natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As concerns potential aid to the airport manager, the Commission noted that prior to the Aéroports de Paris judgment, the development and operation of airport infrastructure did not qualify as economic activity within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty [34].
U odnosu na moguću potporu upravitelju zračne luke, Komisija je napomenula da se prije presude u predmetu Aéroports de Pariz, razvoj i upravljanje infrastrukturom zračne luke nisu mogli smatrati gospodarskom djelatnošću u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. Ugovora [34].
Since part of the measures under assessment was decided before 2001, the Commission noted that it would have to assess whether they stemmed from legally binding commitments taken before the Aéroports the Paris ruling was issued, namely 12 December 2000 [35] and hence fell outside the scope of State aid rules.
Budući da je odluka o dijelu mjera koje su predmet ocjene donesena prije 2001., Komisija je napomenula da će morati ocijeniti potječu li one iz pravno obvezujućih obveza preuzetih prije donošenja presude u predmetu Aéroports the Pariz, odnosno prije 12. prosinca 2000. [35] i jesu li stoga izvan područja primjene pravila o državnim potporama.
The Commission also recalled that, to the extent financing of activities which normally fell within the responsibility of the State in the exercise of public powers was limited to cover costs and was not used to finance other economic activities [36], such financing was not subject to State aid rules.
Komisija je također podsjetila da se pravila o državnim potporama ne primjenjuju na financiranje djelatnosti koje su obično u nadležnosti države koja izvršava svoje javne ovlasti i koje je ograničeno na pokrivanje troškova i ne upotrebljava se za financiranje drugih gospodarskih djelatnosti [36].
At the time of adoption of the 2012 Decision, the Commission did not have sufficient information on the nature (economic or not) of the activities carried out by So.Ge.A.AL and of infrastructure related costs financed by the measures subject to the investigation, nor whether certain costs were inherently linked to activities within the public policy remit.
U trenutku donošenja Odluke iz 2012., Komisija nije imala dovoljno informacija o prirodi (gospodarskoj ili drugoj) djelatnosti koje obavlja društvo So.Ge.A.AL i o troškovima povezanima s infrastrukturom koji se financiraju mjerama koje su predmet istrage niti jesu li određeni troškovi povezani s djelatnostima u području javne politike.
The Commission invited Italy to clarify which activities must be considered as non-economic in nature and which costs linked to such activities, if any, had been financed by the measures covered by the Commission's investigation.
Komisija je pozvala Italiju da objasni koje se djelatnosti moraju smatrati djelatnostima negospodarske prirode i koji su se troškovi povezani s takvim djelatnostima, ako ih ima, financirali mjerama koje su predmet istrage Komisije.
The Commission expressed serious doubts that the capital injections would be MEOP-compliant.
Komisija je izrazila ozbiljne sumnje da bi injekcije kapitala bile u skladu s načelom subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
It noted that So.Ge.A.AL had constantly operated at a loss since 2000 and that its financial performance seemed to worsen following the award of the ‘comprehensive’ concession.
Napomenula je da je društvo So.Ge.A.AL od 2000. stalno poslovalo s gubitkom i da se činilo da su se njegovi financijski rezultati pogoršali nakon dodjele „opće” koncesije.
This seemed to contradict Italy's claim that the poor results of the company were primarily justified by the impossibility to exploit fully airport related activities based on the partial/temporary concession.
Činilo se da je to u suprotnosti s tvrdnjom Italije da su loši rezultati trgovačkog društva u prvom redu opravdani nemogućnošću potpunog iskorištavanja djelatnosti povezanih sa zračnom lukom na temelju djelomične/privremene koncesije.
The Commission further noted that Italy had at that time only provided ex post considerations in support of its claims that the measures were guided by profitability prospects.
Komisija je dalje napomenula da je Italija u tom trenutku dostavila samo ex post razmatranja u potporu svojih tvrdi da se mjere temelje na izgledima postizanja profitabilnosti.
