natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Timing of the transaction
Nadalje, na temelju dostupnih informacija o natječajnom postupku koji je privatna banka organizirala neovisno od društva SEA i upravitelja potvrđuje se da je D’Nata stekao udjel u društvu Airport Handling po tržišnoj cijeni.
The liquidation of SEAH on 1 July 2014 and the establishment of Airport Handling on 9 September 2013 took place after the Commission, on 12 December 2012, had adopted the recovery decision.
Konačno, na temelju dostupnih informacija potvrđuje se da D’Nata nije istovjetan društvu SEA niti je na drugi način povezan s njim.
The company in liquidation ensured ground handling operations until Airport Handling started operations on 1 September 2014.
Neovisno o tome, prijenos kontrole nad društvom Airport Handling s društva SEA i upravitelja na društvo D’Nata izvršen je više od dvije godine nakon što je SEA osnovala Airport Handling i više od jedne godine nakon što je to društvo počelo poslovati.
The timing of events thus could prima facie be an indication that the process which culminated in the creation of Airport Handling had the effect of circumventing the recovery decision, which had been adopted before that process was carried out.
Stoga Komisija ne može samo na temelju kriterija u pogledu identiteta dioničara zaključiti da ne postoji gospodarski kontinuitet.
The Commission however recalls that case-law does not require the Commission to examine, in particular and over and above the other criteria, the time at which the transfer of assets took place, which is one of the factors which ‘may’ be taken into consideration in order to set aside the economic continuity between those two entities.
Neovisno o tome, Komisija je ocijenila taj kriterij zajedno s drugim relevantnim kriterijima kako bi zaključila može li se utvrditi nepostojanje gospodarskog kontinuiteta.
Economic logic of the transaction
Trenutak izvršenja transakcije
Available information confirms that Airport Handling in essence continues the same type of business activities of SEAH, namely offering airport handling services at Linate and Malpensa airports.
Likvidacija SEAH-a 1. srpnja 2014. i osnivanje društva Airport Handling 9. rujna 2013. provedeni su nakon što je Komisija 12. prosinca 2012. donijela odluku o povratu.
In that respect, the Commission refers to case law according to which the mere circumstance that the acquirer is in fact continuing the business of an undertaking that is obliged to reimburse aid does not necessarily mean that the former undertaking enjoyed the competitive advantage linked with the aid granted to the latter.
Društvo u likvidaciji osiguravalo je zemaljske usluge dok Airport Handling nije pokrenuo poslovanje 1. rujna 2014.
In the specific case referred to, the former undertaking leased a plant at a market price from the undertaking that had received aid almost 3 years before the creation of the former undertaking.
Stoga bi slijed događaja prima facie mogao biti naznaka da je postupak koji je završio osnivanjem društva Airport Handling imao učinak izbjegavanja odluke o povratu koja je donesena prije nego što je taj postupak proveden.
The Commission recalls that in the case at issue, Airport Handling has leased, then purchased, SEAH’s assets at a price that can be deemed at least the market price, and that the unlawful aid that is to be recovered from SEAH was granted during the years 2002-2010, i.e. 3 years before Airport Handling was incorporated and 4 years before Airport Handling started its economic activity.
Međutim, Komisija podsjeća da se prema sudskoj praksi od Komisije ne zahtijeva da ispita, posebno uzimajući u obzir ostale kriterije, ali i izvan njihova okvira, vrijeme u kojem je izvršen prijenos imovine, što je jedan od čimbenika koji se „može” uzeti u obzir kao bi se uklonio gospodarski kontinuitet između tih dvaju subjekata.
More particularly as regards the economic logic of the transaction, the Commission notes the following:
Ekonomska logika transakcije
As was described above in points 2.6.1 and 2.6.2, Airport Handling’s business plan differs from SEAH’s in a number of points, in particular:
Na temelju dostupnih informacija potvrđuje se da je Airport Handling, u biti, nastavio obavljati iste poslovne djelatnosti kao SEAH, odnosno zemaljske usluge u zračnim lukama Linate i Malpensa.
Hence, Airport Handling managed its activities under different operating conditions than SEAH’s, under its own business plan.
U tom pogledu Komisija upućuje na sudsku praksu prema kojoj sama činjenica da stjecatelj de facto nastavlja poslovanje poduzetnika koji je obvezan vratiti potporu ne znači nužno da je prvi poduzetnik ostvario konkurentsku prednost povezanu s potporom koja je dodijeljena potonjem.
Moreover, the Italian authorities did not require Airport Handling to follow a specific business model nor to maintain a certain scope of activities, nor to take over any specific assets or employees.
