natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The market investor test will normally be satisfied where the structure and future prospects for the company are such that a normal return, by way of dividend payments or capital appreciation by reference to a comparable private undertaking, can be expected within a reasonable period.
Načelo tržnega vlagatelja je običajno izpolnjeno, ko so struktura in obeti družbe takšni, da je v razumnem obdobju mogoče pričakovati običajen donos v obliki plačila dividend ali povečanja vrednosti kapitala glede na primerljivo zasebno podjetje.
The assessment should leave aside any positive repercussions on the economy of the region in which the airport is located, since the Commission assesses whether the given measure constitutes aid by considering whether ‘in similar circumstances a private shareholder, having regard to the foresee ability of obtaining a return and leaving aside all social, regional-policy and sectoral considerations, would have subscribed the capital in question’ [42]. (202) As the Commission already in the ‘Charleroi’ decision pointed out, ‘one cannot consider as consistent with the principle of private investor in a market economy any commitments made by an airport operator for which it cannot be proven that the airport activity as such will produce reasonable profits within a reasonable time.
Ocena ne sme upoštevati nobenih pozitivnih učinkov na gospodarstvo regije, v kateri se nahaja letališče, ker Komisija ocenjuje, ali je zadevni ukrep pomoč, glede na to ali „bi se v podobnih okoliščinah zasebni investitor na podlagi predvidljivih možnosti donosa, ne glede na vse dejavnike socialne narave oziroma regionalno ali sektorsko politiko, odločil za tak prispevek“ [43].
It goes without saying that any positive effects on the economy of the Region surrounding the airport cannot in any case be included in this evaluation, which is aimed at determining whether or not the intervention conceals elements of aid’ [43].
Kot je Komisija že opozorila v odločbi o letališču Charleroi, „kot skladnih z načelom zasebnega tržnega vlagatelja ni mogoče obravnavati nobenih zavez upravljavca letališča, za katere ni mogoče dokazati, da bo delovanje letališča kot tako zagotovilo razumen dobiček v razumnem času.
As the Court held in its judgments, ‘a private shareholder may reasonably subscribe the capital necessary to secure the survival of an undertaking which is experiencing temporary difficulties but is capable of becoming profitable again, possibly after a reorganisation’ [44].
Samoumevno je, da se morebitni pozitivni učinki na gospodarstvo regije, v kateri je letališče, v nobenem primeru ne smejo vključiti v to oceno, katere namen je ugotoviti, ali poseg vsebuje elemente pomoči“ [44].
However, as to the Court, ‘when injections of capital by a public investor disregard any prospect of profitability, even in the long term, such provision of capital must be regarded as aid …’ [45].
Kot je Sodišče ugotovilo v svojih sodbah v zadevah C-234/84 in C-303/88, „lahko zasebni vlagatelj pametno vloži kapital, potreben za zagotovitev preživetja podjetja, ki ima začasne težave, vendar lahko ponovno postane donosno, morda po prestrukturiranju“ [45]. Vendar, kot navaja Sodišče, „ko dokapitalizacija s strani javnega vlagatelja ne vključuje nobenih pričakovanj donosnosti, niti dolgoročnih, je treba takšno zagotavljanje kapitala obravnavati kot pomoč ….“ [46].
As previously mentioned Germany has submitted a business plan for the realignment of the southern runway.
Kot je bilo omenjeno, je Nemčija predložila poslovni načrt za prilagoditev južne vzletno-pristajalne steze.
On the basis of the included income data and cost figures the Commission can review whether Leipzig Airport acted like a private investor with regard to financing, building and operating of the southern runway.
Na podlagi vključenih podatkov o prihodkih in stroških lahko Komisija preveri, ali je letališče Leipzig v zvezi s financiranjem, gradnjo in delovanjem južne vzletno-pristajalne steze ravnalo kot zasebni vlagatelj.
Germany presented the business plans for three scenarios,
Nemčija je predložila poslovne načrte za tri scenarije:
‘Expansion with DHL’: Rebuilding of the southern runway, DHL comes to Leipzig Airport;
„širitev z družbo DHL“: obnova južne vzletno-pristajalne steze, družba DHL se preseli na letališče Leipzig;
‘Status quo’: No rebuilding or realignment of the southern runway;
„ohranitev obstoječega stanja“: ni obnove ali prilagoditve južne vzletno-pristajalne steze;
‘Expansion without DHL’: Rebuilding of the southern runway, DHL does not come to Leipzig Airport.
„širitev brez družbe DHL“: obnova južne vzletno-pristajalne steze, družba DHL se ne preseli na letališče Leipzig.
