantage.
Det forhold, at en offentlig myndighed påtager sig omkostninger, der normalt skal afholdes af en virksomhed, giver virksomheden en fordel i forhold til dens direkte konkurrenter på de forskellige markeder, hvor den kan operere, og fordrejer dermed konkurrencen.
The object of the fourth Altmark criterion is to verify that, where the undertaking which is to discharge PSOs is not chosen following a public procurement procedure to select a tenderer capable of providing these services at the least cost to the public authority, the level of compensation needed must be determined on the basis of an assessment of the costs which a typical undertaking, well-run and adequately equipped to be able to meet the public-service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligations.
Som det blev konstateret i Altmark-dommen, er flere medlemsstater siden 1995 begyndt at åbne visse transportmarkeder for konkurrence fra virksomheder med hjemsted i andre medlemsstater.
In this connection it should be pointed out that STIF carried out a comparative analysis of costs prior to the signing of contracts with operators.
I lyset af ovenstående konkluderer Kommissionen, at den tilskudsordning, der blev indført ved tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten, kunne fordreje konkurrencen og påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
This comparative analysis is based on (i) accurate costed figures for each contract; (ii) legal instruments which guarantee that costs and equipment are comparable; (iii) a thorough knowledge of the passenger transport market in Île-de-France; and (iv) a comparison both with the ‘trade’ figures generally accepted in the sector and with contracts awarded after being put out to tender.
Det argument, der fremsættes i betragtning 228, gælder også for CT2-perioden, således at den støtte, der tildeles i form af C2-bidraget i CT2-kontrakten, ligeledes kan fordreje konkurrencen og påvirke samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne.
Nevertheless, this detailed analysis is mainly concerned with operating variables such as the commercial speed of buses or the number of hours driven per vehicle.
Konklusion vedrørende forekomsten af statsstøtte
A study of these variables is extremely useful when it comes to negotiating the operating costs and fixing the C1 contribution, but it does not make it possible to ensure that the investment costs covered by contribution C2 correspond to those of an average well-managed undertaking.
Kommissionen konkluderer, at de investeringstilskud og kompensationer for offentlig tjeneste, der blev tildelt først af regionen, derefter i medfør af tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten og til sidst i form af C2-bidraget i CT2-kontrakten, udgør statsstøtte i henhold til artikel 107, stk. 1, i TEUF.
Nor is there anything to show that the sample chosen by STIF is representative of well-managed undertakings.
På dette grundlag må det konstateres, at retsgrundlaget for ordningen var ældre end Romtraktaten, og at regionens ordning således skulle opfattes som en eksisterende støtteordning.
As selectivity is applied both at the sector level and within the sector, there is no need to demonstrate the geographical character of the selectivity as well, contrary to what RATP Dev appears to suggest in referring to the Azores ruling [30].
Subsidiært har de samme parter gjort gældende, at der, hvis Kommissionen skulle være af den opfattelse, at det ikke er tilstrækkeligt, at regionens ordning indgik i den overordnede ramme for 1949-dekretet for at blive opfattet som en eksisterende støtteordning, skal tages hensyn til den dato, hvor Regionalrådet formelt indførte ordningen.
The Commission therefore concludes that the measures implemented by the Region, and by STIF under CT1 and CT2, are selective.
Dette skulle betyde, at ordningen ikke var en støtteordning, da den blev oprettet.
It is necessary to examine whether the measures are such as to distort competition to the extent that they may have an effect on trade between the Member States.
Kommissionen kan ikke godtage disse to argumenter.
As regards the mechanism set up by the Region, the Commission, concurring with the Paris Administrative Court [31], finds that ‘undertakings operating in the scheduled passenger transport sector also operate in the occasional passenger transport sector […] hence, scheduled passenger transport undertakings which have received the above-mentioned subsidies may find themselves in competition with occasional passenger transport undertakings which have not been able to benefit from those subsidies, which are, as has been stated, reserved for undertakings operating scheduled routes’.
Med hensyn til det principale argument bemærker Kommissionen, at 1949-dekretet ikke præcist fastlagde nogen af ordningens nøgleparametre, herunder varighed, budget, beskrivelse af modtagerne, arten af det tilskudsberettigede materiel og tilskudssats.
Thus, during the first five years, the equipment concerned could be assigned, outside the normal periods of utilisation, to other uses, including uses in the occasional transport market.
Derfor kan 1949-dekretet ikke opfattes som retsgrundlaget for regionens støtteordning, således som den fremgår af beskrivelsen i nærværende afgørelse.
Furthermore, there was no provision or stipulation prohibiting subsidised undertakings which operated the scheduled passenger transport routes in Île-de-France from bidding for the award of other scheduled or occasional passenger transport contracts that were put out to tender in France or in Europe.