U specifičnom predmetu na koji se upućuje prvi poduzetnik unajmio je postrojenje po tržišnoj cijeni od poduzetnika koji je potporu primio gotovo tri godine prije osnivanja prvog poduzetnika.
Overall conclusion on economic continuity from SEAH to Airport Handling
Komisija podsjeća da je u ovom predmetu Airport Handling unajmio, a zatim kupio, SEAH-ovu imovinu po cijeni koja se najmanje može smatrati tržišnom cijenom i da je nezakonita potpora koju SEAH treba vratiti dodijeljena u razdoblju 2002.–2010., tj. tri godine prije osnivanja društva Airport Handling i četiri godine prije nego što je Airport Handling započeo svoju gospodarsku djelatnost.
In the Commission’s view, the case at hand contains both, elements which would argue in favour of economic continuity and elements which would support the opposite finding.
Točnije, u pogledu ekonomske logike transakcije Komisija napominje sljedeće.
On the side of the elements supporting a finding of economic continuity, the Commission identified the fact that it was the former owner of SEAH who created Airport Handling, a company active in the same business as SEAH, which recruited its initial workforce of Airport Handling almost exclusively from former SEAH employees and took over a large part of the assets, all this after the Commission’s recovery decision.
Kako je prethodno opisano u točkama 2.6.1. i 2.6.2., poslovni plan društva Airport Handling razlikuje se od SEAH-ova u nizu točaka, posebno:
However, a number of other factors rather indicate that Airport Handling was not set up as a circumvention company but rather as a genuinely new company.
Stoga je Airport Handling vodio svoje poslovanje po drukčijim uvjetima od SEAH-a i na temelju vlastitog poslovnog plana.
The strongest element in this respect is that the client portfolio had to be newly created by approaching the airlines with offers independent from previous SEAH contracts and by concluding new agreements at new conditions with them.
Nadalje, talijanska tijela nisu od društva Airport Handling zahtijevala da slijedi specifični poslovni model, da zadrži određeni opseg aktivnosti ili da preuzme specifičnu opremu ili zaposlenike.
Airport Handling therefore had to newly acquire its customers and gain market shares such as any competitor or new entrant would have had to do.
Ukupan zaključak o gospodarskom kontinuitetu sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling
Considering that the client portfolio is the basis for the ground handling business, the Commission attributes a high weight to this element.
Komisija smatra da su u ovom predmetu sadržani elementi na temelju kojih bi se mogao utvrditi gospodarski kontinuitet i elementi na temelju kojih bi se mogao donijeti suprotan nalaz.
As regards assets taken over from SEAH, Airport Handling paid at least a market price for the lease of the assets and later, when it purchased part of the assets, paid a price that was at least the price market operators were ready to pay.
Među elementima u potporu nalazu o gospodarskom kontinuitetu Komisija je utvrdila činjenicu da je nekadašnji vlasnik SEAH-a osnovao Airport Handling, društvo koje pruža iste usluge kao SEAH, čiju su početnu radnu snagu gotovo isključivo činili bivši zaposlenici SEAH-a i koje je preuzelo velik dio njegove imovine, i to sve nakon što je Komisija donijela odluku o povratu.
Further, the workforce was not block transferred.
Međutim, nizom drugih čimbenika upućuje se na to da Airport Handling nije osnovan radi izbjegavanja obveze, nego kao stvarno novo društvo.
Airport Handling concluded new contracts at new conditions.
Najuvjerljiviji je element u tom pogledu činjenica da je bilo potrebno ponovno izgraditi portfelj klijenata kontaktiranjem sa zračnim prijevoznicima i dostavljanjem ponuda neovisnih o prethodnim ugovorima sa SEAH-om te sklapanjem s njima novih sporazuma s novim uvjetima.
Any competitor or new entrant would have had the same possibility to recruit former SEAH employees, and the former SEAH workers just seemed the most appropriate target for new recruitments.
Stoga je Airport Handling morao iznova steći svoje klijente i tržišne udjele kao što bi to morao učiniti i svaki konkurent ili novi sudionik na tržištu.
Only a part of the assets was transferred; in addition they represent only a minor part of the overall production factor in the ground handling business.
Budući da je portfelj klijenata temelj poslovanja u području zemaljskih usluga, Komisija tom elementu pridaje veliku važnost.
With respect to the economic logic of the operation, Airport Handling manages its activities under different operating conditions than SEAH’s and under its own business plan.
