natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
on the dates of the two amendments to the marketing services agreement signed with AMS on 10 October 2005, namely Amendment No 1 of 30 January 2006 and Amendment No 2 of 17 October 2006,
na dane dviju izmjena Ugovora o marketinškim uslugama sklopljenog 10. listopada 2005. s društvom AMS, tj. izmjene br. 1 od 30. siječnja 2006. i izmjene br. 2 od 17. listopada 2006.,
on the date of signature of the airport services agreement with Ryanair and the marketing services agreement with AMS, i.e. 2 January 2007,
na dan sklapanja Ugovora o uslugama zračne luke s društvom Ryanair i Ugovora o marketinškim uslugama s društvom AMS, odnosno 2. siječnja 2007.,
on the date of signature of the airport services agreement with Ryanair and the marketing services agreement with AMS, i.e. 1 November 2007,
na dan sklapanja Ugovora o uslugama zračne luke s društvom Ryanair i Ugovora o marketinškim uslugama s društvom AMS, odnosno 1. studenoga 2007.,
on the date of signature of the amendments of 25 August 2009, which extended the agreements of 27 August 2008 to 31 December 2011,
na dan potpisivanja izmjena od 25. kolovoza 2009., kojima je provedba ugovora produljena od 27. kolovoza 2008. do 31. prosinca 2011.,
on the dates of 1 August 2007, 18 August 2010 and 30 November 2010, which were the dates of the amendments making substantial changes to the marketing service agreements signed with AMS.
na dane 1. kolovoza 2007., 18. kolovoza 2010. i 30. studenoga 2010., kada su potpisane izmjene kojima su znatno izmijenjeni ugovori o marketinškim uslugama sklopljeni s društvom AMS.
In this context, first of all the Commission particularly considered that, based on the information at its disposal, it could not rule out that Ryanair/AMS had benefited from State aid under the contractual and commercial framework with the successive airport operators.
U tom kontekstu, Komisija je najprije osobito smatrala, na temelju informacija kojima je raspolagala, da ne može isključiti mogućnost da je društvo Ryanair/AMS primilo državne potpore na temelju ugovornog i poslovnog okvira s uzastopnim upraviteljima Zračne luke.
The Commission considered that the measure in question was likely to constitute State aid, paid to AMS by the operators, which was prohibited in principle under Article 107(1) TFEU.
Komisija je smatrala da predmetna mjera, koju su upravitelji platili društvu AMS, može predstavljati državnu potporu koja podliježe načelnoj zabrani iz članka 107. stavka 1.
In addition, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the airport operators, by signing the airport services agreements and marketing services agreements, had behaved as prudent market economy operators pursuing a global or sectoral structural policy, guided by prospects of profitability in the more or less long term.
Osim toga, Komisija je izrazila svoje sumnje u činjenicu da su se upravitelji Zračne luke sklapanjem ugovora o uslugama zračne luke i ugovora o marketinškim uslugama ponijeli kao razumni subjekti u tržišnom gospodarstvu koji slijede strukturnu, globalnu ili sektorsku politiku i koji su vođeni izgledima za manje ili više dugoročnu profitabilnost.
The Commission observed that there were no market studies and/or business plans for the various agreements signed with Ryanair/AMS that economically supported the airport’s decision to make such undertakings to Ryanair/AMS.
Naime, Komisija je zamijetila da nije provedeno ni jedno ispitivanje tržišta i/ili poslovni plan u pogledu različitih ugovora sklopljenih s društvom Ryanair/AMS na kojima bi se temeljila odluka Zračne luke da se tako obveže prema društvu Ryanair/SMS.
In order to carry out this analysis, the Commission proposed to apply the single till principle to the airport’s operation, by taking into account both the aeronautical revenue (airport and ground handling charges) and the revenue from the airport’s non-aeronautical activity (shops, car parks, etc.).