Med hensyn til det subsidiære argument fremgår det, at de interesserede parters ræsonnement er behæftet med flere fejl.
The national court which ruled in the administrative dispute described in recitals 27 to 32 arrived at the same finding, which led it to conclude that the subsidised undertakings were ‘likely, owing to the savings made when acquiring subsidised vehicles and equipment, to enjoy a competitive advantage over undertakings which did not receive aid’ and that, as a consequence, the mechanism in question was ‘such as to affect trade between the Member States and to distort or threaten to distort competition’ [32].
Selv om 1984-afgørelsen skulle blive godtaget som retsgrundlag for regionens ordning, minder Kommissionen om, at kriteriet om påvirkning af konkurrencen og samhandelen mellem medlemsstaterne allerede var opfyldt på denne dato, jf. ræsonnementet i betragtning 226.
The Commission endorses this conclusion and confirms that, from the point at which the regional mechanism was set up, and particularly during the whole of the period under consideration, the investment subsidies from the Region were likely to distort competition and affect trade between the Member States.
Der er således ikke nogen grund til at mene, at regionens ordning ikke var en støtteordning på tidspunktet for dens oprettelse, og det uanset hvilken dato der anses for at være ordningens oprettelsesdato mellem 1979 og 2008.
In the ensuing period, the assets for which a subsidy had been awarded by STIF under Rider No 3 to the CT1 had to be used exclusively for the purpose of carrying out the public-service activities included in the STIF transport plan for a minimum of eight years [33].
Hvis det antages, at regionens ordning blev oprettet ved en af de afgørelser, der blev truffet før 1994, kunne spørgsmålet om de omtvistede foranstaltningers forældelse til gengæld rejses, eftersom datoen for deres retsgrundlag så ville ligge mere end 10 år forud for forældelsesfristens afbrydelse i maj 2004.
The Commission notes, however, that the argument set out in recital 226 remains valid after the eighth year of service.
Kommissionen besvarer dette spørgsmål med, at selv om ordningen var blevet indført før 1994 (f.eks. ved 1984-afgørelsen), ville reglerne om forældelse vedrørende statsstøtte ikke sætte spørgsmålstegn ved konklusionen om, at den støtte, som regionen havde udbetalt siden 1994, udgjorde ny støtte.
What is more, even supposing that the buses and coaches subsidised by STIF had only been used to perform public-service tasks on the market in scheduled passenger transport by road in Île-de-France, that would not be enough to rule out any possibility that competition had been distorted and trade between Member States had been affected by the measure in question.
Forældelsen gælder udelukkende de udbetalinger, der har fundet sted forud for forældelsesdatoen, og ikke ordningen i sin helhed.
The assumption of responsibility by a public authority for costs normally borne by an undertaking gives it an advantage over its direct competitors in the various markets in which it is likely to operate, and therefore distorts competition.
Forældelsesfristen blev afbrudt ved den klage, der blev indgivet til den nationale dommer i maj 2004.
As observed in the Altmark judgment, since 1995 several Member States have started opening certain transport markets up to competition by undertakings established in other Member States.
Denne afbrydelse af forældelsesfristen for den nationale dommer gælder ligeledes for Kommissionen, eftersom den nationale dommer skal beskytte de beføjelser, der tillægges Kommissionen i henhold til artikel 108, stk. 3, i TEUF.
In the case of France, it began opening up its market prior to 1995, as early as 1993 [34].
Al den støtte, som regionen har udbetalt efter maj 1994, skal således opfattes som ny støtte i medfør af denne procedure, også selv om retsgrundlaget for tildeling af denne støtte vurderes at ligge forud for denne dato.
Any public subsidy awarded by France to a road transport undertaking after 1993 was therefore likely to affect trade between Member States.
Da spørgsmålet om eksisterende støtte og eventuel forældelse af de omtvistede foranstaltninger således er afklaret, skal der ses på spørgsmålet om støttens lovlighed.
In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that the subsidy mechanism brought in by Rider No 3 to the CT1 was likely to distort competition and affect trade between the Member States.
De investeringstilskud, som regionen og derefter STIF ydede i medfør af tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten, er ikke blevet meddelt Kommissionen.
The argument put forward in recital 228 also applies to the CT2 period, so that aid awarded through the C2 contribution in CT2 is also likely to distort competition and affect trade between the Member States.
Med hensyn til C2-bidraget i CT2-kontrakten fastsættes det i forordning (EF) nr. 1370/2007, artikel 9, at kompensationer, der ydes i overensstemmelse med forordningens bestemmelser, er fritaget for den pligt til forudgående underretning, der er fastsat i artikel 108, stk. 3, i TEUF.