Such analysis in addition seemed to relate to the overall benefit derived by RAS from an increase in air traffic levels and therefore to revenues that a private investor would not take into account in the analysis of the profitability of its investment.
Također se činilo da je takva analiza povezana s općom koristi društva RAS od povećanja razine zračnog prometa i stoga s prihodima koje privatni ulagač ne bi uzeo u obzir u analizi profitabilnosti svog ulaganja.
On that basis the Commission took the preliminary view that the capital injections provided the airport manager with an advantage and constituted operating aid to the latter.
Na temelju toga Komisija je zauzela preliminarno stajalište da se injekcijama kapitala upravitelju zračne luke pružila prednost i da one čine operativnu potporu potonjem.
The Commission finally noted that, even if So.Ge.A.AL met the conditions to qualify as a firm in difficulty under the Guidelines on State aid for rescueing and restructuring firms in difficulty [37], no element had been submitted to the Commission by Italy to support the conclusion that such aid would comply with the compatibility requirements of those guidelines.
Komisija je, na kraju, napomenula da, iako društvo So.Ge.A.AL zadovoljava uvjete na temelju kojih ga se može smatrati poduzećem u teškoćama u skladu sa Smjernicama Zajednice o državnim potporama za sanaciju i restrukturiranje poduzeća u teškoćama [37], Italija Komisiji nije dostavila niti jedan element kojim bi se mogao potvrditi zaključak da bi takva potpora bila u skladu sa zahtjevima sukladnosti iz tih smjernica.
Measure 2 — Contributions for fittings and works
Mjera 2. – Doprinosi za dijelove i radove
Measure 3 — Investments in airport infrastructure and equipment
Mjera 3. – Ulaganja u infrastrukturu i opremu zračne luke
The Commission noted that between 2001 and 2010 So.Ge.A.AL paid EUR 3042887 to the State in fees for the use of the airport infrastructure, whilst the State financed infrastructure investments for EUR 46940534 and equipment for EUR 284782 during 2004 to 2010.
Komisija je primijetila da je između 2001. i 2010. društvo So.Ge.A.AL platilo 3042887 EUR državi u obliku pristojbi za uporabu infrastrukture zračne luke, dok je država financirala ulaganja u infrastrukturu u iznosu od 46940534 EUR i u opremu u vrijednosti od 284782 EUR tijekom 2004. do 2010.
The Commission further noted that the award of the comprehensive concession to So.Ge.A.AL in 2007 did not appear to have led to an increase in the level of the concession fees.
Komisija je dalje primijetila da se čini da se dodjelom opće koncesije društvu So.Ge.A.AL 2007. nije uzrokovalo povećanje razine naknada za koncesiju.
On that basis the Commission took the preliminary view that the concession fee was manifestly disproportionate to the public funding made available by the State in relation to infrastructure investments.
Na temelju toga Komisija je zauzela preliminarno stajalište da je naknada za koncesiju bila očito nerazmjerna javnom financiranju koje je država stavila na raspolaganje za infrastrukturna ulaganja.
The Commission therefore preliminarily considered that So.Ge.A.AL might have received an advantage by paying a concession fee below market price.
Komisija je stoga preliminarno smatrala da je društvo So.Ge.A.AL moglo ostvariti prednost plaćanjem naknade za koncesiju ispod tržišne cijene.
Italy was invited to provide any ex ante business plan which would demonstrate the profitability prospects of infrastructure investments carried out by public entities at Alghero airport which could support the claim that such investments were MEIP-compliant.
Od Italije se tražilo da dostavi ex ante poslovni plan u kojem bi bili prikazani izgledi za profitabilnost ulaganja u infrastrukturu koja provode javna tijela u zračnoj luci Alghero, čime bi se potvrdio zahtjeva da su ta ulaganja u skladu s MEIP-om.
PRELIMINARY VIEWS ON COMPATIBILITY OF AID TO So.Ge.A.AL
PRELIMINARNA STAJALIŠTA O SPOJIVOSTI POTPORE DODIJELJENE DRUŠTVU So.Ge.A.AL
The Commission expressed doubts as to the compatibility under Article 107(3) of the Treaty of aid to So.Ge.A.AL under the 2005 Aviation Guidelines.