Komisija je u svrhu provedbe te analize predložila primjenu načela jedne blagajne („single till”) u okviru upravljanja Zračnom lukom, uzimajući u obzir zrakoplovne prihode (naknada zračne luke i naknada za zemaljske usluge) i prihode nastale nezrakoplovnim djelatnostima Zračne luke (trgovina, parking itd.).
With regard to the CCI operating period, the Commission observed that it was difficult to establish how the discounts and rebates granted on the airport charges and the waiver of the ground handling charges had been determined in relation to the operating costs of the airport infrastructures, and therefore the costs of providing the airport services.
Kada je riječ o razdoblju upravljanja komore CCI, Komisija je primijetila da je bilo teško utvrditi u kojoj su mjeri dodijeljeni popusti i povrati na naknade zračne luke te besplatne zemaljske usluge utvrđeni u odnosu na troškove upravljanja infrastrukturom zračne luke, a stoga i na troškove pružanja usluga zračne luke.
In this context, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the CCI-Airport had acted as a prudent market economy investor in its relations with Ryanair.
U tim je okolnostima Komisija izrazila sumnje u pogledu činjenice da je odjel CCI-zračna luka u okviru svojih odnosa s društvom Ryanair djelovao kao razuman ulagač u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
As regards the VTAN operating period, the Commission noted that the implementation of the new contractual framework defined from 2007 seemed to substantially degrade the operator’s financial situation, as a result of which the Commission could not rule out that Ryanair/AMS had benefited from State aid due to the contractual and commercial framework in question.
U pogledu razdoblja upravljanja društva VTAN Komisija ističe da se činilo da je provedba novog ugovornog okvira, utvrđenog 2007., ozbiljno pogoršala financijsku situaciju upravitelja, zbog čega Komisija nije mogla isključiti mogućnost da je društvo Ryanair/AMS primilo državne potpore na temelju predmetnog ugovornog i poslovnog okvira.
Lastly, the Commission expressed doubts about the compatibility of these measures with the internal market under the 2005 Guidelines.
Naposljetku, Komisija je izrazila sumnje u pogledu spojivosti tih mjera s unutarnjim tržištem na temelju smjernica iz 2005.
COMMENTS MADE BY INTERESTED PARTIES
PRIMJEDBE ZAINTERESIRANIH OSOBA
The Commission received comments from the following interested third parties: the CCI, VTAN, the SMAN, Ryanair, AMS and Transport & Environment.
Komisija je primila primjedbe sljedećih trećih zainteresiranih osoba: CCI, VTAN, SMAN, Ryanair, AMS i Transport & Environment.
JOINT COMMENTS OF THE CCI, VTAN AND THE SMAN
5.1.1. ZAJEDNIČKE PRIMJEDBE KOMORE CCI, DRUŠTVA VTAN I SINDIKATA SMAN
The two airport operators during the period covered by the opening decision, namely the CCI and VTAN, submitted their comments jointly with the SMAN.
Komora CCI i društvo VTAN, koji su tijekom razdoblja obuhvaćenog odlukom o pokretanju postupka bili upravitelji Zračne luke, svoje su primjedbe iznijeli zajedno sa sindikatom SMAN.
The CCI, VTAN and the SMAN will hereinafter be referred to as ‘the Operators’.
Komora CCI, društvo VTAN i sindikat SMAN u nastavku se nazivaju „Upravitelji”.
The Operators stress that Veolia Transport and VTAN are two separate entities.
Upravitelji ističu da su Veolia Transport i VTAN dva različita subjekta.
The first is the company selected to operate Nîmes airport, whilst VTAN replaced Veolia Transport in the performance of the public service delegation agreement.
Prvi je poduzetnik odabran za upravljanje Zračnom lukom Nîmes, dok je društvo VTAN zamijenilo društvo Veolia Transport u pogledu provedbe ugovora o prijenosu ovlasti za obavljanje javnih usluga.
