natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As a result, according to France, out of the EUR [5-9] million paid by the public authorities between 2000 and 2010, EUR [0,8-2] million should be excluded from the Commission analysis, given that this financing was granted in line with the 1994 Guidelines and before the 2005 Guidelines were adopted.
Stoga je, prema mišljenju Francuske, iz analize Komisije trebalo isključiti [0,8 – 2] milijuna EUR od [5 – 9] milijuna EUR koje su javne vlasti platile od 2000. do 2010. jer su ta financiranja dodijeljena prije donošenja smjernica iz 2005. te u skladu sa smjernicama iz 1994.
With regard to the investments made during the CCI operating period, France makes clear that the entire airport, except for the passenger terminal, was used for the airbase’s military activities, with the commercial activity being secondary.
U pogledu ulaganja ostvarenih tijekom razdoblja upravljanja komore CCI Francuska navodi da je cijelo zrakoplovno čvorište, osim putničkog terminala, bilo namijenjeno vojnim djelatnostima baze, dok su komercijalne djelatnosti bile podredne.
France states that, until 2004, the costs associated with the infrastructure and common services were partly rebilled to the CCI by the Ministry of Defence according to the percentage of commercial traffic within the airport’s total traffic.
Francuska navodi da je Ministarstvo obrane troškove povezane s infrastrukturom i zajedničkim uslugama do 2004. djelomično prefakturiralo komori CCI, ovisno o postotku komercijalnog prometa u ukupnom prometu Zračne luke.
The airbase subsequently rebilled in detail to the CCI the part of the costs attributable to the civilian operation of the airport.
Zatim je mornarička zrakoplovna baza po stavkama prefakturirala komori CCI dio troškova pripisivih civilnom upravljanju Zračnom lukom.
France also makes clear that the only work directly carried out by the CCI involved the expansion and adaptation of the passenger terminal and that this work was financed from the CCI’s own resources or through loans taken out in its name.
Francuska osim toga navodi da su se jedini radovi koje je izravno izvršila komora CCI odnosili na povećanje i prilagodbu putničkog terminala te da su oni financirani vlastitim sredstvima komore CCI ili zajmovima koji su ugovoreni u njezino ime.
With regard to the investments made under the CDSP signed with VTAN, France notes that the CDSP provided for only part of these investments to be covered by the operator.
U pogledu ulaganja provedenih u okviru ugovora CDSP, sklopljenog s društvom VTAN, Francuska podsjeća da je ugovorom CDSP bilo predviđeno da upravitelj snosi samo dio ulaganja.
Likewise, France notes that the short term of the delegation (six years) prevented an alternative solution and that no advantage was conferred on VTAN by the SMAN assuming responsibility for the investments.
Usto, Francuska podsjeća da zbog kratkog trajanja prenesenih ovlasti (šest godina) nije bilo moguće alternativno rješenje te da ulaganja koja je platio sindikat SMAN nisu dodijelila prednost društvu VTAN.
Finally, France explains that the equipment subsidy granted following closure of the airbase was intended to cover investments in sovereign activities and certification work on the airport that was not anticipated at the time when the CDSP was signed.
Konačno, Francuska navodi da je cilj subvencije za opremu dodijeljene nakon zatvaranja mornaričke zrakoplovne baze bio pokrivanje ulaganja u državne djelatnosti te radova homologacije koji nisu mogli biti predviđeni u trenutku sklapanja ugovora CDSP.
Clarifications on the infrastructure used to exercise the powers of a public authority
Pojašnjenja o infrastrukturi koja služi za izvršavanje javnih ovlasti
France considers that aircraft firefighting and wildlife hazard prevention services are tasks falling within the powers of a public authority that are essential for airport safety.
Francuska smatra da su vatrogasne usluge za zrakoplove i usluge suzbijanja opasnosti od naleta životinja zadatci izvršavanja javne ovlasti koji su ključni za sigurnost zračnih luka.
