natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Tirrenia concludes, therefore, that such payment does not hamper competition with other market operators.
Tirrenia je zato zaključila, da takšno plačilo ne ovira konkurence z drugimi prevozniki trga.
At the same time, by virtue of paragraph 4 of Article 230 of the Treaty [19], Tirrenia di Navigazione and the regional companies of the Tirrenia Group instituted proceedings, currently pending before the Court of First Instance, against the Commission’s decision to initiate the procedure.
Istočasno v skladu z odstavkom 4 člena 230 Pogodbe [19] so družba Tirrenia di Navigazione in regionalne družbe skupine Tirrenia sprožila postopke, ki trenutno tečejo pred Sodiščem prve stopnje proti odločitvi Komisije, da sproži postopek.
Comments from private operators
Pripombe zasebnih prevoznikov
The Commission received comments from various private operators competing on a number of the routes served by Caremar, Saremar and Toremar.
Komisija je prejela pripombe različnih zasebnih prevoznikov, ki konkurirajo na številnih poteh, na katerih delujejo družbe Caremar, Saremar in Toremar.
These can be summarised as follows:
Te se lahko strnejo kot sledi:
the Tirrenia Group companies practise an aggressive commercial policy on the routes on which competition from private operators is focused, taking the form of voyages at dumped prices, discounts and deferred payment systems, the only explanation for which is the public aid they receive,
družbe skupine Tirrenia izvajajo agresivno trgovinsko politiko na poteh, na katerih je osredotočena konkurenca zasebnih prevoznikov, ki prevzemajo obliko potovanj po dampinških cenah, popustih in sistemih kasnejših plačil, katerih edino pojasnilo je javna pomoč, ki jo prejemajo;
the public service obligations lack transparency, and the Tirrenia Group companies’ ability to alter the extent of the obligations imposed on them, particularly in terms of the routes they serve and the imposed timetables and frequencies, is contrary to the very nature of public service obligations,
obveznostim iz opravljanja javnih storitev primanjkuje preglednost in zmožnost družb skupine Tirrenia, da spremenijo obseg obveznosti, ki so jim naložene, zlasti v smislu poti, na katerih delujejo, naloženih urnikov ter pogostosti, je v nasprotju z naravo obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev;
given that services are being provided by private operators on certain routes served by the Tirrenia Group companies, the need for a public service seems highly debatable,
glede na to, da storitve zagotavljajo zasebni prevozniki na določenih poteh, ki jih oskrbujejo družbe skupine Tirrenia, se zdi potreba po javnih storitvah zelo sporna;
the financing arrangements for investments carried out since 1995, or scheduled in the business plan, contain elements of aid, particularly as regards two vessels acquired by Viamare in 1996 and more generally in terms of the more favourable access to bank loans enjoyed by the Tirrenia Group companies,
finančni sporazumi za investicije, ki se izvajajo od leta 1995, ali so načrtovane v poslovnem načrtu, vsebujejo elemente pomoči, zlasti kar zadeva dve plovili, ki jih je pridobila Viamare leta 1996 in bolj splošno v skladu z bolj ugodnim dostopom do bančnih posojil, ki jih uživajo družbe skupine Tirrenia;
the Tirrenia Group companies enjoy preferential fiscal treatment for mineral oils used on board their vessels when laid up in Italian ports.
družbe skupine Tirrenia uživajo preferencialno davčno obravnavanje za mineralna olja, ki se uporabljajo na plovilih, ko so zasidrane v italijanskih pristaniščih.
COMMENTS FROM THE ITALIAN AUTHORITIES
PRIPOMBE ITALIJANSKIH ORGANOV
By letter dated 29 September 1999, the Italian authorities supplied their comments on the decision to initiate the procedure.
S pismom z dne 29. septembra 1999 so italijanski organi posredovali svoje pripombe glede odločitve o sprožitvi postopka.
In their opinion, Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within the Member States (maritime cabotage) [20] allows the agreements concluded with each company of the Tirrenia Group to remain fully in force until they expire at the end of 2008.