The business plans are based on the following assumptions, cost figures and income data as provided by the German authorities for the period from 2006 until 2042, no terminal value for the time after 2042 is specified.
Poslovni načrti temeljijo na naslednjih domnevah, podatkih o stroških in prihodkih, kot so jih nemški organi predložili za obdobje od leta 2006 do leta 2042, pri čemer ni določena nobena končna vrednost za obdobje po letu 2042 (glej tudi uvodno izjavo 236 spodaj).
As previously stated the Commission cannot take into consideration the ‘Expansion with DHL’ scenario in determining the conformity of the investments with the MEIP [46].
Kot že navedeno v uvodni izjavi 197, Komisija pri določanju skladnosti naložb z načelom tržnega vlagatelja ne more upoštevati scenarija „širitev z družbo DHL“.
The forecast development of sales for the scenario ‘Expansion without DHL’ is based on two main assumptions: The investor expects a displacement effect of night-flight restrictions at Frankfurt/Main Airport in 2012, and capacity bottlenecks at other airports will lead to further growth between 2013 and 2018.
Napoved gibanja prihodkov za scenarij „širitev brez družbe DHL“ temelji predvsem na dveh glavnih domnevah: vlagatelj pričakuje, da bo zaradi omejitev nočnih letov na letališču Frankfurt/Main v letu 2012 in ozkih grl glede zmogljivosti na drugih letališčih prišlo do prerazporeditve in s tem do nadaljnjega povečanja rasti v obdobju 2013–2018.
The provisions of the enlargement were deemed necessary in order to ensure sufficient capacity to meet the expected growth of air freight.
Načrti o širitvi so se šteli kot nujni za zagotovitev zadostne zmogljivosti glede na pričakovano rast zračnega tovornega prometa.
However, while the increasing demand for air freight traffic from Leipzig airport is mentioned as the reason for investment, this is not justified by in the present case by a specific cost-benefit-analysis.
Čeprav je naraščajoče povpraševanje po storitvah zračnega prevoza tovora z letališča Leipzig omenjeno kot razlog za naložbo, to ni utemeljeno z ustrezno analizo stroškov in koristi.
The risk of overcapacity existed when the decision to rebuild the southern runway was taken.
Ko je bila sprejeta odločitev o obnovi južne vzletno-pristajalne steze, je tveganje presežne zmogljivosti vsekakor obstajalo.
Vacancy costs resulting from possible overcapacity (e.g. without DHL) would not be compensated.
Za stroške, ki bi jih povzročila presežna zmogljivost (npr. brez družbe DHL), ne bi bilo mogoče plačati nadomestila.
However, the presented calculations do not seem to take this risk into consideration.
Predloženi izračuni očitno ne upoštevajo tega tveganja.
The following table [47] summarises the cash-flow calculations in relation to the two different scenarios ‘Status quo’ and ‘Expansion without DHL’.
Naslednja tabela [47] povzema izračune denarnega toka za oba scenarija, tj. „ohranitev obstoječega stanja“ in „širitev brez družbe DHL“.
These calculations are based on the business scenarios submitted by Germany which assume inter alia a growth rate of at least three percent for the air cargo business.
Ti izračuni temeljijo na poslovnih načrtih, ki jih je predložila Nemčija in ki med drugim predvidevajo najmanj triodstotno stopnjo rasti obsega zračnega tovornega prometa.
Cash-flow calculations
Izračuni denarnega toka
(EUR million)
(v tisoč EUR)
Cash-flow calculations [48]
Izračuni denarnega toka [48]
Airport
Letališče
Southern runway
Južna vzletno-pristajalna steza
without DHL
brez družbe DHL
EBITDA Safety Measures
Varnostni ukrepi EBITDA
EBITDA (2006-2042) corrected (1) + (2)
EBITDA (2006–2042) popravljeno (1) + (2)
Investments costs (2006-2042)
Stroški naložb (2006–2042)
Investments costs Safety measures (2006-2042)
Stroški naložb – varnostni ukrepi (2006–2042)
Investments costs 2005
Stroški naložb za leto 2005
Cash flow 2005-2042 (3) + (4) + (5) + (6)
Denarni tok za obdobje 2005–2042 (3) + (4) + (5) + (6)
The Commission firstly notes that it has taken into account the total amount of the investment and operational costs for security and safety measures for the purposes of the Cash-flow calculations.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da je pri izračunih denarnega toka upoštevala celotne predvidene stroške naložb in poslovanja za varnostne ukrepe.