U pogledu imovine preuzete od SEAH-a Airport Handling platio je najmanje tržišnu cijenu za najam imovine te je za kupnju dijela imovine platio cijenu koja je najmanje bila jednaka cijeni koju bi sudionici na tržištu bili spremni platiti.
Against that backdrop, the Commission considers that on balance, there is no economic continuity between SEAH and Airport Handling and the creation of the latter cannot be regarded as a circumvention of the recovery decision.
Nadalje, nije bilo skupnog prijenosa zaposlenika.
Consequently, Airport Handling cannot be held liable to repay the aid found incompatible in the recovery decision.
Airport Handling sklopio je nove ugovore po novim uvjetima.
SEA’s investment in Airport Handling — existence of State aid
Svaki konkurent ili novi sudionik na tržištu mogao bi jednako tako zaposliti bivše zaposlenike SEAH-a koji su se samo činili najprimjerenijom ciljnom skupinom za nova zapošljavanja.
According to Article 107(1) of the Treaty ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market’.
Prenesen je samo dio imovine; uz to, ona predstavlja samo manji dio ukupnog proizvodnog čimbenika u sektoru zemaljskih usluga.
The criteria laid down in Article 107(1) of the Treaty are cumulative.
U pogledu ekonomske logike poslovanja Airport Handling svoje poslovanje vodi po drukčijim uvjetima od SEAH-a i na temelju vlastitog poslovnog plana.
Therefore, in order to determine whether the measures constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, all the above-mentioned conditions need to be fulfilled.
U tom kontekstu Komisija smatra da, uzimajući sve u obzir, ne postoji gospodarski kontinuitet između SEAH-a i društva Airport Handling te da se osnivanje potonjeg ne može smatrati izbjegavanjem odluke o povratu.
Namely, the financial support should:
Stoga se Airport Handling ne može smatrati odgovornim za povrat potpore za koju je u odluci o povratu utvrđeno da nije spojiva s unutarnjim tržištem.
be granted by a Member State or through State resources;
Ulaganje društva SEA u Airport Handling – postojanje državne potpore
favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods;
U skladu s člankom 107. stavkom 1.
distort or threaten to distort competition;
Ugovora, „svaka potpora koju dodijeli država članica ili koja se dodjeljuje putem državnih sredstava u bilo kojem obliku kojim se narušava ili prijeti da će se narušiti tržišno natjecanje stavljanjem određenih poduzetnika ili proizvodnje određene robe u povoljniji položaj, nespojiva je s unutarnjim tržištem u mjeri u kojoj utječe na trgovinu među državama članicama”.
affect trade between Member States.
Kriteriji utvrđeni u članku 107. stavku 1.
Selective economic advantage — the market economy investor principle
Ugovora kumulativni su.
Italy is of the opinion that SEA’s injection in Airport Handling’s capital complied with the market economy investor principle and thus no advantage was granted to Airport Handling, and therefore the measure did not constitute State aid.
Stoga, kako bi se odlučilo smatraju li se mjere državnom potporom u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
Even though SEAH had consistently recorded losses since 2000, it would be legitimate to assume that Airport Handling’s activity would in turn yield a sufficient return to render the equity injection profitable, notably in view of the actions laid down in the business plan for Airport Handling for 2014-2017.
Ugovora, svi prethodno navedeni uvjeti moraju biti ispunjeni.
When deciding to invest in the capital of Airport Handling, SEA would therefore have acted as a prudent market investor.
Drugim riječima:
Consequently, the market economy rationale of a public investment must be assessed having regard to the information available and developments foreseeable at the time when the investment was made.
financijskom potporom narušava se ili prijeti narušavanju tržišnog natjecanja,
In the course of the investigation Italy explained that the decision to invest in Airport Handling was based on the business plan of 6 August 2014.
financijskom potporom utječe se na trgovinu među državama članicama.
However, the Commission observes that this business plan is dated only after the final decision to increase the capital of the company up to EUR 25 million was taken on 30 June 2014.
Selektivna gospodarska prednost – načelo ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu
The Commission considers that the initial decision to set up Airport Handling and invest EUR 25 million must have been taken at the latest prior to establishing the company on 9 September 2013.
Italija smatra da je dokapitalizacija društva Airport Handling koju je provela SEA u skladu s načelom ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu i da mu time nije dodijeljena nikakva prednost te da, stoga, mjera ne čini državnu potporu.
The business plan available to the Commission which is closest to that date is the business plan of 14 November 2013.