France confirms that these services are funded by a parafiscal charge: the airport tax.
Potvrđuje da se te usluge financiraju parafiskalnom pristojbom: pristojbom zračne luke.
France also stresses that the methods of financing sovereign tasks at Nîmes airport are not unique, but are similar to those used at other French airports.
Francuska ističe i da načini financiranja državnih zadataka Zračne luke Nîmes nisu jedinstveni, nego su slični onima drugih francuskih zračnih luka.
The only difference at Nîmes airport is that, when the airbase was operational, the tasks carried out by the Ministry of Defence were partly rebilled to the civilian operator, with the associated investment and operating costs then being financed by the airport tax.
Njihova je jedina osobitost u tome što su, dok je mornarička zrakoplovna baza djelovala, troškovi ulaganja i operativni troškovi zadataka koje je provodilo Ministarstvo obrane djelomično prefakturirani civilnom upravitelju te su se financirali pristojbom zračne luke.
After the airbase closed, VTAN took over all the airport safety and security tasks, which led to a significant increase in the expenditure covered by the airport tax.
Nakon zatvaranja mornaričke zrakoplovne baze društvo VTAN preuzelo je sve zadatke sigurnosti i zaštite zračne luke, što je dovelo do znatnog povećanja troškova koji se pokrivaju pristojbom zračne luke.
France alleges that these transferred activities are in all cases safety/security tasks that do not, as a result, constitute economic activities and that therefore escape the application of the State aid rules.
Francuska navodi da su te prenesene djelatnosti u svakom slučaju obuhvaćene zadatcima sigurnosti/zaštite, koje stoga ne predstavljaju gospodarske djelatnosti i zato se na njih ne primjenjuju pravila o državnim potporama.
France also notes that the model for financing French airports through the airport tax and the establishment of the passenger rate of the airport tax are governed in detail by its national legislation.
Francuska podsjeća i na to da su model financiranja francuskih zračnih luka pristojbom zračne luke i utvrđivanje putničke cijene pristojbe zračne luke detaljno uređeni nacionalnim zakonodavstvom.
This model takes account of the overlap between normal operating constraints and those constraints specific to safety or security.
Tim je modelom financiranja uzeta u obzir isprepletenost uobičajenih zahtjeva upravljanja i zahtjeva koji su posebno povezani sa sigurnosti i zaštitom.
As a result, France states that the financing of airport sovereign tasks is strictly regulated, which, in its view, prevents any overcompensation.
Prema tome, Francuska navodi da je financiranje državnih zadataka zračne luke strogo propisano, čime je spriječena svaka prekomjerna naknada.
As regards the investments in common infrastructure made between 2000 and 2011 by the Ministry of Defence and co-financed by the state and those local and regional authorities involved in managing the civilian area, France explains that the financing of the sovereign tasks of the airport’s civilian and military areas was split in proportion to the number of flights.
Kada je riječ o ulaganjima povezanima sa zajedničkom infrastrukturom, koja je od 2000. do 2011. provelo Ministarstvo obrane i koja su sufinancirali država te regionalna i lokalna tijela zainteresirana za upravljanje civilnom zonom, Francuska objašnjava da je financiranje državnih zadataka civilne i vojne zone Zračne luke bilo raspodijeljeno razmjerno broju letova.
France also indicates that the largest investments were made in the runway, and were therefore essential military investments.
Francuska navodi i da su se najveća ulaganja odnosila na uzletno-sletnu stazu te su uglavnom bila vojne prirode.
As regards the costs of the aircraft rescue and firefighting service (service de sauvetage et de lutte contre l’incendie des aéronefs sur les aérodromes — ‘SSLIA’) and of creating an automatic parameter transmission system (système de transmission automatique des paramètres — ‘STAP’), France indicates that these investments were not made in response to requests by Ryanair.