Komisija je, u skladu s člankom 107. stavkom 3. Ugovora izrazila sumnje u spojivost potpore dodijeljene društvu So.Ge.A.AL na temelju Smjernica za zračni prijevoz iz 2005.
Although the measures seemed to meet an objective of general interest which was clearly defined, insufficient information was provided to the Commission to assess whether the infrastructure at Alghero airport was necessary and proportional to the objective set.
Iako se činilo da se mjerama zadovoljava cilj od općeg interesa koji je jasno definiran, Komisija nije dobila dovoljno informacija da bi mogla ocijeniti je li infrastruktura zračne luke Alghero nužna i razmjerna utvrđenom cilju.
Nor did the Commission have sufficient elements to assess the perspectives for the use of such infrastructure in the medium term.
Komisija također nije imala dovoljno elemenata da bi mogla ocijeniti izglede za srednjoročnu uporabu takve infrastrukture.
The Commission also had doubts whether the airport infrastructure was made available to air carriers on non-discriminatory terms.
Komisija je također sumnjala je li infrastruktura zračne luke stavljena na raspolaganje zračnim prijevoznicima pod nediskriminacijskim uvjetima.
Finally, given that certain infrastructure investments appeared at that stage to result from So.Ge.A.AL's contractual obligations towards Ryanair, the Commission had doubts on the necessity of any aid to finance such investments.
Naposljetku, budući da se činilo da su određena ulaganja u infrastrukturu u toj fazi rezultat ugovornih obveza društva So.Ge.A.AL prema društvu Ryanair, Komisija je sumnjala u nužnost potpore za financiranje takvih ulaganja.
POTENTIAL AID TO THE AIRLINES
POTENCIJALNA POTPORA ZRAČNIM PRIJEVOZNICIMA
The Commission took the preliminary view that the decisions concerning airlines' operating conditions at Alghero airport were likely to involve State resources and be imputable to the State.
Komisija je zauzela preliminarno stajalište da odluke koje se odnose na uvjete rada zračnih prijevoznika u zračnoj luci Alghero vjerojatno uključuju državna sredstva i mogu se pripisati državi.
The Commission noted first that AMS is a 100 %-owned subsidiary of Ryanair, set up with the specific aim of supplying marketing services via the website of Ryanair, and which does not provide other services.
Komisija prvo primijetila da je društvo AMS društvo kći koje je u stopostotnom vlasništvu društva Ryanair i koje je osnovano s posebnim ciljem pružanja usluga marketinga putem web-mjesta društva Ryanair i ne pruža druge usluge.
On that basis the Commission took the preliminary view that in order to assess the presence of a selective advantage, Ryanair and AMS had to be considered as one single entity.
Na osnovu toga Komisija je zauzela preliminarno stajalište da se društva Ryanair i AMS, u svrhe ocjenjivanja postojanja selektivne prednosti, moraju smatrati jednim tijelom.
The Commission also took the view that, when assessing whether the measures in relation to Ryanair/AMS were market conform, the behaviour of So.Ge.A.AL had to be assessed together with the behaviour of RAS and/or other public shareholders of So.Ge.A.AL during the period under investigation.
Komisija je također zauzela stajalište da, prilikom ocjenjivanja jesu li mjere koje se odnose na društvo Ryanair/AMS u skladu s tržištem, treba ocijeniti ponašanje društva So.Ge.A.AL zajedno s ponašanjem društva RAS i/ili drugih javnih dioničara društva So.Ge.A.AL u razdoblju obuhvaćenom istragom.
The Commission considered that, for the purpose of the MEOP assessment, the ASAs and the marketing agreements and their financial consequences could not be severed and must therefore be subject to a joint assessment.