Po njihovem mnenju člen 4 Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 3577/92 z dne 7. decembra 1992 o uporabi načela svobode opravljanja storitev v pomorskem prometu znotraj držav članic (pomorska kabotaža) [20] omogoča, da sporazumi, ki so bili sklenjeni z vsako družbo skupine Tirrenia ostanejo v celoti veljavni, dokler ob koncu leta 2008 ne potečejo.
Consequently, the system of public service obligations which derives from those agreements may not be thrown into question by the decision to initiate the procedure.
Zato sistem obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, ki izhaja iz teh sporazumov, ne more povzročati dvomom v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka.
The Italian authorities also contest the notion that the aid referred to by the Commission Decision constitutes ‘new’ aid within the meaning of Article 88(3) of the Treaty and that it could have affected trade between Member States before the Italian market was opened up to cabotage on 1 January 1999.
Italijanski organi ugovarjajo tudi pojmu, da pomoč iz Odločbe Komisije tvori „novo“ pomoč znotraj smisla člena 88(3) Pogodbe in da bi lahko vplivala na trgovino med državami članicami, preden je bil italijanski trg odprt kabotaži 1. januarja 1999.
Apart from these general comments, the Italian authorities stress that the presence of private operators on the routes served by the Tirrenia Group companies is an often recent and limited phenomenon, being confined to a small number of routes and concentrated in the summer season.
Razen teh splošnih pripomb italijanski organi poudarjajo, da je prisotnost zasebnih prevoznikov na poteh, ki jih oskrbujejo družbe skupine Tirrenia, pogosto zadnji in omejen pojav, ki je omejen na majhno število poti in osredotočen v poletni sezoni.
Moreover, the method of calculating the annual compensation, which consists in deducting profit accrued during the summer from losses accumulated during the winter, helps keep the amount of compensation to the strict minimum.
Poleg tega metoda izračunavanja letnega nadomestila, ki temelji na odštevanju dobička, ki je nastal poleti od izgub, ki so se nabrale pozimi, pomaga vzdrževati znesek nadomestila na najnižjem znesku.
Consequently, according to the Italian authorities, the compensation is necessary and strictly proportionate in respect of the public service obligations, whose characteristics it is for the Member State to define.
Zato je, glede na italijanske organe, nadomestilo potrebno in nujno sorazmerno glede na obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, katerih značilnost mora določiti država članica.
Regarding Adriatica’s infringement of the competition rules on the connections it operated between Italy and Greece, the Italian authorities emphasise that the Commission’s decision in respect of that infringement is not definitive, that the two procedures are independent of each other, that the aid was not used to finance anti-competitive behaviour, that to declare it incompatible would be equivalent to a new penalty and that to recover it would compromise both the Adriatica company and the privatisation process.
Glede kršenja pravil konkurence družbe Adriatica na povezavah, na katerih je delovala med Italijo in Grčijo, italijanski organi poudarjajo, da odločitev Komisije v zvezi s to kršitvijo ni dokončna, da sta dva postopka neodvisna drug od drugega, da pomoč ni bila uporabljena za financiranje protikonkurenčnega vedenja, da bi, če bi jo razglasili za nezdružljivo, bila enaka kot nova kazen in če bi jo izterjali, bi ogrozila tako družbo Adriatica kot postopek privatizacije.
The investment scheduled in the business plan
Naložba, predvidena v poslovnem načrtu
The Italian authorities stress that the investment scheduled in the business plan is designed to reduce the cost of services while maintaining a high level of quality.
Italijanski organi poudarjajo, da je naložba, predvidena v poslovnem načrtu, namenjena zmanjšanju stroškov storitev in hkrati vzdrževanju visoke stopnje kakovosti.
They also contend that the methods for financing the planned investment contain no element of aid in as much as the said investment will be financed partly from the companies’ own resources and partly by means of bank loans taken out under normal market conditions.
Trdijo tudi, da metode za financiranje načrtovanih naložb ne vsebujejo elementa pomoči, ker bodo navedene naložbe financirane delno iz lastnih sredstev družb in delno z bančnimi posojili, najetimi pod normalnimi tržnimi pogoji.
The Italian authorities have given details of the legal framework governing the fiscal treatment of mineral oils used as fuels for shipping.
Italijanski organi so podali podrobnosti o pravnem okviru, ki ureja davčno obravnavanje mineralnih olj, ki se uporabljajo kot goriva za plovbo.