Kada je riječ o troškovima povezanima sa spasilačkom i vatrogasnom službom za zrakoplove u zračnim lukama („SSLIA”) te o uvođenju sustava za automatski prijenos parametara („STAP”), Francuska navodi da ta ulaganja nisu bila provedena na zahtjev društva Ryanair.
The first service was essential to attract any airline (and not just Ryanair) to the airport, whereas the second service was necessary to transform the airport into a commercial base and integrate Nîmes within the Montpellier TMA (Terminal Manoeuvring Area).
Naime, prvi trošak bio je neophodan za privlačenje svih zračnih prijevoznika u čvorište (a ne samo društva Ryanair), dok je drugi trošak bio potreban da bi se čvorište prilagodilo za komercijalnu zrakoplovnu bazu i da bi se Zračna luka Nîmes integrirala u područje TAM (Terminal Manoeuvring Area) grada Montpelliera.
Clarifications on the financing of the infrastructure and operation (excluding sovereign tasks)
Pojašnjenja o financiranju infrastrukture i upravljanja (osim državnih zadataka)
Examination of the private investor criterion
Ispitivanje kriterija privatnog ulagača
France stresses that the private investor criterion must be analysed based solely on the variable costs generated by the airport’s commercial activity, given that all the airport’s fixed costs are, in its view, included as part of the performance of the general interest tasks assigned to the airport.
Francuska ističe da je analizu kriterija privatnog ulagača potrebno provesti samo na temelju varijabilnih troškova nastalih komercijalnom djelatnošću Zračne luke jer su svi fiksni troškovi Zračne luke uključeni u provedbu zadataka od općeg interesa koji su mu povjereni.
Examination with regard to the Altmark criteria for the VTAN operating period
Ispitivanje uvjeta iz presude Altmark u pogledu razdoblja upravljanja društva VTAN
France asserts that the sums paid by the SMAN to VTAN under the CDSP did not confer any advantage on VTAN because the flat-rate contribution payments were, in its view, solely intended to compensate for clearly defined public service obligations.
Francuska tvrdi da iznosima koje je na temelju ugovora CDSP sindikat SMAN platio društvu VTAN potonjem nije dodijeljena nikakva prednost jer su naknade plaćene kao paušalni doprinos namijenjene jedino plaćanju jasno utvrđenih obveza javne usluge.
Clearly defined public service obligations. France underlines the broad discretion that it enjoys in defining the activities that constitute an SGEI.
Jasno utvrđene obveze javne usluge: Francuska ističe veliki manevarski prostor kojim raspolaže pri utvrđivanju koje su djelatnosti usluge od općega gospodarskog interesa.
France asserts in this respect that, given that Nîmes airport is a Category D airport, the entire airport constitutes an SGEI in accordance with the 2005 Guidelines.
Francuska u tom pogledu tvrdi da su, s obzirom na to da Zračna luka Nîmes pripada kategoriji D, sve njezine djelatnosti usluge od općega gospodarskog interesa u skladu sa smjernicama iz 2005.
France underlines that the activities imposed on VTAN could have been included under the ‘special task’ heading as no economic operator would have been able to accept the concession under the proposed conditions.
Francuska ističe da djelatnosti koje se zahtijevaju od društva VTAN mogu biti obuhvaćene rubrikom „posebni zadatci” jer ni jedan gospodarski subjekt ne bi bio u mogućnosti prihvatiti koncesiju u ponuđenim uvjetima.
France also states that VTAN was not entrusted with developing the airport, but rather with the economic and tourism development of the region, and particularly with the development of the industrial hub situated nearby.
Francuska navodi i da društvo VTAN nije dobilo zadatak da vodi računa o razvoju zrakoplovnog čvorišta, nego o gospodarskom i turističkom razvoju regije te osobito o razvoju industrijskog središta u blizini Zračne luke.
Finally, France notes that the compensation paid to VTAN was not linked to the development of commercial routes, as indicated by the Commission.