Iako je SEAH od 2000. stalno bilježio gubitke, bilo bi legitimno pretpostaviti da bi, s druge strane, poslovanje društva Airport Handling dovelo do dostatnog povrata kako bi dokapitalizacija bila profitabilna, posebno s obzirom na mjere utvrđene u poslovnom planu društva Airport Handling za razdoblje 2014.–2017.
Therefore the Commission considers that the business plan of November 2013 is the relevant one for testing the market economy investor principle.
Za potrebe ocjenjivanja načela ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu nužno je odrediti bi li se, u okolnostima koje su slične onima u kojima je donesena mjera koja se ocjenjuje, hipotetski ulagač u tržišnom gospodarstvu, vođen izgledima za profitabilnost, a ne ciljevima javnih politika, slično ponašao.
In the 2014 opening decision, the Commission expressed doubts that SEA acted as a market economy investor.
Kako bi se ispitalo je li država usvojila ponašanje razboritog ulagača koji posluje u tržišnom gospodarstvu ili nije, nužno je razmotriti kontekst razdoblja tijekom kojeg su poduzete mjere financijske potpore radi procjene ekonomske opravdanosti ponašanja države te se, dakle, suzdržati od procjena na temelju kasnijih okolnosti.
First, because SEA did not consider the risk of Airport Handling being liable to repay incompatible aid previously granted to SEAH following a finding of economic continuity by the Commission.
Stoga se obrazloženje javnog ulaganja u okviru tržišnoga gospodarstva mora ocijeniti uzimajući u obzir dostupne informacije i predvidljive promjene u trenutku ulaganja.
Second, the Commission doubted whether the business plan, underpinning SEA’s decision to invest in Airport Handling relied on sufficiently plausible assumptions.
Tijekom istražnog postupka Italija je objasnila da se odluka o ulaganju u Airport Handling temeljila na poslovnom planu od 6. kolovoza 2014.
Ultimately the Commission has to assess if the decision to invest in Airport Handling is taken on market terms.
Međutim, Komisija primjećuje da je taj poslovni plan donesen tek nakon konačne odluke o povećanju kapitala društva do 25 milijuna EUR koja je donesena 30. lipnja 2014.
In other words, the Commission has to assess if the investor could have expected a reasonable return taking into account the foreseeable risks related to the investment.
Komisija smatra da se početna odluka o osnivanju društva Airport Handling i ulaganju 25 milijuna EUR morala donijeti najkasnije prije osnivanja društva 9. rujna 2013.
Risk mitigation measures taken by SEA (327) As regards the first doubt, the Commission observes that SEA was aware of the risk of finding economic continuity and has taken risk mitigation measures:
Poslovni plan dostupan Komisiji koji je najbliži tom datumu jest poslovni plan od 14. studenoga 2013.
SEA was aware of such risk, as shown by the documents submitted to the Commission in the context of the pre-notification of November 2013.
U odluci o pokretanju postupka iz 2014.
The risk that liability could be transferred to Airport Handling through economic continuity from SEAH was a legal risk.
Komisija je izrazila sumnju u to je li SEA djelovala kao ulagač u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
Perception and weighing of the risk and adequate risk mitigation measures depend on legal assumptions made at the time of the investment.
Prvo, jer SEA nije uzela u obzir rizik da bi Airport Handling mogao biti odgovoran za povrat potpore koja nije spojiva s unutarnjim tržištem i koja je prethodno odobrena SEAH-u nakon Komisijina nalaza o gospodarskom kontinuitetu.
Available information shows that SEA had considered the following work force related risk mitigation measures: In the agreement between SEA and the Trade Unions, of 4 November 2013, SEA declared that ‘fundamental importance was attributed to the requirement for “discontinuity”, which must form part of any alternative solution to payment in money, as a guarantee that it is not possible for the obligation to recover the aid to be extended to any third party.’
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 uvjerljivim pretpostavkama.
In the course of negotiations on the partial transfer of the workforce from SEAH to Airport Handling, work structure and certain employment conditions were materially altered as explained in detail in recitals 232-234 above.
Konačno, Komisija mora ocijeniti je li odluka o ulaganju u Airport Handling donesena u tržišnim uvjetima.
The applicable principles were set out in the above described Implementing Agreements with the Trade Unions, of 4 June 2014 and had already been announced in the agreement with the Trade Unions of 13 November 2013, and thus prior to implementing of the two major capital injections of 10 March and 30 June 2014 (recitals 45 and 46 above).
Drugim riječima, Komisija mora ocijeniti bi li ulagač mogao očekivati razuman povrat uzimajući u obzir predvidljive rizike povezane s ulaganjem.