However, as previously explained (see recitals 180 to 183) part of these expenses (operations and also investment costs) may represent measures which fall within the public policy remit
Vendar, kot je že bilo pojasnjeno (glej uvodne izjave 180–183), lahko del teh izdatkov (stroškov poslovanja in tudi naložb) predstavljajo ukrepi, ki spadajo na področje javnih nalog.
This fact notwithstanding, the cash-flow of the airport for the period 2005-2042 totals to approximately [negative cashflow] euro. The Commission cannot therefore accept that a market economy investor would have decided to make the investment in the construction of the southern runway.
Ne glede na to dejstvo znaša denarni tok letališča za obdobje 2005–2042 približno [negativen denarni tok] EUR. Zato ni mogoče izhajati iz domneve, da bi se tržni vlagatelj odločil za naložbo v gradnjo južne vzletno-pristajalne steze.
The calculations show that Scenario B generates a cash-flow lower than Scenario A by about EUR [100-200] million. Building the southern runway reduces the cash flow in real terms, which is at disposal for the financing of the pre-existing facilities.
Izračuni kažejo, da je denarni tok pri scenariju B za približno [100–200] milijonov EUR nižji kot pri scenariju A. Gradnja južne vzletno-pristajalne steze dejansko zmanjšuje denarni tok, ki je na voljo za financiranje že obstoječih objektov.
As the airport has still to finance the existing capital assets amounting to EUR 642 million (book value 2005), it will not reach the required EBITDA to refinance completely the existing capital assets in Scenario B. On the basis of the presented cash flow calculations it cannot be assumed that the business operations of Leipzig Airport will reach break-even in the future.
Ker mora letališče še vedno financirati obstoječa kapitalska sredstva v višini do 642 milijonov EUR (knjigovodska vrednost iz leta 2005), ne bo doseglo EBIDTA, potrebnih za popolno refinanciranje obstoječih kapitalskih sredstev iz scenarija B. Na podlagi predloženih izračunov denarnega toka ni mogoče predvidevati, da bo poslovanje letališča Leipzig v prihodnosti doseglo prag donosnosti.
It cannot therefore be assumed that the Southern runway would have been built by a private investor on the basis of Scenario B.
Zato ni mogoče izhajati iz domneve, da bi pri scenariju B gradnjo južne vzletno-pristajalno steze prevzel zasebni vlagatelj.
On this basis the Commission can conclude that the public authorities do not have a well founded expectation of a financial return on the investment in question and although it is their intention to make the airport more attractive to users and therefore more profitable, they are not guided by prospects of profitability in the longer term [49].
Komisija lahko na podlagi tega sklepa, da javni organi ne morejo utemeljeno pričakovati finančnega donosa zadevnih naložb, in čeprav je njihov namen povečati privlačnost letališča za uporabnike ter s tem njegov dobiček, jih pri tem ne vodijo pričakovanja dolgoročne donosnosti [49].
Rather the aim of the public financing is, as explicitly indicated by the German authorities, regional development, and an increase in the accessibility of the region, the creation of jobs and environmental purposes (i.e. noise reduction).
Prej kot to je cilj javnega financiranja, kot so izrecno navedli nemški organi, regionalni razvoj, povečanje dostopnosti regije, ustvarjanje delovnih mest ter varstvo okolja (tj. zmanjševanje hrupa).
The Commission concludes that a private investor, even one operating at the scale of a group in a broader economic context, could not, in the normal circumstances of a market economy and even in the longer term, have expected an acceptable return on the capital invested in the case at hand.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega ugotavlja, da v obravnavanem primeru zasebni vlagatelj, tudi če deluje v okviru skupine v širšem gospodarskem smislu, v običajnih razmerah tržnega gospodarstva in tudi dolgoročno v zadevnem primeru ne bi mogel pričakovati sprejemljivega donosa na vloženi kapital.
In these circumstances the Commission is entitled to consider that a private investor, even one pursuing a comprehensive long-term policy without regard to immediate returns, would not, in the normal circumstances of a market economy, have made the injections of capital in question.
V teh okoliščinah Komisija lahko upravičeno domneva, da se zasebni vlagatelj, tudi če izvaja celovito dolgoročno politiko, pri kateri ni pomemben takojšen donos, v običajnih razmerah tržnega gospodarstva ne bi odločil za zadevno dokapitalizacijo.
Furthermore, and without prejudice to the arguments set out and the conclusions reached above the Commission is obliged to observe that the discount rate applied by the German authorities in their calculations of 6.5 % (see point 117) implies that the calculations assume a very low risk investment premium of approximately 3.25 % based on a beta factor of 0.65.
Ne glede na navedene utemeljitve in sklepe je treba opozoriti, da diskontna stopnja 6,5 %, ki so jo nemški organi uporabili v svojih izračunih (glej točko 117), pomeni, da izračuni izhajajo iz zelo nizke premije za tveganje naložb, približno 3,25 %, na podlagi faktorja beta 0,65.