Komisija je smatrala da, u svrhe ocjene načela subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu, nije bilo moguće odvojiti ASA-ove i ugovore o marketingu i njihove financijske posljedice i da ih stoga treba zajedno ocjenjivati.
The Commission recalled that regional development considerations could not be taken into consideration for the application of the MEOP.
Komisija je podsjetila da se za primjenu načela subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu ne mogu uzeti u obzir pitanja regionalnog razvoja.
It also observed that according to the information at its disposal at that stage no business plan or ex ante analysis of the agreements signed with Ryanair/AMS had been prepared as the basis for So.Ge.A.AL's decision to enter such arrangements.
Također je uočila da, prema informacijama koje je imala na raspolaganju u toj fazi, nije izrađen niti jedan poslovni plan ili ex ante analiza ugovora potpisanih s društvom Ryanair/AMS na temelju kojih bi društvo So.Ge.A.AL donijelo odluku o sklapanju takvih ugovora.
On that basis, the Commission expressed doubts that So.Ge.A.AL and RAS behaved as a market economy investor in their relationship with Ryanair/AMS.
S obzirom na to Komisija je izrazila sumnje da su društva So.Ge.A.AL i RAS postupala kao ulagači u tržišnom gospodarstvu u svom odnosu s društvom Ryanair/AMS.
Measure 5 — Agreements with air carriers other than Ryanair
Mjera 5. – Ugovori s drugim zračnim prijevoznicima pored društva Ryanair
The Commission noted that substantial discounts on airport charges were applied by So.Ge.A.AL to air carriers other than Ryanair, for instance depending on the start-up of new routes and increase in traffic levels.
Komisija je primijetila je društvo So.Ge.A.AL odobrilo znatne popuste na pristojbe zračne luke i drugim zračnim prijevoznicima, ne samo društvu Ryanair, primjerice ovisno o pokretanju novih linija i povećanju razine prometa.
The Commission invited Italy to provide any ex ante business plans, studies or documents assessing the profitability for the airport manager of each of the agreements with the airlines operating at the airport or, should such documents be unavailable, So.Ge.A.AL's latest budget forecasts prepared prior to the conclusion of those agreements.
Komisija je pozvala Italiju da dostavi ex ante poslovne planove, studije ili dokumente s ocjenom profitabilnosti svakog od ugovora sa zračnim prijevoznicima koji obavljaju usluge prijevoza u zračnoj luci za upravitelja zračne luke ili, ako takvi dokumenti nisu dostupni, najnovija predviđanja proračuna društva So.Ge.A.AL izrađena prije sklapanja tih ugovora.
On this basis, the Commission expressed doubts that So.Ge.A.AL and RAS behaved as a market economy investor in their relationship with the carriers operating at the airport.
S obzirom na to Komisija je izrazila sumnje da su društva So.Ge.A.AL i RAS postupala kao ulagači u tržišnom gospodarstvu u svom odnosu s prijevoznicima koji obavljaju usluge prijevoza u toj zračnoj luci.
COMMENTS FROM ITALY
PRIMJEDBE ITALIJE
The Commission notes that, in addition to the replies to the requests for information by the Commission, Italy has in the course of the investigation made various submissions.
Komisija napominje da je, pored odgovora na Komisijine zahtjeve za informacije, Italija tijekom istrage dostavila različite podneske.
POTENTIAL AID TO THE AIRPORT
POTENCIJALNA POTPORA ZRAČNOJ LUCI
On the repayment of losses and capital injections
i. O pokrivanju gubitaka i injekcijama kapitala
Italy recalled that airport managers are required by law to observe certain capital thresholds.
Italija je podsjetila da upravitelji zračnih luka moraju u skladu sa zakonom poštovati određene pragove kapitala.
According to Italy the capital injections under assessment in this case aimed to restore So.Ge.A.AL's capital to the required standards.
Italija tvrdi da je cilj predmetnih injekcija kapitala u ovom slučaju bio vratiti kapital društva So.Ge.A.AL na propisani standard.