The information supplied to the Commission shows that, through a general decision of 2 March 1996 taken pursuant to Decree Law No 504/1995, the preferential fiscal treatment provided for by the Decree Law was extended to fuels and lubricants used by any vessel laid up in a port for maintenance operations.
Informacije, predložene Komisiji kažejo, da je bilo, preko splošne odločbe z dne 2. marca 1996, sprejete v skladu z Uredbo z zakonsko močjo št. 504/1995, prednostno davčno obravnavanje, ki ga določa Uredba z zakonsko močjo, razširjeno na goriva in maziva, ki se uporabljajo na plovilih, zasidranih v pristanišču zaradi vzdrževanja.
At the same time, Italy lodged an appeal before the Court of Justice against the decision to initiate the procedure, in respect of the part stipulating that the grant of unlawful aid be suspended [21].
Istočasno je Italija pred Sodiščem vložila pritožbo zoper odločitev, da se sproži postopek v zvezi z delom, ki določa, da se izplačevanje pomoči začasno ustavi [21].
V. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID
V. OCENA POMOČI
Article 87(1) of the Treaty stipulates that 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 must, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.
Člen 87(1) Pogodbe določa, da mora biti vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, v kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
The subsidies at issue are clearly granted by the State and through State resources.
Brez dvoma so obravnavane subvencije dodeljene s strani države in preko državnih sredstev.
As for the concept of an advantage, this was interpreted by the Court of Justice in its judgment of 24 July 2003 in the Altmark Trans Case [22].
Kar zadeva pojem prednosti, le-tega je razložilo Sodišče v sodbi z dne 24. julija 2003 v primeru Altmark Trans [22].
This ruling establishes that a State measure involving compensation for the services provided by the recipient undertakings in order to discharge public service obligations does not fall within the scope of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, in that such undertakings do not enjoy a financial advantage and the measure thus does not have the effect of putting them in a more favourable competitive position than the undertakings competing with them.
Ta odločitev ugotavlja, da državni ukrep, ki vključuje nadomestilo za storitve, ki jih opravijo podjetja prejemnika, da bi razrešili obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, ne sodi v področje uporabe člena 87(1) Pogodbe, in da takšna podjetja ne uživajo finančne prednosti in ukrep ne učinkuje tako, da jih postavi v ugodnejši konkurenčni položaj, kot ga imajo podjetja, ki konkurirajo z njimi.
The Court specifies that for such compensation to escape classification as State aid in a particular case, four conditions must be satisfied:
Sodišče navaja, da morajo biti izpolnjeni štiri pogoji, da se takšna nadomestila izognejo razvrstitvi kot državna pomoč v posebnem primeru:
the recipient undertaking must actually have public service obligations to discharge, and the obligations must be clearly defined.
podjetje prejemnik mora dejansko izpolnjevati obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev in obveznosti morajo biti jasno opredeljene.
In the case of the compensation paid to the Tirrenia Group companies, the Commission finds that the public service obligations imposed on the companies arise simultaneously from the agreements concluded with the Italian State in July 1991, the legal framework (see recitals 30 to 34) and the five-year plans (see recitals 37 to 39).
V primeru nadomestila, plačanega družbam skupine Tirrenia, Komisija ugotavlja, da obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, ki so naložene družbam, nastanejo hkrati iz sporazumov, sklenjenih z italijansko državo julija 1991, pravnim okvirom (glej uvodne izjave 30 do 34) in petletnimi načrti (glej uvodne izjave 37 do 39).
The existence of an actual public service obligation [23] is examined in recitals 84 to 122,the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated must be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner, to avoid it conferring an economic advantage which may favour the recipient undertaking over competing undertakings.
Obstoj dejanskih obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev [23] je preučen v uvodnih izjavah 84 do 122;parametri, na podlagi katerih se izračunava nadomestilo, morajo biti določeni vnaprej na objektiven in pregleden način, da se prepreči priznanje trgovinske prednosti, ki lahko koristi podjetju prejemniku v primerjavi s konkurenčnimi podjetji.