Naposljetku, Francuska napominje da naknade koje je primio VTAN nisu bile povezane s razvojem komercijalnih linija, kao što navodi Komisija.
It was simply a flat-rate contribution of a fixed amount that depended on the economic situation referred to in the ‘reference scenario’ or in the ‘downturn scenario’.
Riječ je samo o paušalnoj naknadi fiksnog iznosa ovisno o gospodarskoj situaciji predviđenoj u „referentnom scenariju” ili u „rezervnom scenariju”.
As a result, France considers that a private operator acting in a market economy would not have been prepared to assume the tasks assigned to VTAN, under the same conditions, in the absence of compensation for the public service provided.
Prema tome, Francuska smatra da privatni subjekt koji djeluje u tržišnom gospodarstvu ne bi bio spreman bez naknade za pruženu javnu uslugu pod istim uvjetima preuzeti zadatke dodijeljene društvu VTAN.
Parameters established in advance for determining the amount of compensation. According to France, the rules governing the amount of compensation are clearly defined in the CDSP.
Prethodno utvrđeni parametri u svrhu utvrđivanja iznosa naknade: prema mišljenju Francuske, pravila kojima je određen iznos naknade jasno su utvrđena u ugovoru CDSP.
France justifies the payment of additional amounts to the airport operator by the fact that a number of unexpected events, which could not have been envisaged at the time when the tender was submitted, occurred during the period of the delegation, in particular the dismantling of the airbase.
Francuska opravdava činjenicu da upravitelj zračne luke prima dodatne iznose time što je do određenog broja nepredviđenih događaja, koje nije bilo moguće planirati u trenutku podnošenja ponude za prijenos ovlasti, došlo tijekom razdoblja prijenosa ovlasti, osobito zatvaranje vojne baze.
Fair compensation for costs arising from public service obligations. France asserts that VTAN’s accounts do not prove that the operator was overcompensated.
Pravedna naknada troškova nastalih obvezama javne usluge: Francuska tvrdi da računi društva VTAN ne ukazuju na postojanje prekomjerne naknade u korist upravitelja.
The analysis conducted by France shows that, due to the small size of Nîmes airport, all the economic costs incurred by the operator (except for the activities covered by the airport tax, i.e. the costs of the sovereign tasks) should be taken into account when assessing the existence of overcompensation.
Analitička studija koju je provela Francuska pokazuje da je zbog male veličine Zračne luke Nîmes pri ocjeni postojanja prekomjerne naknade trebalo uzeti u obzir sve gospodarske troškove upravitelja (osim djelatnosti pokrivenih pristojbom zračne luke, odnosno troškova državnih zadataka).
As a result, France indicates that all the costs associated with the airport’s operation (including the costs generated by Ryanair/AMS) must be regarded as falling within a public service activity.
Stoga Francuska navodi da je potrebno smatrati da su svi troškovi povezani s upravljanjem zračne luke (uključujući troškove društva Ryanair/AMS) nastali djelatnošću javne usluge.
On that basis, France concludes that there was no overcompensation.
Francuska iz toga zaključuje da ne postoji nikakva prekomjerna naknada.
Selection of the service provider. France also stresses that the operator was selected in accordance with the principle of legality, given that an invitation to tender notice was published in the French Official Gazette of Public Procurement Notices (Bulletin Officiel des Annonces des Marchés Publics — BOAMP) and in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Odabir pružatelja usluge: Francuska ističe i da je upravitelj odabran u skladu s načelom zakonitosti s obzirom na to da je javni natječaj objavljen u listu Bulletin officiel des annonces des marchés publics (Službenom oglasniku javne nabave) i u Službenom listu Europske unije.
Veolia’s tender was finally chosen because it was regarded as the most advantageous after its economic, service and financial aspects had been analysed.