On the public financing for fittings and works
O javnom financiranju za dijelove i radove
Italy explained that prior to 2003, the concession fees to be paid by airport managers having obtained the ‘comprehensive’ concession was set at 10 % of the user fees as per Italian Law No 324 of 5 May 1976 as subsequently amended, and the fee for loading and unloading goods transported by air as per Italian Law No 117 of 16 April 1974.
Italija je objasnila da su, prije 2003., naknade za koncesiju koje su trebali plaćati upravitelji zračnih luka koji su dobili „opću” koncesiju iznosile 10 % korisničkih pristojbi u skladu s talijanskim zakonom br. 324 od 5. svibnja 1976. kako je naknadno izmijenjen, a pristojbe za utovar i istovar robe prevezene zrakom u skladu s talijanskim zakonom br. 117 od 16. travnja 1974.
As of 2003 the annual concession fees were determined with reference to the airport's Work Load Units (WLU, or units of load corresponding to one passenger or one hundred kilograms of goods or mail), which were in turn determined on the basis of traffic data published yearly by the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport-ENAC.
Od 2003. godišnje naknade za koncesiju utvrđivale su se upućivanjem na jedinice tereta zračne luke (WLU, ili jedinice tereta koje odgovaraju jednom putniku ili stotini kilograma robe ili pošte) koje su se utvrđivale na temelju podataka o prometu koje svake godine objavljuje Ministarstvo infrastrukture i prometa – ENAC.
By virtue of Italian Law 296 of 27 December 2006, the annual concession fee for airport managers was increased so as to guarantee revenues of EUR 3 million in 2007, EUR 9,5 million in 2008 and EUR 10 million in 2009 respectively to the Italian Treasury.
Na temelju talijanskog zakona br. 296 od 27. prosinca 2006., godišnja naknada za koncesiju za upravitelje zračne luke povećana je kako bi se zajamčio prihod u talijansku riznicu u iznosu od 3 milijuna EUR 2007., 9,5 milijuna EUR 2008. i 10 milijuna EUR 2009.
Italy did not comment on the potential aid to the airlines operating at Alghero airport within the deadline laid down by Article 6(1) of the Procedural Regulation for Member States to submit their comments following a decision opening the formal investigation by the Commission.
Italija nije komentirala potencijalnu potporu zračnim lukama koje obavljaju usluge prijevoza u zračnoj luci Alghero u roku propisanom članku 6. stavku 1. Uredbe o pravilima unutar kojeg države članice moraju iznijeti svoje primjedbe nakon Komisijine odluke o pokretanju formalnog istražnog postupka.
The Commission notes that the comments of interested parties cover a wide range of arguments.
Komisija napominje da su primjedbama zainteresiranih stranaka obuhvaćene različite tvrdnje.
For instance, in its numerous submissions to the Commission Ryanair detailed the underlying principles and assumptions which it considers should serve as the basis for the Commission's MEOP analysis of the agreements with airlines.
Na primjer, u svojim brojnim podnescima Komisiji društvo Ryanair opisalo je temeljna načela i pretpostavke za koje smatra da bi trebale služiti kao osnova za analizu načela subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu koju obavlja Komisija u pogledu ugovora s prijevoznicima.
So.Ge.A.AL claimed that there exist numerous grounds on the basis of which the measures subject to the assessment in its favour could be declared compatible with the internal market.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL tvrdilo je da postoje brojne osnove na temelju kojih bi se mjere koje su predmet ocjene mogle proglasiti spojivima s unutarnjim tržištem.
COMMENTS FROM So.Ge.A.AL
PRIMJEDBE DRUŠTVA SO.GE.A.AL
Potential aid to the airport manager
Potencijalna potpora upravitelju zračne luke
On economic activity
i. O gospodarskoj djelatnosti
So.Ge.A.AL underlines that the public funding granted to it to cover costs incurred in the provision of services falling within the public policy remit does not constitute State aid.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL ističe da javno financiranje koje mu je odobreno za pokrivanje troškova pružanja usluga koje su u nadležnosti javne politike ne čini državnu potporu.