In the case in question, the Commission notes that Article 5 of the agreements details the economic parameters used to calculate the various cost elements taken into consideration, pursuant to Presidential Decree No 501/1979, to determine the compensation,
V zadevnem primeru Komisija ugotovi, da člen 5 sporazumov podrobno določa gospodarske parametre, ki se uporabljajo za izračun različnih upoštevanih stroškovnih elementov, v skladu s predsedniško uredbo št. 501/1979, da določi nadomestilo;
the compensation cannot exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in the discharge of public service obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations.
nadomestilo ne more preseči tistega, kar je potrebno za kritje vseh ali dela stroškov, ki so nastali pri izpolnjevanju obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prejemkov in razumnega dobička za izpolnjevanje teh obveznosti.
This point is examined in recitals 123 to 148,
Ta točka je preučena v uvodnih izjavah 123 do 148;
where the undertaking which is to discharge public service obligations, in a specific case, is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure which would allow for the selection of the tenderer capable of providing those services at the least cost to the community, the level of compensation needed must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided with means of transport so as to be able to meet the necessary public service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligations.
če podjetje, ki mora izpolnjevati obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, v določenem primeru ni izbrano v skladu s postopkom javnega naročanja, ki bi omogočil izbor vlagatelja, ki lahko zagotavlja tiste storitve z najmanjšimi stroški skupnosti, mora biti potrebna raven nadomestila določena na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih tipično podjetje, dobro vodeno in primerno založeno s transportnimi sredstvi, da lahko uresničuje potrebne zahteve javnih storitev, ki so nastale pri opravljanju teh obveznosti, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prejemkov in razumnega profita za izpolnjevanje teh obveznosti.
It should be noted here that the Tirrenia Group companies were not chosen as the result of a public procurement procedure.
Treba je vedeti, da družbe skupine Tirrenia niso bile izbrane kot rezultat postopka javnega naročanja.
The Commission also notes that neither the applicable legal acts nor the agreements impose conditions ensuring that the compensation does not exceed the costs of a typical undertaking well run and adequately provided with means of transport.
Komisija prav tako ugotavlja, da niti veljavni pravni predpisi niti sporazumi ne določajo pogojev, ki zagotavljajo, da nadomestilo ne presega stroškov tipičnega dobro vodenega podjetja in primerno založenega s transportnimi sredstvi.
Nor do the information and data supplied by the Italian authorities and the recipients serve to establish whether this condition is satisfied.
Prav tako so informacije in podatki, ki jih posredujejo italijanski organi ter prejemniki namenjeni ugotavljanju, če je ta pogoj izpolnjen.
In view of the above considerations and those set out below concerning the existence of an actual public service requirement, the Commission considers that the annual balancing subsidy granted to the regional companies under the 1991 agreements confers an advantage on those companies over competing companies which provide or could provide comparable services on the relevant market.
Glede na zgornja načela in načela, navedena spodaj, ki zadevajo obstoj dejanskih zahtev javnih storitev, Komisija meni, da letna uravnalna subvencija, podeljena regionalnim družbam v skladu s sporazumi iz leta 1991, prenese prednost na tiste konkurenčne družbe, ki zagotavljajo ali bi lahko zagotavljale storitve na zadevnem trgu.
In terms of impact on intra-Community trade and distortion of competition, these are evident in the case of transport between Member States, or between Member States and third countries, liberalised by Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries [24].
V skladu z vplivom na promet znotraj Skupnosti in izkrivljanje konkurence, so le-te očitne v primeru prometa med državami članicami ali med državami članicami in tretjimi državami, liberaliziranimi z Uredbo Sveta (EGS) št. 4055/86 z dne 22. decembra 1986 o uporabi načela svobode opravljanja storitev v pomorskem prometu med državami članicami in med državami članicami in tretjimi državami [24].
Although it is cabotage services that are at issue, the Court has noted [25] that it is not impossible that a public subsidy granted to an undertaking which provides only local or regional transport services and does not provide any international transport services may none the less have an effect on trade between Member States.
Čeprav gre za sporne kabotažne storitve je Sodišče ugotovilo [25], da ni nemogoče, da javna subvencija, podeljena podjetju, ki zagotavlja samo storitve lokalnega in regionalnega prometa in ne zagotavlja katerih koli mednarodnih prevoznih storitev, lahko vseeno učinkuje na trgovino med državami članicami.
