natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Secondly, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the business plan underpinning SEA’s decision to invest in Airport Handling relied on sufficiently robust assumptions.
Drugo, Komisija je izrazila sumnju u to je li poslovni plan na kojem se temelji odluka društva SEA o ulaganju u Airport Handling zasnovan na solidnim pretpostavkama.
The Commission therefore considered that SEA’s investment of EUR 25 million into Airport Handling does not appear to be based on economic evaluations comparable to those which, in the relevant circumstances, a rational private investor in a similar situation would have had carried out, before making such investments, in order to determine its future profitability.
Komisija je, stoga, smatrala da se čini kako se ulaganje društva SEA od 25 milijuna EUR u Airport Handling ne temelji na ekonomskim ocjenama koje se mogu usporediti s onima koje bi, u relevantnim okolnostima, razuman privatni ulagač u sličnoj situaciji izvršio prije tih ulaganja kako bi odredio buduću profitabilnost.
On that basis, the Commission took the preliminary view that the EUR 25 million capital injection amounted to State aid in favour of Airport Handling.
Na temelju toga Komisija je zauzela preliminarno stajalište da dokapitalizacija od 25 milijuna EUR čini državnu potporu u korist društva Airport Handling.
On economic continuity
Gospodarski kontinuitet
Italy recalled that according to settled case-law, the recovery of illegal and incompatible State aid aims to eliminate the distortion of competition caused by the competitive advantage conferred by the unlawful aid.
Italija je podsjetila da je prema ustaljenoj sudskoj praksi cilj povrata nezakonite i nespojive državne potpore ukloniti narušavanje tržišnog natjecanja prouzročeno konkurentskom prednosti koja je dodijeljena tom nezakonitom potporom.
Consequently, the unlawful and incompatible aid must be recovered from the undertaking that actually benefited from it.
Stoga, nezakonitu potporu koja nije spojiva s unutarnjim tržištem mora vratiti onaj poduzetnik koji je u stvarnosti od nje ostvario korist.
The recovery obligation may only be extended to companies other than the original beneficiary of the aid if the following cumulative conditions are fulfilled:
Obveza povrata može se proširiti na društva koja nisu prvotni korisnici potpore samo ako su ispunjeni sljedeći kumulativni uvjeti:
that the company was found to continue the activity of the recipient undertaking, and
to je društvo osnovano kako bi nastavilo obavljati djelatnost poduzetnika korisnika i
that the company retains the actual benefit of the competitive advantage connected with the receipt of the aid.
to društvo zadržava stvarnu korist od konkurentske prednosti povezane s korisnikom potpore.
In Italy’s view, in this case the transfer of the competitive advantage linked to the aid granted to SEAH can be excluded from the outset.
Prema mišljenju Italije u ovom se predmetu prijenos konkurentske prednosti povezane s potporom koja je dodijeljena SEAH-u odmah može isključiti.
In particular, Italy notes that the alleged advantage granted to SEAH was defined by the Commission in recitals 219 et seq. of its recovery decision as corresponding to the compensation of SEAH’s losses during the period 2002-2010.
Konkretno, Italija napominje da je Komisija u uvodnim izjavama 219. i dalje svoje odluke o povratu utvrdila da navodna prednost dodijeljena SEAH-u odgovara nadoknadi gubitaka SEAH-a zabilježenih u razdoblju 2002.–2010.
As indicated by the Commission, those losses had been generated by high personnel costs, which represent a significant share of the cost structure of a ground handling provider.
Kako je Komisija navela, ti su gubitci nastali zbog visokih troškova osoblja koji čine znatan udjel u strukturi troškova pružatelja zemaljskih usluga.
Since the capital injections classified as State aid by the Commission served primarily to cover losses resulting from excessive personnel costs of SEAH, in Italy’s view the competitive advantage which SEAH benefitted from would ipso facto be removed with its liquidation and exit from the market.
Budući da su dokapitalizacije koje Komisija smatra državnom pomoći prije svega služile za pokriće gubitaka nastalih zbog prekomjernih troškova osoblja SEAH-a, Italija smatra da bi se konkurentska prednost koju je SEAH ostvario ipso facto uklonila njegovom likvidacijom i izlaskom s tržišta.
Italy also noted that even if a part — albeit small — of the competitive advantage linked to the aid granted to SEAH could be associated with the assets of the company, i.e. the assets used by SEAH to carry out its ground handling activity at Milan airports, those assets would however not be subject to transfer from SEAH to Airport Handling.