A beta of 0.65 means that if the value of the overall market decreases by 1 %, the value of the investment decreases by 0.65 %, which implies a lower volatility of the investment than the overall capital market and therefore results in a lower risk.
Faktor beta 0,65 pomeni, da se z zmanjšanjem celotne tržne vrednosti za 1 % vrednost naložbe zmanjša za 0,65 %, kar pomeni manjšo nestanovitnost naložbe v primerjavi s celotnim kapitalskim trgom ter s tem manjše tveganje.
In this regard, the Commission notes that some expert sources provide beta for aerospace and airport development in Europe based on statistical data of between 0,81 and 1,26 [50].
V zvezi s tem Komisija ugotavlja, da nekateri strokovni viri na podlagi statističnih podatkov za razvoj letalskih in vesoljskih programov ter letališč v Evropi uporabljajo faktor beta med 0,81–1,26 [50].
These beta factors are calculated for international airports (mainly hub-airports) with good access to capital markets because of their listing on the stock exchange.
Ti faktorji beta so izračunani za mednarodna letališča (predvsem vozlišča), ki imajo zaradi svoje kotacije na borzi dober dostop do kapitalskih trgov.
The Commission considers that investments into smaller airports such as in the present case would give rise to a higher level of risk because of their size.
Komisija meni, da bi naložbe v manjša letališča, kot v obravnavanem primeru, zaradi njihove velikosti pomenile večje tveganje.
Furthermore, in the present case the airport is publicly owned and its access to capital markets is limited, moreover, it is dependent on the support provided by its public shareholders.
Poleg tega je v obravnavanem primeru letališče v državni lasti in je njegov dostop do kapitalskega trga omejen, prav tako pa je odvisno od podpore javnih delničarjev.
Therefore, the Commission notes that in addition to a higher beta factor a so-called ‘illiquidity premium’ should have been taken into account by the German authorities in their calculation but was not.
Zato Komisija meni, da bi morali nemški organi v svojih izračunih poleg višjega faktorja beta upoštevati tudi tako imenovano premijo za nelikvidnost, vendar tega niso storili.
If it had been taken into consideration the interest rates would have been higher and the net present value of the cash flow would have been at a lower level.
Če bi se ta premija upoštevala, bi bile obrestne mere višje, čista neto vrednost denarnega toka pa nižja.
Article 87(1) EC requires that a measure, in order to be defined as State aid, favours ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’.
V skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe ES, se neki ukrep šteje za državno pomoč, kadar se daje prednost posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga.
In the case at issue, the Commission notes that the advantages in question were granted to Leipzig airport only.
V obravnavanem primeru Komisija ugotavlja, da so bile zadevne prednosti dodeljene samo letališču Leipzig.
The public funding is directed at a single undertaking.
Javna sredstva so namenjena le enemu projektu.
The capital contributions granted by public authorities have not been made available to any competing airports Airport.
Kapitalski vložki države niso bili dodeljeni nobenemu konkurenčnemu letališču.
Thus it is a selective within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC.
Torej gre za selektiven ukrep v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
Distortion of competition and affectation of trade
Izkrivljanje konkurence in vpliv na trgovino
When aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid.
Če pomoč, ki jo podeli država članica, okrepi položaj podjetja v primerjavi z drugimi konkurenčnimi podjetji v trgovini znotraj Skupnosti, se šteje, da na njegovo konkurenčnost vpliva zadevna pomoč.
In accordance with settled case law [51], for a measure to distort competition it is sufficient that the recipient of the aid competes with other undertakings on markets open to competition.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso [51] je za to, da ukrep izkrivlja konkurenco, dovolj, da prejemnik pomoči konkurira drugim podjetjem na trgih, odprtih za konkurenco.
As previously explained, the operation of an airport is an economic activity [52].
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno v uvodni izjavi 166, je delovanje letališča gospodarska dejavnost.
Competition takes place not only between air carriers but also between airports.
Med seboj si ne konkurirajo le letalski prevozniki, ampak tudi letališča.
In the case at hand, these are inter alia undertakings possibly offering the requested premises to become a hub for air freight traffic.
V obravnavanem primeru so to med drugim podjetja, ki morda zagotavljajo potrebno infrastrukturo za razvoj vozlišča za zračni tovorni promet.
Any economic advantage which the airport Leipzig/Halle receives from the financing of the southern runway would strengthen its position vis-à-vis its competitors on the European market of providers of airport services.