Na kraju je odabrana ponuda društva Veolia jer se nakon analize njezinih gospodarskih, uslužnih i financijskih aspekata smatrala najpovoljnijom.
Examination of the effect on competition criterion
Ispitivanje kriterija utjecaja na tržišno natjecanje
France considers that Nîmes airport has a specific catchment area that differs from those of Montpellier, Avignon and Marseille airports. As a result, public financing granted to the Nîmes airport operator is unlikely to affect competition.
Francuska smatra da Zračna luka Nîmes ima vlastito prihvatno područje koje se razlikuje od onog Zračnih luka Montpellier, Avignon i Marseille te da stoga javna financiranja u korist upravitelja Zračne luke Nîmes ne mogu utjecati na tržišno natjecanje.
In that regard, France underlines that the catchment area of regional airports is limited to those airports that can be reached by car within a maximum of 60 minutes.
U tom pogledu Francuska ističe da je, s obzirom na to da je riječ o prihvatnom području regionalnih zračnih luka, ono ograničeno na zračne luke do kojih je moguće doći automobilom za najviše 60 minuta.
France also believes that the journey time between two airports is not the only variable to be considered when determining the catchment area, because account must also be taken of the cost of the journey, which is a very important variable for the low-cost traffic predominating at Nîmes airport (see the table prepared by France in this recital).
Francuska smatra i da vrijeme putovanja između dviju zračnih luka nije jedina varijabla koju je potrebno uzeti u obzir pri utvrđivanju prihvatnog područja jer je u obzir potrebno uzeti i trošak putovanja, koji je vrlo važna varijabla za niskotarifni promet, koji prevladava u Zračnoj luci Nîmes (vidjeti tablicu u ovoj uvodnoj izjavi, koju je izradila Francuska).
Distance (in kilometres)
Udaljenost (u km)
Journey time by car
Vrijeme vožnje automobilom
Cost of return journey
Cijena povratnog putovanja
EUR 19
19 EUR
EUR 38
38 EUR
EUR 36
36 EUR
As regards Marseille airport, France considers that the cost of a return journey to the airport and the journey time (in excess of 60 minutes) are sufficient reasons for Marseille airport to be excluded from the catchment area of Nîmes airport or, at the very least, for the overlap between the activities of these two airports to be very limited, particularly with regard to the low-cost offer at Nîmes.
U pogledu Zračne luke Marseille Francuska smatra da su cijena povratnog putovanja do Zračne luke i njegovo trajanje (više od 60 minuta) dovoljni razlozi da se Zračna luka Marseille isključi iz prihvatnog područja Zračne luke Nîmes ili barem da djelatnosti tih dviju Zračnih luka budu znatno smanjene, osobito u pogledu niskotarifne ponude Zračne luke Nîmes.
Furthermore, France asserts that Nîmes airport is a Category D airport according to the 2005 Guidelines and that, in accordance with the Commission’s decision-making practice, it cannot be regarded as a competitor to Marseille airport, given that the latter sees annual traffic of over 7 million passengers.
Nadalje, Francuska tvrdi da Zračna luka Nîmes pripada kategoriji D u smislu smjernica iz 2005. i da se, u skladu s praksom Komisije u donošenju odluka, ne može smatrati konkurentom Zračne luke Marseille jer potonja bilježi godišnji promet veći od 7 milijuna putnika.
Finally, France stresses that the type of traffic at Marseille airport (high proportion of business passengers) is completely different from Nîmes airport (tourist and seasonal traffic focused on the appeal of Nîmes and the Gard department) and that the Brussels-Charleroi destination is served by both airports, which, in its view, shows that these are not substitutes as far as users are concerned.
Naposljetku, Francuska ističe da tipologija prometa Zračne luke Marseille (velik udio poslovnih putnika) uopće nije jednaka onoj Zračne luke Nîmes (turistički i sezonski promet koji se temelji na atraktivnosti grada Nîmesa i departmana Gard) te da obje zračne luke nude letove prema Zračnoj luci Bruxelles-Charleroi, što dokazuje da ih korisnici ne smatraju zamjenjivima.