So.Ge.A.AL did not detail the nature or amount of such costs.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL nije detaljno opisalo prirodu i iznos takvih troškova.
So.Ge.A.AL considers that all measures under assessment in this case concerning the financing of infrastructure, equipment and ‘fittings and works’ had been legally committed before the Aéroports de Paris ruling and should therefore be excluded from State aid scrutiny.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL smatra da su sve mjere koje su predmet ocjene u ovom predmetu u pogledu financiranja infrastrukture, opreme i „postavljanja i radova” zakonski preuzete prije nego što je donesena presuda u predmetu Aéroports de Pariz i stoga bi trebale biti isključene iz analize državnih potpora.
As concerns the period after 12 December 2000, So.Ge.A.AL recalls that Italy had already submitted evidence of the non-economic character of certain activities carried out by the airport manager.
U pogledu razdoblja nakon 12. prosinca 2000., društvo So.Ge.A.AL podsjeća da je Italija već dostavila dokaze o negospodarskom karakteru određenih djelatnosti koje obavlja upravitelj zračne luke.
On that basis the Commission should attribute part of the public financing in question to costs incurred in the provision of non-economic activities.
Na osnovu toga Komisija bi trebala pripisati dio predmetnog javnog financiranja troškovima koji su nastali pružanjem negospodarskih djelatnosti.
So.Ge.A.AL further notes that the 2012 Decision is not clear as to the nature and scope of the presumed aid to the airport manager.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL dalje napominje da odluka iz 2012. nije jasna u pogledu prirode i opsega pretpostavljene potpore upravitelju zračne luke.
In particular, it would be unclear whether the intention of the Commission was to qualify the totality of the financing for infrastructure works as State aid or, in the alternative, to consider that only the difference between the market based concession fee, which So.Ge.A.AL would have had to pay to the State for the improved infrastructure and the concession fee actually paid by the airport manager would qualify as aid.
Posebno nije jasno je li namjera Komisije bila opisati ukupnost financiranja infrastrukturnih radova državnom potporom ili, s druge strane, smatrati da bi se državnom potporom mogla opisati samo razlika između tržišne naknade za koncesiju, koji bi društvo So.Ge.A.AL moralo platiti državi za unaprijeđenu infrastrukturu, i naknade za koncesiju koju je upravitelj zračne luke stvarno platio.
It argued that the first option could not be reconciled with the fact that the State retained at all material times ownership of the airport infrastructure.
Tvrdila je da se prva mogućnost ne bi mogla uskladiti s činjenicom da je država zadržala vlasništvo nad infrastrukturom zračne luke u svim ključnim trenucima.
So.Ge.A.AL cannot therefore be considered as beneficiary of investment aid.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL stoga se ne može smatrati korisnikom potpore za ulaganja.
At any rate, So.Ge.A.AL submits that it had not benefitted from any undue economic advantage even if the second option was favoured.
U svakom slučaju, društvo So.Ge.A.AL tvrdi da nije dobilo neopravdano gospodarsku prednost, čak i kada bi se prihvatila druga mogućnost.
On non-distortion of competition
O nenarušavanju tržišnog natjecanja
So.Ge.A.AL underlines that no distortion of competition can arise as a result of public financing granted to it.
Društvo So.Ge.A.AL ističe da zbog javnog financiranja koje mu je odobreno ne može doći do narušavanja tržišnog natjecanja.
Given the remote location of Alghero airport, its catchment area [39] does not overlap with that of any other airport in Italy or other Member States.
Zbog udaljenog položaja zračne luke Alghero, njezino prihvatno područje [39] ne može se preklapati s prihvatnim područjem bilo koje druge zračne luke u Italiji ili drugim državama članicama.
Neither is the airport competing with other airports on the island, given the distance between them and the absence of reliable land connections.
Zračna luka ne natječe se s drugim zračnim lukama na otoku s obzirom na udaljenost između njih i nepostojanje pouzdanih zemaljskih veza.