Vsaka gospodarska prednost, ki jo letališču Leipzig/Halle omogoči financiranje južne vzletno-pristajalne steze, bo okrepila njegov položaj v primerjavi s konkurenčnimi podjetji na evropskem trgu ponudnikov letaliških storitev.
Therefore, the public funding under examination distorts or threatens to distort competition and affects trade between the Member States
Zato bi javno financiranje v obravnavi lahko izkrivljalo konkurenco ali vplivalo na trgovino med državami članicami.
For the reasons set out above the Commission concludes that the public financing of the development of the southern runway at Leipzig-Halle airport involves State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC Treaty.
Na podlagi navedenih razlogov Komisija ugotavlja, da javno financiranje obnove južne vzletno-pristajalne steze na letališču Leipzig-Halle pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
Existence of State aid to DHL — Framework Agreement and Comfort Letter
Obstoj državne pomoči družbi DHL – okvirni sporazum in patronatska izjava
As already explained in the opening decision (see recitals 42 to 46), the Commission considers that the measures under assessment are granted by State resources and are liable to distort competition.
Kot je že pojasnjeno v uvodni odločbi (uvodne izjave 42 do 46), Komisija meni, da se ukrepi v obravnavi financirajo iz državnih sredstev in lahko izkrivljajo konkurenco.
The concept of State aid applies to any advantage, granted directly or indirectly, financed out of State resources, granted by the State itself or by any intermediary body acting by virtue of powers conferred on it.
Pojem državne pomoči zajema vsako prednost, ki se neposredno ali posredno financira iz državnih sredstev in ki jih dodeli država sama ali drug organ, ki deluje na podlagi javnega pooblastila.
It is evident that the Framework Agreement and letter of comfort are financed by State resources and the decisions to grant them are imputable to public authorities: MFAG's supervisory board authorised on 3 June 2004 the conclusion of the Framework agreement.
Jasno je, da se okvirni sporazum in patronatska izjava financirata iz javnih sredstev ter da so za odločitve o dodelitvi teh sredstev odgovorni javni organi: uprava MFAG je 3. junija 2004 odobrila sklenitev okvirnega sporazuma.
The majority of MFAG's supervisory board members are representatives of public authorities (e.g. finance ministers of Sachsen and Sachsen-Anhalt, mayors of Leipzig, Dresden, and Halle).
Večina članov uprave MFAG so predstavniki države (npr. finančni ministri dežel Saške in Saške-Anhalt, župani Leipziga, Dresdna in Halleja.).
The letter of comfort was signed by the finance minister of Land Sachsen on 21 December 2005.
Patronatsko izjavo je 21. decembra 2005 podpisal finančni minister dežele Saške.
To the extent that the measures grant a selective advantage to DHL and Leipzig Airport, the Commission considers that they are liable to distort competition and affect trade between Member States.
Če ukrepi dajejo selektivno prednost družbi DHL in letališču Leipzig, Komisija meni, da lahko izkrivljajo konkurenco in vplivajo na trgovino med državami članicami.
It is also evident that the express parcel business is a market in which companies from different Member States compete.
Dejavnosti hitre pošte nedvomno predstavljajo trg, na katerem si konkurirajo družbe iz različnih držav članic.
Any economic advantage which DHL receives from the listed public measures will strengthen its position vis-à-vis its competitors on the European express parcel market.
Vsaka gospodarska prednost, ki jo družbi DHL omogočijo navedeni javni ukrepi, bo okrepila položaj družbe do njenih konkurentov na evropskem trgu hitre pošte.
As this assessment remained undisputed by Germany and third parties, the following discussion will focus on the extent to which the Framework agreement and the comfort letter favour DHL.
Ker oceni iz uvodnih izjav 42 do 46 uvodne odločbe Nemčija in tretje strani niso oporekali, se bo obravnava v nadaljevanju osredotočila na obseg prednosti, ki jo družbi DHL dajeta okvirni sporazum in patronatska izjava.
Economic advantages for DHL through Framework Agreement
Gospodarske prednosti, ki jih družbi DHL daje okvirni sporazum
The Commission will analyse for each of the offered services — warranties, lease, and airport services — whether the Framework Agreement offers an appropriate remuneration which a private investor would have accepted.
Komisija bo za vsako od ponujenih storitev – jamstva, najem in letališke storitve – preverila, ali okvirni sporazum zagotavlja ustrezno nadomestilo, ki bi ga zasebni vlagatelj sprejel.
Warranties
Neomejena jamstva
The Framework Agreement does not offer any explicit premium payments for the provided warranties.
Okvirni sporazum ne predvideva nobenih izrecnih plačil premij za zagotovljena jamstva.