Reminder of the public service mission of operating Nîmes-Alès-Camargue-Cévennes airport
Podsjetnik o zadatku pružanja javne usluge upravljanja Zračnom lukom Nîmes-Ales-Camargue-Cévennes
The Operators note that the SMAN is a legal person governed by public law.
Upravitelji podsjećaju da je SMAN pravna osoba javnog prava.
The SMAN was assigned public service missions by the French state under the transfer of powers to the local and regional authorities.
Zadatke pružanja javne usluge sindikatu SMAN dodjeljuje francuska država u okviru prijenosa ovlasti na regionalna i lokalna tijela.
The Operators assert that, in accordance with the case-law of the French Council of State, when a syndicat mixte or joint association operates an aerodrome, there is a public service inherent in the nature of its activity.
Upravitelji tvrde da, u skladu sa sudskom praksom francuskog Državnog vijeća, kada mješoviti sindikat osigurava upravljanje zračnom lukom, njegova djelatnost ima prirodu javne usluge.
The SMAN subsequently decided to delegate the airport’s operation to the CCI and then to VTAN in accordance with French law and subject to monitoring of its legality by the Prefect of the Gard Department, without the latter identifying any illegality.
Sindikat SMAN naknadno je odlučio prenijeti ovlasti za upravljanje na komoru CCI, a zatim na društvo VTAN u skladu s francuskim pravom te nakon što je zakonitost te radnje provjerio prefekt departmana Gard i utvrdio da ne postoji nikakva nezakonitost.
Measure 1: Assessment of the financial contributions made to the airport Operators
Mjera 1.: ocjena financijskih doprinosa Upraviteljima Zračne luke
Tasks falling within the powers of a public authority and infrastructure used to perform those tasks
Zadatci koji spadaju u službene ovlasti javnog tijela i infrastruktura koja služi za izvršavanje tih zadataka
The Operators take the view that aircraft firefighting and wildlife hazard prevention services are not security services, but sovereign tasks associated with safety that are covered by the airport tax, such that these are non-economic activities falling outside the scope of the European rules on State aid.
Upravitelji smatraju da vatrogasne usluge za zrakoplove i usluge suzbijanja opasnosti od naleta životinja nisu usluge povezane sa sigurnosti nego s državnim zadatcima koji se odnose na zaštitu te su obuhvaćene pristojbom zračne luke, tako da je riječ o negospodarskim djelatnostima koje su obuhvaćene područjem primjene europskih pravila o državnim potporama.
Financing of the operation
Financiranje upravljanja
The Operators stress that, during the CCI operating period, neither the repayable advances paid by the CCI’s general arm for the benefit of the airport’s accounts nor the rebilling system for joint costs can be regarded as acts that may be assessed under the State aid rules.
Upravitelji naglašavaju da tijekom razdoblja upravljanja komore CCI ni povratne predujmove koje je opći odjel komore CCI plaćao u korist računa Zračne luke ni sustav prefakturiranja zajedničkih troškova nije moguće smatrati radnjama koje je moguće ocijeniti s obzirom na pravila o državnim potporama.
Accordingly, in their view, in the first case the CCI acted as a private investor ensuring that its business had the necessary resources and, in the case of the rebilling system for joint costs, these costs were decided based on objective criteria associated with the volume of services provided to each recipient.
Stoga se komora CCI u prvom slučaju ponijela kao privatni ulagač kako bi osigurala da njezin poduzetnik ima potrebna sredstva te u slučaju prefakturiranja zajedničkih troškova jer se o njima odlučivalo s obzirom na objektivne kriterije povezane s obujmom usluga koje se pružaju svakom odjelu.
Compatibility of the flat-rate contribution with the Altmark case-law
Spojivost paušalnog doprinosa u pogledu sudske prakse iz predmeta Altmark
Clearly defined public service obligations. The Operators refute the Commission’s view that developing the airport, particularly for commercial flights, cannot be defined as a service of general interest.