Italija je napomenula i da čak i ako bi se dio, iako mali, konkurentske prednosti povezane s potporom dodijeljenom SEAH-u mogao povezati s imovinom tog društva, tj. imovinom koju je SEAH upotrebljavao za pružanje zemaljskih usluga u milanskim zračnim lukama, ta se imovina ipak neće prenijeti sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling.
Rather, they would be leased temporarily by the latter under market conditions pending their sale on the open market.
Naprotiv, potonji će je privremeno unajmiti po tržišnim uvjetima do njezine prodaje na otvorenom tržištu.
Italy further noted that, even if a transfer of competitive advantage from SEAH to Airport Handling effectively took place, it cannot be established in this case that Airport Handling de facto continues the economic activity of SEAH.
Italija je, nadalje, napomenula da se, čak i ako je konkurentska prednost stvarno prenesena sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling, u ovom predmetu ne može utvrditi da Airport Handling de facto nastavlja gospodarsku djelatnost SEAH-a.
First, no transfer, de facto or de jure, of work contracts would have taken place between SEAH and Airport Handling.
Prvo, nijedan ugovor o radu, de facto ili de jure, nije prenesen sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling.
According to Italy, Airport Handling had only employed, under substantially new conditions, the staff strictly necessary for the performance of the ground handling activity.
Prema mišljenju Italije u društvu Airport Handling zaposleno je, po znatno drukčijim uvjetima, samo osoblje koje je strogo nužno za pružanje zemaljskih usluga.
In addition, the new employment contracts were governed by a different regime (the Handler Section rather than the Airport operators Section of the national collective labour contract (Contratto Collettivo Nazionale di Lavoro (CCNL)) and association of employees (Assohandlers instead of Assoaeroporti).
Uz to, na nove ugovore o radu primjenjuje se drukčiji režim (odjeljak o pružateljima zemaljskih usluga umjesto odjeljka o upraviteljima zračnih luka) iz nacionalnog kolektivnog ugovora o radu (Contratto Collettivo Nazionale di Lavoro (CCNL)) i drukčije udruženje zaposlenika (Assohandlers umjesto Assoaeroporti).
On that basis, Italy pointed out that Airport Handling would achieve a reduction of personnel costs, with a significant increase in productivity.
Na temelju toga Italija je istaknula da će Airport Handling ostvariti smanjenje troškova osoblja, uz znatno povećanje produktivnosti.
Italy also added that the Commission’s assertion in the 2014 opening decision that former employees of SEAH were guaranteed the rights acquired in respect of previous contracts with SEAH would not be supported by factual evidence.
Italija je dodala i da Komisijina tvrdnja iz odluke o pokretanju postupka iz 2014. da su bivšim zaposlenicima SEAH-a zajamčena prava stečena u okviru prethodnih ugovora sa SEAH-a nije potkrijepljena činjeničnim dokazima.
According to Italy the agreement of 4 November 2013 did not provide for any guarantee to the benefit of former employees of SEAH on acquired rights, and clearly laid down the need for new employment contracts to be based on new conditions.
Prema mišljenju Italije u sporazumu od 4. studenoga 2013. nisu predviđena nikakva jamstva u korist bivših zaposlenika SEAH-a u pogledu stečenih prava te je jasno utvrđeno da se novi ugovori o radu trebaju temeljiti na novim uvjetima.
Nor would there be any transfer of the contracts between SEAH and the air carriers operating at Milan airports to Airport Handling.
Na Airport Handling neće se prenositi ni ugovori između SEAH-a i zračnih prijevoznika koji posluju u milanskim zračnim lukama.
According to Italy, upon the termination of contracts between SEAH and air carriers, Airport Handling negotiated ex novo the contracts with the air carriers operating at Milan airports.
Italija je navela da je nakon raskida ugovora između SEAH-a i zračnih prijevoznika Airport Handling iznova pregovarao o ugovorima sa zračnim prijevoznicima koji posluju u milanskim zračnim lukama.
In addition, according to Italy, SEA and Airport Handling did not engage in common marketing efforts to this end, contrary to the Commission’s allegations in the 2014 opening decision which according to Italy is supported by no factual evidence.
Uz to, prema mišljenju Italije, SEA i Airport Handling nisu pokrenuli zajedničke marketinške napore u tu svrhu, što je suprotno Komisijinim tvrdnjama iz odluke o pokretanju postupka iz 2014., koja, prema mišljenju Italije, nije potkrijepljena nikakvim činjeničnim dokazima.
This circumstance would in any event be irrelevant to the assessment of economic continuity between SEAH and Airport Handling.