SEA put in place the following risk mitigating measures to ensure discontinuity from the assets transfer of SEAH: First, the Trustee excluded Airport Handling from the public bidding procedure for the sale of the assets.
SEA je bila svjesna tog rizika, kako je vidljivo iz dokumenata koji su Komisiji dostavljeni u okviru postupka prije podnošenja prijave iz studenoga 2013.
Second, Airport Handling leased assets from SEAH against a market lease fee which was determined by two independent expert reports.
Rizik da bi se zbog gospodarskoga kontinuiteta odgovornost mogla prenijeti sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling bio je pravni rizik.
SEA took measures to ensure discontinuity of Airport Handling from the SEAH also in view of the customer base.
Percepcija i ponderiranje rizika te odgovarajuće mjere ublažavanja rizika ovise o pravnim pretpostavkama iznesenima u trenutku ulaganja.
The customers of SEAH were informed in advance about the liquidation of the company.
(329) Iz dostupnih informacija vidljivo je da je SEA razmotrila sljedeće mjere ublažavanja rizika povezane s radnom snagom.
New service contracts with new financial conditions were signed with the airlines which chose Airport Handling as their service provider.
U sporazumu između društva SEA i sindikata od 4. studenoga 2013.
As a further risk mitigation measure, SEA set up a Trust.
SEA je izjavila da je „temeljna važnost pripisana uvjetu ‚diskontinuiteta’ koji mora biti dio svih alternativnih rješenja za plaćanje u novcu, kao jamstvo da se obveza povrata potpore ne može proširiti na treće strane.”
As explained in Section 2.3 above the main purpose of the Trust was to act as sole shareholder of Airport Handling and ensure that Airport Handling operated in economic discontinuity with SEAH.
Tijekom pregovora o djelomičnom prijenosu radne snage sa SEAH-a na Airport Handling struktura rada i određeni uvjeti zapošljavanja bitno su izmijenjeni kako je detaljno opisano u prethodnim uvodnim izjavama 232.
The Commission notes that the risk arising from a possible future liability to repay the aid is not mentioned in Airport Handling’s business plan of November 2013.
Primjenjiva načela utvrđena su u prethodno opisanom Provedbenom sporazumu sa sindikatima od 4. lipnja 2014. i već su najavljena u sindikalnom sporazumu od 13. studenoga 2013. te, stoga, prije provedbe dviju najvećih dokapitalizacija od 10. ožujka i 30. lipnja 2014. (prethodne uvodne izjave 45. i 46.).
In that respect, the Commission observes that SEA made that business plan for its own purposes.
SEA je uspostavila sljedeće mjere ublažavanja rizika kako bi osigurala diskontinuitet od prijenosa imovine SEAH-a.
Being the mother company of an established market player in ground handling and demonstrably being aware of the risks arising from various factors of continuity, SEA was in a position to take informed investment decisions without explicitly mentioning that risk in that business plan.
Prvo, upravitelj je isključio Airport Handling iz postupka javnog natječaja za prodaju imovine.
Additionally, the final decision to raise the capital up to EUR 25 million was taken only after the risk mitigating measures were ensured.
Drugo, Airport Handling unajmio je imovinu od SEAH-a uz tržišnu najamninu koja je određena u dvama izvješćima neovisnih stručnjaka.
Moreover, the above described external evaluation of the November 2013 business plan (recital 114 above) confirms that a rational investor would have judged the probability of economic continuity, and thus the liability to repay the aid, to be less than […] [8] Business secret.
SEA je poduzela mjere kako bi osigurala diskontinuitet društva Airport Handling od SEAH-a i u pogledu baze klijenata.
%, and therefore would have found it economically rational to invest in AH.
Klijenti SEAH-a unaprijed su obaviješteni o likvidaciji društva.
As regards the second doubt, namely whether the business plan underpinning SEA’s decision to invest in Airport Handling relies on sufficiently plausible assumptions, the Commission makes the following observations:
SEA je osnovala Trust kao dodatnu mjeru ublažavanja rizika.
Assumptions on traffic development STOP
Kako je objašnjeno u prethodnom odjeljku 2.3., glavna je svrha Trusta djelovati u svojstvu jedinog dioničara društva Airport Handling te osigurati da Airport Handling posluje u uvjetima gospodarskog diskontinuiteta sa SEAH-om.
Air traffic forecasts at Milan airports, combined with Airport Handling’s market shares, are a determining factor in that company’s business plan.
Komisija primjećuje da se rizik koji proizlazi iz moguće buduće obveze povrata potpore ne spominje u poslovnom planu društva Airport Handling iz studenoga 2013.