Jasno utvrđene obveze javne usluge: Upravitelji odbacuju mišljenje Komisije da se razvoj zrakoplovnog čvorišta, osobito za komercijalne letove, ne može smatrati uslugom od općeg interesa.
In fact, they consider that (i) the Member States enjoy broad discretion in defining what they regard as a service of general economic interest (SGEI); and that (ii) the ‘development of air traffic’ has a wider objective, namely regional development, which is an objective that, according to the Operators, has already been recognised by the Commission as being a general interest objective.
Naprotiv, smatraju da i. države članice raspolažu širokim diskrecijskim pravom pri određivanju onoga što smatraju uslugom od općega gospodarskog interesa i da ii. „razvoj zračnog prometa” ima širi cilj, a to je prostorno planiranje, za koji je, prema mišljenju Upravitelja, Komisija već potvrdila da je sastavni dio cilja od općeg interesa.
In addition, the Operators have submitted a study proving that the airport’s impact on the local economy is clearly greater than the flat-rate contribution, due to the airport’s importance as a focus of activity.
Osim toga, Upravitelji su iznijeli studiju kojom je dokazano da je utjecaj Zračne luke na lokalno gospodarstvo znatno veći od paušalnog doprinosa zbog važnosti Zračne luke kao poslovnog središta.
The Operators also refer to the contents of the CDSP to prove that (i) the CDSP contains numerous obligations associated with the maintenance and accessibility of the airport; and that (ii) VTAN was required to ensure the continuity of the public service under threat of penalties, by assuming obligations that a private investor, based on its own commercial interest, would not have assumed or would not have assumed to the same extent or under the same conditions.
Upravitelji upućuju i na sadržaj ugovora CDSP kako bi dokazali i. da CDSP sadržava brojne obveze povezane s pristupom Zračnoj luci i njezinim održavanjem te ii. da je društvo VTAN dužno osigurati kontinuitet pružanja javne usluge pod prijetnjom sankcija, preuzimajući obveze koje privatni ulagač, razmatrajući vlastiti poslovni interes, ne bi preuzeo ili ne bi preuzeo u istoj mjeri ni u istim uvjetima.
The Operators assert that the Commission has misinterpreted the meaning of the expression ‘development of air traffic’.
Upravitelji tvrde da Komisija ne razumije smisao izraza „razvoj zračnog prometa”.
Unlike the Commission, which has taken the view that this task involves developing the airport, the Operators have indicated that, in its broader sense, this task corresponds to regional development, which they claim to be a clearly defined general interest objective.
Suprotno mišljenju Komisije da se taj zadatak odnosi na razvoj zrakoplovnog čvorišta, Upravitelji su naveli da taj zadatak u najširem smislu podrazumijeva prostorno planiranje, koje je jasno utvrđen cilj od općeg interesa.
In addition, in their view, this task also includes development of the industrial hub.
Osim toga, tim bi zadatkom bio obuhvaćen i razvoj industrijskog središta.
The Operators also stress that, contrary to the Commission’s opinion, the compensation granted to VTAN did not depend on how the aviation activity developed.
Upravitelji ističu i da, suprotno mišljenju Komisije, naknade dodijeljene društvu VTAN ne ovise o dinamičnosti zrakoplovne djelatnosti.
In fact, the flat-rate contribution took the form of compensation fixed at EUR [1200000–1500000] per year in the reference scenario, which could only go down subject to certain conditions defined in the CDSP.
Naime, paušalni doprinos u referentnom scenariju poprima oblik naknade fiksnog iznosa od [1200 – 1500] tisuća EUR godišnje, koji se može samo smanjiti i to pod određenim propisno utvrđenim uvjetima.
Lastly, the Operators consider that the overall management of Nîmes airport, given its size and local role, should be regarded as an SGEI, given that the Commission has not proven that a private market economy operator would have been prepared to assume such obligations in the absence of public service compensation.