U svakom slučaju ta okolnost ne bi bila relevantna za ocjenu gospodarskog kontinuiteta između SEAH-a i društva Airport Handling.
In that respect, Italy recalled that the current portfolio of clients of Airport Handling is different from that of SEAH.
U tom je pogledu Italija podsjetila da se trenutačan portfelj klijenata društva Airport Handling razlikuje od klijenata SEAH-a.
Rather, Airport Handling would have concluded certain contracts with air carriers that were not already customers of SEAH, whilst at the same time failed to retain some of the former customers of SEAH.
Naime, Airport Handling sklopio je određene ugovore sa zračnim prijevoznicima koji prethodno nisu bili klijenti SEAH-a, ali istodobno nije uspio zadržati neke od bivših klijenata SEAH-a.
Italy stated that the fact that the business plan of Airport Handling provides for a market share […] [8] Business secret.
Italija je tvrdila da se činjenica da je u poslovnom planu društva Airport Handling predviđen tržišni udjel od […] [8] Poslovna tajna.
cannot, as such, be considered proof of economic continuity.
, kao takva, ne može smatrati dokazom gospodarskog kontinuiteta.
Such market share should be assessed in the light of the objective pursued by Airport Handling of reaching viability in the medium term.
Taj bi se tržišni udjel trebao ocijeniti u odnosu na cilj društva Airport Handling, odnosno ostvarivanje održivosti u srednjoročnom razdoblju.
Italy also submitted that Airport Handling is not involved in the procedure for the sale of SEAH’s assets and, therefore, there would be no transfer of assets between the two companies.
Italija je navela i da Airport Handling nije uključen u postupak prodaje imovine SEAH-a te da, stoga, nije došlo do prijenosa imovine između tih dvaju društava.
Furthermore, in Italy’s view the mere fact that the assets of the beneficiary of the aid are leased to a third undertaking cannot constitute sufficient evidence that the latter enjoyed the competitive advantage linked to the aid.
Nadalje, Italija smatra da sama činjenica da se imovina korisnika potpore iznajmljuje trećem poduzetniku ne može biti dovoljan dokaz da je potonji ostvario konkurentsku prednost povezanu s tom potporom.
In Italy’s view, for this to constitute an indication of continuity, the lease of those assets must take place at a price below the market price.
Prema mišljenju Italije, kako bi to predstavljalo kontinuitet, ta se imovina mora iznajmiti po cijeni nižoj od tržišne cijene.
In this case, however, the lease price would have been determined by an independent company (IMQ).
Međutim, u ovom je predmetu cijenu najma odredilo neovisno društvo (IMQ).
Italy also recalled that SEA’s shareholding differs significantly from the period when the alleged aid was granted to SEAH.
Italija je podsjetila i da se vlasnička struktura društva SEA znatno razlikuje od razdoblja kad je navodna potpora dodijeljena SEAH-u.
While SEA was entirely State-owned in the period 2002-2010, a private investor, F2i, currently owns 44,31 % of its capital.
Dok je u razdoblju 2002.–2010. SEA bila u potpunosti u vlasništvu države, trenutačno privatni ulagač F2i drži 44,31 % njezina kapitala.
Furthermore, in Italy’s view the setting-up of the Trust constitutes an additional guarantee of the absence of continuity between SEAH and Airport Handling.
Nadalje, Italija smatra da je osnivanje Trusta dodatno jamstvo diskontinuiteta između SEAH-a i društva Airport Handling.
Indeed, as laid down by the Trust Deed, the activities of the Trustee should be instrumental in achieving the following objectives:
Naime, kako je utvrđeno u ugovoru o trustu, djelatnosti upravitelja trebale bi biti ključne u postizanju sljedećih ciljeva:
ensure the independent management of SEA’s participation in Airport Handling, assuming sole control over the company and thus ensuring the absence of any interest and/or information flow between Airport Handling and the SEA group, with particular reference to SEAH and handling activities previously carried out by the latter at Milan airports,
osigurati neovisno upravljanje udjelom društva SEA u društvu Airport Handling, preuzimanjem isključive kontrole nad društvom i time osiguranjem nepostojanja interesa i/ili protoka informacija između društva Airport Handling i grupe SEA, uz posebno upućivanje na SEAH i zemaljske usluge koje je potonji prethodno pružao u milanskim zračnim lukama,
As a result of the transfer of 100 % of SEA’s shareholding in Airport Handling to the Trust, the Trustee was entered in the business register as sole shareholder of the company.
Kao rezultat prijenosa 100-postotnog udjela društva SEA u društvu Airport Handling na Trust upravitelj je upisan u registar trgovačkih društava kao jedini dioničar društva.