The Commission concludes that the investment subsidies and public-service compensation awarded successively by the Region, then under Rider No 3 to the CT1, and finally through contribution C2 in CT2, are State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
I sin dom i sagen Dilly's Wellnesshotel [35] forklarede Domstolen, at alle betingelser i en fritagelsesforordning, herunder alle formelle betingelser, skal være overholdt, for at fritagelsen for anmeldelsespligten finder anvendelse.
Lawfulness of the aid
I den forhåndenværende sag påvises det i afsnit 6.3.2 i nærværende afgørelse, at C2-bidraget i CT2-kontrakten opfylder de væsentlige kriterier, der fremgår af forordning (EF) nr. 1370/2007.
To start with, the Commission wishes to respond to the arguments put forward by the Region and certain other interested third parties regarding the potential classification of the Region's contentious mechanism as existing State aid.
Til gengæld konstaterer Kommissionen, at STIF ikke opfyldte de forpligtelser til offentliggørelse, der fremgår af artikel 7, stk. 2, i forordning (EF) nr. 1370/2007.
The Commission would make clear that the question of existing aid arises only with respect to the scheme set up by the Region, as the date when the scheme was set up is not as clear as in the case of the later schemes implemented by STIF.
De franske myndigheder har erkendt, at for så vidt angår virksomhederne i OPTILE, er bekendtgørelserne om indgåede kontrakter ikke blevet offentliggjort på trods af forpligtelsen i forordning (EF) nr. 1370/2007.
In the case of the latter, it is clear, in particular, that the subsidy scheme brought in by Rider No 3 to the CT1 was set up in 2008 and cannot be seen as merely a continuation of the Region's scheme, despite similarities in the spirit of both of these schemes, if only because the authority which awards the subsidies in these two schemes is not the same.
For så vidt angår de kontrakter, der blev indgået med RATP og SNCF Mobilités, bemærker Kommissionen, at bekendtgørelserne om indgåede kontrakter blev offentliggjort i det officielle tidende for offentliggørelse af indgåede offentlige kontrakter (Bulletin officiel des annonces de marché public) og i EU-Tidende efter kontrakternes indgåelse og altså ikke mindst et år forud for datoen for indgåelse uden forudgående udbud, sådan som det er påkrævet.
In the case of the Region's scheme, the parties to the procedure, having highlighted its alleged character as an existing aid scheme, have claimed principally that the legal basis which established the Region's subsidy mechanism was Decree No 49-1473 of 14 November 1949 on the coordination and harmonisation of rail and road transport.
Det betyder, at bestemmelserne i artikel 7 i forordning (EF) nr. 1370/2007 ikke blev overholdt, og at den støtte, som STIF har ydet i medfør af CT2-kontrakten, ikke er omfattet af den fritagelse for forudgående underretning, der er nævnt i forordningens artikel 9.
This decree, which was repealed in September 2012, laid down that ‘a local authority may subsidise a road service by signing a contract with an undertaking laying down the obligations imposed on the latter over and above those to which it is subject under its operating rules’ (Article 19, first subparagraph).
Da Kommissionen ikke er blevet underrettet om støtten, konkluderer den, at der er tale om ulovlig støtte.
In this case, it would have to be found that the legal basis for the scheme dated from before the Treaty of Rome, which would mean that the mechanism set up by the Region would have to be regarded as an existing aid scheme.
Kommissionen minder om, at det påhviler de nationale myndigheder at drage alle de konsekvenser, som støttens ulovlighed medfører, navnlig med hensyn til inddrivelsen af renter for den periode, hvor der forelå ulovlighed, som fastsat i CELF-dommen [36].
In the alternative, the same parties argue that, if the Commission were to consider that the fact that the mechanism set up by the Region fell within the general framework laid down by the 1949 decree was not sufficient grounds for classifying it as an existing aid scheme, the date on which the mechanism concerned was officially established by the Regional Council would have to be taken into account.
Vurdering af foranstaltningernes overensstemmelse med reglerne for statsstøtte
The salient date would be the date of publication of Decision CR 84-07 of 14 February 1984 which, still according to the parties, first set up the mechanism in the form in which it operated until 2008.
Investeringstilskud ydet af regionen og derefter STIF i medfør af tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten
In this case, it would have to be found that the criterion regarding an effect on competition and trade between Member States was not met on the date when the scheme was established, since the French market in scheduled public transport by road was not open to competition.
I lyset af de mange ligheder mellem de tilskud, som STIF ydede i medfør af tillæg nr. 3 til CT1-kontrakten, og dem, som regionen ydede i den foregående periode, er ræsonnementet vedrørende foreneligheden med det indre marked det samme for de to ordninger.
The consequence of this would be that the scheme was not aid at the time it was established.