Naposljetku, Upravitelji smatraju da bi se upravljanje Zračnom lukom Nîmes, s obzirom na njezinu veličinu i lokalnu ulogu, trebalo u potpunosti smatrati uslugom od općega gospodarskog interesa jer Komisija nije dokazala da bi privatni subjekt u tržišnom gospodarstvu bio spreman preuzeti takve obveze bez naknade za pružanje javne usluge.
Parameters established in advance for determining the amount of compensation. The Operators maintain that the flat-rate contribution paid by the delegator to the delegatee was fixed, and was only indexed each year according to a clearly defined formula.
Prethodno utvrđeni parametri za utvrđivanje iznosa naknade: Upravitelji i dalje tvrde da je paušalni doprinos koji je delegant platio delegataru bio fiksan i da je svake godine bio samo indeksiran na temelju jasno utvrđene formule.
Furthermore, they clarify that the exceptional increases stipulated in the amendments were agreed as a result of the occurrence of events that were unforeseeable at the time when VTAN drew up its tender.
Nadalje, navode da su se pojedinačna povećanja predviđena u izmjenama ugovora provodila nakon događaja koji nisu mogli biti predviđeni u trenutku kada je društvo VTAN sastavilo svoju ponudu.
Fair compensation for costs arising from public service obligations. The Operators rely on a quantitative analysis to prove that the airport operator was not overcompensated.
Pravedna naknada troškova proizašlih iz obveza pružanja javne usluge: Upravitelji se oslanjaju na kvantitativnu analizu kako bi dokazali da upravitelji Zračne luke nisu primili prekomjernu naknadu.
As a result, given the size of Nîmes airport, all the operator’s economic costs (excluding sovereign tasks) must be taken into account to determine the existence of overcompensation.
Stoga je, s obzirom na veličinu Zračne luke Nîmes, pri utvrđivanju postojanja prekomjerne naknade potrebno uzeti u obzir sve gospodarske troškove upravitelja (osim državnih zadataka).
Lastly, the Operators stress that, if the AMS expenditure is included in the public service missions, the compensation covers only […] % of the AMS expenditure of EUR [5-7] million over the 2007-2011 period, less the public service costs in the strict sense, which does not show any overcompensation.
Naposljetku, Upravitelji ističu da, ako se razmotri pripisivanje rashoda društva AMS zadatcima pružanja javne usluge, naknada pokriva samo […] % rashoda društva AMS, koji su u razdoblju od 2007. do 2011 dosegli iznos od [5 – 7] milijuna EUR, umanjen za troškove pružanja javne usluge stricto sensu, zbog čega nema prekomjerne naknade.
Selection of the service provider. The Operators rely on an independent economic study to prove that the negotiated procedure allowed the most efficient operator to be selected (i) by improving the efficiency of the agreement; and (ii) by allowing the Operators to submit more aggressive tenders.
Odabir pružatelja usluge: Upravitelji se oslanjaju na neovisnu gospodarsku studiju kako bi opravdali da je pregovaračkim postupkom odabran najučinkovitiji upravitelj uz i. unapređenje učinkovitosti ugovora te ii. omogućavanje Upraviteljima da sastave agresivnije ponude.
The procedure followed with Veolia met the final Altmark criterion, given that the predicted costs used to calculate the financial contribution reflected the costs of a well-run airport of the same size as Nîmes.
Postupak koji je proveden s društvom Veolia ispunjava posljednji uvjet iz presude Altmark jer predviđeni troškovi koji su poslužili pri izračunu financijskog doprinosa odražavaju troškove dobro vođene zračne luke koja je iste veličine kao Zračna luka Nîmes.
Clarifications on the AMS expenditure
Pojašnjenja o troškovima društva AMS
VTAN stresses that Ryanair and AMS are two separate entities and that their contractual relations must therefore be treated separately.
Društvo VTAN naglašava da su društva Ryanair i AMS dva različita subjekta te da zato njihove ugovorne odnose treba zasebno promatrati.
In addition, the Operators maintain that all the services contracted to AMS fell within the public service missions assigned to VTAN.