In this capacity, the Trustee has full and substantial control over SEA’s participation in Airport Handling.
U tom svojstvu upravitelj ima punu i stvarnu kontrolu nad udjelom društva SEA u društvu Airport Handling.
As sole shareholder of Airport Handling the Trustee must, inter alia:
Kao jedini dioničar društva Airport Handling upravitelj, među ostalim, mora:
Exercise voting rights on the appointment of the managing bodies of Airport Handling independently and without any interference by SEA, and in such a way as to ensure that the members of those bodies do not have or have not had operational roles or dependence on SEA or SEAH.
prava glasa u pogledu imenovanja upravljačkih tijela društva Airport Handling ostvarivati neovisno i bez uplitanja društva SEA tako da osigura da članovi tih tijela nemaju ili da nisu imali operativne uloge u društvu SEA ili SEAH-u i da nisu ovisni o njima.
At the moment of the transfer of SEA’s participation to the Trust, all members of the managing bodies of Airport Handling appointed by SEA handed in their resignation and were replaced by those appointed by the Trustee.
U trenutku prijenosa udjela društva SEA na Trust svi članovi upravljačkih tijela društva Airport Handling koje je imenovala SEA dali su otkaz i zamijenjeni su članovima koje je imenovao upravitelj,
Monitor the economic discontinuity between SEAH and Airport Handling, requesting regular reports on the management of the company, the correct implementation of the business plan, the market share and development prospects.
pratiti gospodarski diskontinuitet između SEAH-a i društva Airport Handling, zahtijevajući redovita izvješća o upravljanju društvom, točnoj provedbi poslovnog plana, tržišnom udjelu i izgledima za razvoj,
Ensure that procedures are in place to prevent that Airport Handling unduly benefits from information held by SEA in the acquisition or maintenance of contracts with air carriers or suppliers of goods or services.
osigurati uspostavu postupaka kako bi se spriječila neopravdana korist društvu Airport Handling od informacija koje ima SEA pri stjecanju ili zadržavanju ugovora sa zračnim prijevoznicima ili dobavljačima robe ili usluga,
Verify that no sale transaction has taken place between SEAH and Airport Handling.
potvrditi nepostojanje prodajnih transakcija između SEAH-a i društva Airport Handling.
On States resources and imputability
Državna sredstva i pripisivost državi
In Italy’s view, SEA’s status as a public undertaking is not sufficient to conclude that its resources qualify as State resources within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Italija smatra da se na temelju statusa društva SEA kao javnog poduzetnika ne može zaključiti da njegova sredstva ispunjuju uvjete za državna sredstva u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
In that respect, Italy recalled that Airport Handling’s financial resources are not in the possession or under the control of SEA, as its participation in Airport Handling is being managed by an independent body, the Trust, in total independence from SEA.
Ugovora. U tom je pogledu Italija podsjetila da SEA ne posjeduje financijska sredstva društva Airport Handling niti ima kontrolu nad njima jer njezinim udjelom u društvu Airport Handling upravlja neovisno tijelo, Trust, potpuno neovisno od društva SEA.
SEA would therefore not have the possibility to exercise typical majority-shareholder powers, namely, inter alia, the power to appoint the members of the managing bodies of the subsidiary and, therefore, to participate in a decisive manner to the management of the company.
SEA stoga ne bi mogla izvršavati uobičajene ovlasti većinskog dioničara, odnosno, među ostalim, ovlast imenovanja članova upravljačkih tijela društva kćeri i, stoga, imati odlučujuću ulogu u upravljanju društvom.
According to Italy, the Commission cannot infer the imputability of the contested measures to the State by the mere fact that it is highly unlikely that those measures have been taken without any intervention by the State.
Prema mišljenju Italije Komisija ne može donijeti zaključak o pripisivosti osporavane mjere državi samo na temelju činjenice da je izrazito nevjerojatno da bi se te mjere poduzele bez uplitanja države.
According to Italy, the Commission is required to meet a high standard of proof.
Prema mišljenju Italije Komisija je obvezna zadovoljiti visok standard dokaza.
The measures at hand may be deemed imputable to the State only to the extent that the public shareholder of SEA played a key role in the adoption of the capital injection in favour of Airport Handling.
Predmetne mjere mogu se smatrati pripisivima državi samo u mjeri u kojoj je javni dioničar društva SEA imao ključnu ulogu u donošenju odluke o dokapitalizaciji u korist društva Airport Handling.