Where a Member State grants a public subsidy to an undertaking, the provision of transport services by that undertaking may for that reason be maintained or increased with the result that undertakings established in other Member States have less chance of providing their transport services in the market in that Member State [26].
Če država članica podeli javno subvencijo nekemu podjetju, se izvajanje prevoznih storitev tistega podjetja lahko vzdržuje ali poveča, tako da imajo podjetja, ustanovljena v drugih državah članicah, manjšo možnost zagotavljanja svojih prevoznih storitev na trgu v tisti državi članici [26].
According to the case-law of the Court, the Commission is not required, where aid has been granted unlawfully, to demonstrate the real effect of the aid on competition and on trade between Member States.
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča se od Komisije ne zahteva, če je bila pomoč podeljena nezakonito, da prikaže resničen učinek pomoči na konkurenco in trgovino med državami članicami.
Indeed, such an obligation would favour those Member States which granted aid in breach of the duty to notify laid down in Article 88(3) of the Treaty over those which did notify aid at the planning stage [27].
Takšna obveznost bi dajala prednost tistim državam članicam, ki so izplačale pomoč v nasprotju z dolžnostjo o priglasilu, določeno v členu 88(3) Pogodbe in ne tistim, ki niso priglasile pomoči v pripravljalni fazi [27].
The fact that this market in cabotage connections with the Mediterranean islands was provisionally exempted, up to 1 January 1999, from the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) does not rule out the possibility that the subsidies paid to the regional companies operating on cabotage routes with the Mediterranean islands pursuant to the agreements could have affected trade between Member States and distorted competition.
Dejstvo, da je bil ta trg v kabotažnih povezavah s sredozemskimi otoki začasno izvzet, do 1. januarja 1999, iz uporabe Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 3577/92 o uporabi načela svobode opravljanja storitev v pomorskem prometu znotraj držav članic (pomorska kabotaža), ne izključuje možnosti, da bi lahko subvencije, plačane regionalnim družbam, ki delujejo na kabotažnih poteh s sredozemskimi otoki v skladu s sporazumi, vplivale na trgovino med državami članicami in izkrivljeno konkurenco.
In any event, even allowing that the aid paid to companies which only operated cabotage transport may not have affected trade or distorted competition prior to 1 January 1999, the situation changed as of that date, when cabotage activity was opened up to all Community operators pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92.
V vsakem primeru, celo ko se omogoči, da pomoč, plačana družbam, ki so samo opravljale kabotažne prevoze, mogoče niso vplivale na trgovino ali izkrivljeno konkurenco pred 1. januarjem 1999, se je situacija s tem dnem spremenila, ko je bila kabotažna trgovina odprta za vse prevoznike Skupnosti v skladu z Uredbo (EGS) št. 3577/92.
In the light of the criteria set out in recitals 58 to 66, it is useful to examine the situation of the regional companies with reference to the markets on which they operate.
V luči kriterija, določenega v uvodnih izjavah 58 do 66, je koristno preučiti situacijo regionalnih družb glede na trge, na katerih delujejo.
With regard to Adriatica, the Commission would point out that, under the agreement, the company operates not only on the cabotage market but also on international routes on which it faces or has faced competition from other Community operators since the agreement entered into force.
Kar zadeva družbo Adriatica bi Komisija opozorila da, na podlagi sporazuma, družba deluje ne samo na kabotažnem trgu, temveč tudi na mednarodnih poteh, na katerih se sooča ali se je soočala s konkurenco drugih prevoznikov iz Skupnosti, odkar je sporazum začel veljati.
The Commission also notes here the risk of cross-subsidies between the services provided by Adriatica on the cabotage market and those provided on the international market, particularly as the company does not keep separate accounts for these different categories of service.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja tveganje notranjih subvencij med storitvami, ki jih zagotavlja družba Adriatica na kabotažnem trgu in tistimi na mednarodnem trgu, zlasti ker družba ne vodi ločenih računov za te različne kategorije storitev.
In these circumstances, the subsidies paid to Adriatica under the agreement may have affected trade between Member States and distorted competition.
V teh okoliščinah so mogoče subvencije, plačane družbi Adriatica iz sporazuma, vplivale na trgovino med državami članicami in izkrivljeno konkurenco.