Osim toga, Upravitelji tvrde da su sve usluge odobrene društvu AMS obuhvaćene okvirom zadataka pružanja javne usluge koji su dodijeljeni društvu VTAN.
As a reminder, the main objective of these public service missions was the economic and tourism development of the Nîmes region.
Potrebno je podsjetiti da je prvi cilj tih zadataka pružanja javne usluge gospodarski i turistički razvoj regije Nîmesa.
Financing of the infrastructure
Financiranje infrastruktura
The Operators confirm that the only work directly carried out by the CCI during its operation of Nîmes airport involved the expansion and adaptation of the passenger terminal, with this work being financed from the CCI’s own resources or through loans taken out in its name.
Upravitelji potvrđuju da su se jedini radovi koje je tijekom upravljanja Zračnom lukom Nîmes izravno izvršila komora CCI odnosili na povećanje i prilagodbu putničkog terminala, a ti su radovi financirani vlastitim sredstvima komore CCI ili zajmovima koji su ugovoreni u njezino ime.
Given that the vast majority of this work took place during the 1990s, the applicable legislation is the 1994 Aviation Guidelines, meaning that the financing of this work escapes the monitoring of State aid carried out by the Commission.
Budući da je velika većina tih radova izvršena tijekom 1990-ih, u zakonodavnom smislu primjenjivale bi se smjernice iz 1994., zbog čega financiranje tih radova ne bi bilo obuhvaćeno Komisijinom kontrolom državnih potpora.
The Operators also note that, except for the passenger terminal, the investments were made in the airbase, as the commercial activity was secondary.
Upravitelji podsjećaju i da su se provedena ulaganja, osim u putnički terminal, uglavnom odnosila na mornaričku zrakoplovnu bazu jer je komercijalna djelatnost bila podredna.
During the VTAN operating period, the main investments, which were mainly military in nature, involved bringing the runway into compliance.
Tijekom razdoblja upravljanja društva VTAN glavna su ulaganja, većinom vojne prirode, bila namijenjena usklađivanju uzletno-sletne staze s propisima.
These investments were made to meet the basic needs of the airbase.
Ta su ulaganja provedena kako bi se zadovoljile osnovne potrebe mornaričke zrakoplovne baze.
In addition, other investments were made between 2010 and 2011 to bring the terminal into compliance following an unfavourable opinion from the Safety Commission, which could not have been anticipated when the delegation was granted.
Osim toga, druga su ulaganja provedena od 2010. do 2011. radi usklađenja terminala zbog nepovoljnog mišljenja Povjerenstva za sigurnost (Commission de Sécurité), koje nije moglo biti predviđeno u trenutku sklapanja ugovora CDSP.
As regards the financing of certain investments by the SMAN, the Operators assert that this was the only possible solution given the short term of the CDSP, which was much shorter than the ‘investment depreciation period’.
U pogledu određenih ulaganja u nadležnosti sindikata SMAN Upravitelji tvrde da je to bilo jedino moguće rješenje s obzirom na kratak rok ugovora CDSP, koji je znatno kraći od „razdoblja amortizacije ulaganja”.
In addition, they assert that, if these investments had been taken into account at the time of the invitation to tender, the interested parties would have requested higher compensation.
Osim toga, tvrde da bi preuzimanje ulaganja u trenutku objave javnog natječaja dovelo do zahtjeva zainteresiranih strana za veću naknadu.
To conclude, they assert that the infrastructure being placed at the operator’s disposal without charge did not confer any advantage on VTAN because, in the absence of the SMAN’s support for certain investments, the associated costs would have been directly included in the amount of the flat-rate contribution.
Konačno, Upravitelji tvrde da besplatnim stavljanjem infrastrukture na raspolaganje društvu VTAN nije dodijeljena prednost jer bi, bez potpore sindikata SMAN provedbi određenih ulaganja, troškovi povezani s tim ulaganjima bili izravno uključeni u iznos paušalne naknade.