In this sense, Italy considers it is important to note that Article 15 of SEA’s by-laws provides that the deliberations relating, inter alia, to the increase in capital of subsidiaries must be taken with the favourable vote of at least six members out of seven, which requires the consent of administrators appointed by the private shareholder F2i.
U tom smislu Italija smatra da je važno napomenuti da se u članku 15. statuta društva SEA, među ostalim, navodi da za povećanje kapitala društava kćeri mora glasovati najmanje šest od sedam članova, za što je potreban pristanak upravitelja koje je imenovao privatni dioničar F2i.
Consequently, irrespective of their ownership of the majority of the shares of SEA, the public shareholder cannot validly deliberate a capital increase without recourse to consent (or rather, the decisive vote) of directors appointed by the private shareholder.
Stoga, bez obzira na vlasništvo društva SEA nad većinskim udjelom, javni dioničar ne može valjano razmatrati dokapitalizaciju bez traženja pristanka (ili odlučujućeg glasa) direktora koje je imenovao taj privatni dioničar.
Furthermore, Italy submitted that statements such as those made by the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport to reassure workers, quoted by the Commission in the opening decision, are fully in line with European and Italian practice and, therefore cannot be used as proof of the imputability to the State of the measure.
Nadalje, Italija je navela da su izjave kao što su izjave ministra za infrastrukturu i promet kojima je umirivao zaposlenike, a koje je Komisija citirala u odluci o pokretanju postupka, u potpunosti u skladu s europskom i talijanskom praksom te da se, stoga, ne mogu upotrijebiti kao dokaz pripisivosti te mjere državi.
The statements in question must be regarded as political declarations intended to mitigate adverse effects of unemployment.
Predmetne izjave moraju se smatrati političkim izjavama kojima je cilj umanjiti negativne učinke nezaposlenosti.
On this basis, Italy considers that SEA’s investment in Airport Handling is not imputable to the State and does not involve State resources and thus does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Na temelju toga Italija smatra da se ulaganje društva SEA u Airport Handling ne može pripisati državi i da ne uključuje državna sredstva te da, stoga, ne čini državnu potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
On the existence of an economic advantage
Ugovora. 4.2.2. Postojanje gospodarske prednosti
Italy recalled that the private shareholder contributes to capital injections in proportion to the share of the capital held at SEA, 44,31 %.
Italija je podsjetila da je privatni dioničar unio kapital razmjeran udjelu kapitala koji drži SEA, odnosno 44,31 %.
According to Italy, the participation of the private investor F2i has a real economic impact and is significant.
Prema mišljenju Italije udio privatnog ulagača F2i ima stvaran ekonomski učinak i značajan je.
In this respect, Italy considers it important to note that according to the Commission’s practice, private investment of around one third of the total investment was considered significant.
U tom pogledu Italija smatra da je važno napomenuti da se, u skladu s Komisijinom praksom, privatno ulaganje od oko jedne trećine ukupnog ulaganja smatralo značajnim.
In Italy’s view this is in itself sufficient to exclude the State aid qualification within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty of the capital injection.
Prema mišljenju Italije to je samo po sebi dovoljno da se isključi definiranje te dokapitalizacije kao državne potpore u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. Ugovora.
Second, Italy submits that the business plan of Airport Handling was evaluated by an independent expert who concluded that SEA’s investment is justified from a purely economic point of view and therefore complies with the market economy investor principle.
Drugo, Italija je navela da je poslovni plan društva Airport Handling ocijenio neovisni stručnjak koji je zaključio da je ulaganje društva SEA opravdano s isključivo ekonomskog stajališta i da je, stoga, u skladu s načelom ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
On this basis Italy considers that the SEA’s investment in Airport Handling was made in circumstances that would be acceptable to a private investor operating under normal market conditions and that, therefore, the measure does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Na temelju toga Italija smatra da je ulaganje društva SEA u Airport Handling izvršeno u okolnostima koje bi bile prihvatljive privatnom ulagaču koji posluje u uobičajenim tržišnim uvjetima i da, stoga, mjera ne čini državnu potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. Ugovora.
The Commission received comments from SEAH (in liquidation), the Milan Airport Handling Trust and Airport Handling, SEA and an interested party which asked for anonymity.
SEAH (u likvidaciji), Milan Airport Handling Trust i Airport Handling, SEA i zainteresirana strana koja je zatražila anonimnost dostavili su primjedbe Komisiji.
Comments from the Milan Airport Handling Trust and Airport Handling (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trust’)
Primjedbe subjekata Milan Airport Handling Trust i Airport Handling (dalje u tekstu „Trust”)
On the transfer of workforce
Prijenos radne snage