Disse investeringstilskud vedrørte hverken behovet for koordinering af befordringstjenesterne eller godtgørelsen for visse forpligtelser, der har sammenhæng med begrebet offentlig tjenesteydelse, som konkluderet i betragtning 206 og 213.
The Commission cannot accept these two arguments.
Kommissionen kan således ikke basere sig på artikel 93 i TEUF (eller på den deraf afledte ret) ved vurderingen af deres forenelighed med det indre marked.
As regards the principal argument, the Commission points out that the 1949 decree did not precisely define any of the key parameters of the scheme: duration, budget, definition of the beneficiaries, type of asset eligible for the subsidy, subsidy rates.
Til gengæld kan støtteordninger ifølge artikel 107, stk. 3, i TEUF betragtes som forenelige med det indre marked, når de har til formål at fremme udviklingen af visse erhvervsgrene eller økonomiske regioner, og de ikke ændrer samhandelsvilkårene på en måde, der strider mod den fælles interesse.
On its own, that enactment did not establish any entitlement to receive subsidies.
Dette kan bl.a. være tilfældet med investeringsstøtte, der forbedrer den måde, hvorpå den pågældende økonomiske aktivitet udøves.
Therefore, the 1949 decree cannot be regarded as the legal basis for the aid mechanism set up by the Region, as described in this Decision.
De franske myndigheder hævder, at denne bestemmelse finder anvendelse på den investeringsstøtteordning, som regionen Île-de-France havde indført.
As regards the argument in the alternative, it is clear that the case made by the interested parties is vitiated by error.
Indførelsen af en investeringsstøtteordning for udstyr, der gav mulighed for kvantitativt og kvalitativt at forbedre de udbudte tjenester for kollektiv rutebefordring ad vej, hvor ordningen hævede det niveau for forpligtelser, som modtagerne skulle opfylde ved leveringen af deres tjenester inden tildelingen af tilskud, kunne gøre udbuddet mere tiltrækkende end alternative transportformer i personbil.
Even if the 1984 decision were to be taken as the legal basis on which the Region's mechanism was established, the Commission points out that the criterion regarding an effect on competition and trade between Member States was already met by that date, for the reasons stated in recital 226.
På den måde og i betragtning af de særlige forhold i Île-de-France, der mindes om i betragtning 16 og 17, bidrog de påklagede ordninger til opfyldelsen af det mål af fælles interesse, jf. hvidbogen om et fælles europæisk transportområde fra 2011 [37], som ændringen i transportmiddelvalg fra personbiler til kollektive transportmidler udgør.
It should not, therefore, be considered that the mechanism set up by the Region did not constitute aid at the time of its establishment, whatever date is taken as that on which the scheme was established between 1979 and 2008.
Uden tilskud ville transportvirksomhederne ikke have været i stand til at gennemføre disse forbedringer.
If, however, it were to be considered that the establishment of the Region's mechanism dated back to one of the decisions prior to 1994, the question of whether the measures at issue were barred by limitation could arise, since the legal basis for them would date back to more than 10 years prior to the suspension of the limitation, which took effect in May 2004.
De linjer, der blev ydet tilskud til, kørte med underskud, og deres økonomiske ligevægt var allerede afhængig af kompensationer for offentlig tjeneste andre steder fra.
On this question, the Commission would reply that, even supposing the scheme had been set up before 1994 (for example, by the 1984 decision), the rules on limitation applying with respect to State aid would not jeopardise the conclusion that the aid paid by the Region since 1984 was new aid.
De påklagede ordninger havde altså en tilskyndelsesvirkning.
Limitation, in fact, attaches only to the payments made before the date of the limitation, and not to the scheme in its entirety.
Kommissionen konstaterer, at der var loft over tilskuddenes beregningsgrundlag og satser, så kun en del af investeringsomkostningerne blev afholdt direkte af regionen og derefter af STIF.
The limitation was suspended, however, by the appeal lodged with the national court in May 2004.
De maksimale tilskudssatser lå på 50 % for almindelige busser og 60 % for miljøvenlige busser, så støtteintensiteten var moderat.
This suspension of limitation before the national court also applies to the Commission, as the purpose of the powers of the national court is to safeguard the prerogatives granted to the Commission by Article 108(3) TFEU.
Dertil kommer, at det materiel, der blev ydet tilskud til — for størstedelens vedkommende busser — kun kunne anvendes marginalt til andre formål eller på andre linjer end dem, tilskuddene blev ydet til i første omgang.
Any aid paid by the Region after May 1994, even if the legal basis authorising the award of such aid were to be deemed to be prior to that date, must therefore be considered as being new aid in the current proceedings.
For det første var anvendelsen til andre formål end offentlig personbefordring reguleret eller endda forbudt.
Now that the questions relating to existing aid and the possibility of time-barring of the measures at issue have been clarified, the question of the lawfulness of the aid must be addressed.