As regards Avignon airport, France asserts that the return cost of EUR 40 is regarded as a negative factor by low-cost passengers.
U pogledu Zračne luke Avignon Francuska tvrdi da putnik na niskotarifnim letovima smatra cijenu povratnog putovanja automobilom od 40 EUR negativnim čimbenikom.
In addition, there is no overlap between the activities of Avignon airport and those of Nîmes airport because the destinations served from Avignon are different.
Osim toga, između djelatnosti zračnih luka Avignon i Nîmes ne postoje nikakva preklapanja s obzirom na to da se iz tih zračnih luka ne leti prema istim odredištima.
France maintains that this argument is supported by a 2011 passenger survey, which allegedly highlighted the low ranking of Avignon airport among the other airports in the region (2,55 % of passengers from other airports in the region).
Taj je argument potkrijepljen anketom među putnicima iz 2011., u kojoj je istaknuta mala važnost Zračne luke Avignon u odnosu na druge zračne luke u toj regiji (2,55 % putnika drugih zračnih luka u regiji).
As regards Montpellier airport, France considers that the two airports are not in the same catchment area given that (i) the Ryanair routes from Montpellier airport meet a tourist demand that is situated more to the west than to the east of the airport; and (ii) that Nîmes airport covers a different catchment area from part of Montpellier airport’s catchment area (in particular the Cévennes, Uzège and the northeast of Gard/south of the Ardèche in the Rhône valley).
U pogledu Zračne luke Montpellier Francuska smatra da se te dvije zračne luke ne nalaze na istom prihvatnom području s obzirom na to i. da linije društva Ryanair s polaskom iz Zračne luke Montpellier odgovaraju na turističku potražnju zapadnije, a ne istočnije od Zračne luke te ii. da Zračna luka Nîmes pokriva prihvatno područje koje se dijelom razlikuje od onog Zračne luke Montpellier (osobito Cévennes, Uzège i sjeveroistok departmana Gard/jug departmana Ardèche u dolini rijeke Rhône).
Furthermore, France takes the view that the lack of overlap between the activities is confirmed by two facts, namely (i) the Brussels-Charleroi route operated from both airports allegedly shows that these are not substitutes as far as their users are concerned; and (ii) the traffic at Montpellier airport is clearly higher than that at Nîmes airport.
Nadalje, Francuska smatra da je izostanak utjecaja djelatnosti potvrđen dvjema činjenicama: i. linija prema Zračnoj luci Bruxelles-Charleroi s polaskom iz obiju zračnih luka dokazuje da ih korisnici ne smatraju zamjenjivima te ii. promet Zračne luke Montpellier znatno je veći od prometa Zračne luke Nîmes.
In conclusion, France asserts that Nîmes airport is a Category D airport according to the 2005 Guidelines and that it has a specific catchment area that differs from those of Montpellier, Avignon and Marseille airports. As a result, public financing granted to the Nîmes airport operator is unlikely to affect competition.
Zaključno, Francuska tvrdi da Zračna luka Nîmes pripada kategoriji D u smislu smjernica iz 2005. i da ima vlastito prihvatno područje koje se razlikuje od onog zračnih luka Marseille, Montpellier i Avignon te da stoga javna financiranja u korist upravitelja Zračne luke Nîmes ne mogu utjecati na tržišno natjecanje.
In any event, France indicates that the measures were compatible with the internal market as all the financing was granted for infrastructure that was entirely used to provide a service of general economic interest, given the following:
Francuska navodi da su mjere, u svakom slučaju, spojive s unutarnjim tržištem jer se financiranja uglavnom odnose na infrastrukturu koja je u potpunosti namijenjena izvršavanju usluge od općega gospodarskog interesa s obzirom na sljedeće: