natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In their observations, received on 8 September 2008, and during a follow-up meeting on 9 October 2008, the Belgian authorities did not provide any additional element to enable the Commission to examine whether the advantages granted to AGVO could be considered compensation for tasks of general (economic) interest.
Belgijski organi niso v pripombah, prejetih 8. septembra 2008 in na naslednjem sestanku 9. oktobra 2008, predložili nobenih dodatnih dejstev, na podlagi katerih bi lahko Komisija proučila, ali je mogoče ugodnosti, dodeljene družbi AGVO, obravnavati kot nadomestilo za naloge splošnega (gospodarskega) pomena.
Instead, the Belgian authorities reiterated that the Altmark criteria were not relevant because AGVO was involved exclusively in public tasks.
Namesto tega so belgijski organi ponovno poudarili, da merila Altmark niso pomembna, ker opravlja družba AGVO le javne naloge.
This answer was, however, unsatisfactory, since AGVO was also involved in economic activities.
Vendar ta odgovor ni bil zadovoljiv, ker družba AGVO sodeluje tudi v gospodarskih dejavnostih.
Pursuant to Article 10(3) Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, the Commission thus requested by way of an information injunction of 8 September 2009 any useful information and in particular:
Tako je Komisija v skladu s členom 10(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 z odredbo o predložitvi podatkov z dne 8. septembra 2009 zahtevala vse uporabne informacije v zvezi s tem in zlasti:
a list of the various activities entrusted to AGVO divided into economic activities, tasks of non-economic public interest and tasks of general economic interest,
seznam različnih dejavnosti, ki jih opravlja družba AGVO, na katerem so ločeno razvrščene gospodarske dejavnosti, naloge negospodarskega javnega interesa in naloge splošnega gospodarskega pomena,
the parameters for calculating, controlling and reviewing the compensation for the tasks of non-economic public interest on the one hand and the compensation for the tasks of economic public interest on the other hand,
parametre za izračun, nadzor in pregled nadomestil za naloge negospodarskega javnega interesa na eni strani in nadomestil za naloge gospodarskega javnega interesa na drugi,
the arrangements for avoiding and repaying any overcompensation,
dogovore za izogibanje in povračilo kakršnih koli čezmernih nadomestil,
the costs incurred in the discharge of, and the revenue relating to, the economic public services obligation, the non-economic public services obligation and the other services,
stroške, ki so nastali pri opravljanju obveznosti v zvezi z gospodarskimi javnimi storitvami, negospodarskimi javnimi storitvami in drugimi storitvami, ter s tem povezan prihodek,
abstracts from internal accounts showing separately the costs and receipts associated with the service of general economic interest and those associated with the service of general non-economic interest and those of other services, as well as the parameters for allocating costs and revenues,
povzetke notranjih računovodskih izkazov, v katerih so ločeno prikazani stroški in prejemki, povezani s storitvami splošnega gospodarskega pomena, storitvami splošnega negospodarskega pomena in drugimi storitvami, ter parametre za razporejanje stroškov in prihodkov,
if available, documents showing that AGVO complies with the fourth criterion laid down in Altmark, i.e. that the level of compensation needed has been determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs, which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately provided within the same sector would incur, taking into account the receipts and a reasonable profit from discharging the obligations.
dokumente, če so na voljo, ki dokazujejo, da družba AGVO izpolnjuje četrto merilo iz sodbe Altmark, tj., da je treba stopnjo potrebnega nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih imelo običajno podjetje, ki je v istem sektorju dobro vodeno in ima ustrezna sredstva, ob upoštevanju prejemkov in zmernega dobička iz izpolnjevanja obveznosti.
In their letter of 16 November 2009, the Belgian authorities reiterate that AGVO is entrusted with the following public interest tasks: management of the fishing port, renovation and renting of buildings to public and semi-public organisations, and management and maintenance of the public domain (including maintenance of the road leading to the fish auction).
Belgijski organi v svojem dopisu z dne 16. novembra 2009 ponovno poudarjajo, da opravlja družba AGVO naslednje javne naloge: upravljanje ribiškega pristanišča, obnova in dajanje v najem stavb javnim in delno javnim organizacijam ter upravljanje in vzdrževanje javne domene (vključno z vzdrževanjem ceste do dražbe rib).
They submit that those tasks are of public interest since they are not carried out in favour of specific beneficiaries.
Navajajo, da so navedene javne naloge, ker se ne opravljajo v korist posameznih upravičencev.
They do not make a distinction between tasks of general non-economic interest and services of public economic interest but admit that some or all public tasks might be of economic nature.
Ne razlikujejo med nalogami splošnega negospodarskega pomena in storitvami javnega gospodarskega pomena, vendar priznavajo, da so morda nekatere ali vse javne naloge gospodarske narave.
The Belgian authorities acknowledge that AGVO, through its subsidiary EVO, is engaged in a commercial activity, i.e. the running of the fish auction, which is not of public interest.
Belgijski organi priznavajo, da družba AGVO prek svoje hčerinske družbe EVO sodeluje v trgovinski dejavnosti, in sicer pri vodenju dražbe rib, ki ni dejavnost javnega interesa.
The Belgian authorities state that AGVO does not actually receive any compensation for its tasks of general interest.
Belgijski organi navajajo, da družba AGVO dejansko ne prejema nadomestila za svoje naloge splošnega pomena.
They are financed out of AGVO’s budget.
Te se financirajo iz proračuna družbe AGVO.
There is thus no methodology to calculate the compensation.
Zato metodologija za izračun nadomestila ne obstaja.
The Belgian authorities add that it is not possible on the basis of AGVO’s and EVO’s accounts to distinguish between costs and revenues relating to the tasks of general interest and the commercial tasks.
Belgijski organi dodajajo, da na podlagi računovodskih izkazov družb AGVO in EVO ni mogoče razlikovati med stroški in prihodki v zvezi z nalogami splošnega pomena in trgovinskimi nalogami.
SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION
PODROČJE PREISKAVE
It is apparent from various recitals of the preamble (for instance recital 85) to the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure that the scope of the investigation is larger than the fish auction market and also concerns activities linked to the fish auction (rental of buildings around the fish auction, management of the fishing port, etc.).
Kot je mogoče sklepati iz več uvodnih izjav (na primer uvodne izjave 85) odločitve o sprožitvi uradnega postopka preiskave, področje preiskave ne obsega le trga dražbe rib, ampak vključuje tudi dejavnosti, povezane z dražbo rib (dajanje v najem stavb v okolici dražbe rib, upravljanje ribiškega pristanišča itd.).
Therefore, the advantages granted to AGVO or PAKHUIZEN which do not directly relate to the operation of the fish auction also form part of the current procedure.
Zato so tudi ugodnosti, ki so dodeljene družbi AGVO ali PAKHUIZEN in ki niso neposredno povezane z delovanjem dražbe rib, del zdajšnjega postopka.
The Commission has also analysed the advantages granted to EVO, either directly by the City or by AGVO.
Komisija je analizirala tudi ugodnosti, ki jih je družbi EVO dodelilo mesto samo ali družba AGVO.
In the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure, EVO’s initial capital and the subsequent capital increases had not been analysed as separate measures from the capital instalments granted to AGVO.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi uradnega postopka preiskave začetni kapital družbe EVO in naknadna povečanja kapitala niso bili analizirani kot ukrepi, ločeni od vplačil kapitala za družbo AGVO.
They were merely taken into account as one of the uses that AGVO has made of the capital instalments received from the City.
Upoštevali so se zgolj kot eden od načinov, na katere je družba AGVO uporabila vplačila kapitala, ki jih je prejela od mesta.
However, in their comments, the Belgian authorities claimed that the Commission had not sufficiently distinguished between the activities and tasks performed by AGVO, PAKHUIZEN and EVO and that, due to the division of tasks between AGVO and EVO, the advantages granted to AGVO were relevant for the current investigation only to the extent that they had been ‘transferred’ to EVO.
Belgijski organi v svojih pripombah kljub temu trdijo, da Komisija ni ustrezno razlikovala med dejavnostmi in nalogami, ki jih opravljajo družbe AGVO, PAKHUIZEN in EVO, ter da so zaradi delitve nalog med družbama AGVO in EVO ugodnosti, dodeljene družbi AGVO, pomembne za zdajšnjo preiskavo le, če so bile „prenesene“ na družbo EVO.
Therefore, for the sake of clarity and in order to meet the Belgian authorities’ concerns, the provision of EVO with its initial capital and the subsequent capital increases are examined separately in point 10.1.2.2.3.
Zato se zaradi jasnosti in pomiritve belgijskih organov zagotovitev začetnega kapitala družbi EVO in naknadna povečanja kapitala proučujejo ločeno v skladu s točko 10.1.2.2.3.
The issue of the real beneficiary of the aid is examined in recital 319.
Vprašanje dejanskega upravičenca do pomoči se proučuje v uvodni izjavi 319.
According to Article 107(1) of the TFEU, ‘save as otherwise provided in the Treaties, 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’.
V skladu s členom 107(1) PDEU velja: „Razen če Pogodbi ne določata drugače, je 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 z notranjim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.“
UNDERTAKINGS
PODJETJA
As explained above, this investigation concerns the possible aid granted to AGVO, EVO and PAKHUIZEN, and the fisheries undertakings making use of the Ostend fish auction and EVO’s and PAKHUIZEN’s services.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno, zadeva ta preiskava morebitno pomoč, dodeljeno družbam AGVO, EVO in PAKHUIZEN ter ribiškim podjetjem, ki uporabljajo dražbo rib v Ostendeju ter storitve družb EVO in PAKHUIZEN.
All these must be qualified as undertakings within the meaning of Article 107 of the TFEU.
Vse te je treba obravnavati kot podjetja v smislu člena 107 PDEU.
The only entity in respect of which the Belgian authorities seriously contest this is AGVO, which according to the Belgian authorities only performs public interest tasks.
Belgijski organi pri tem resno nasprotujejo le v zvezi z družbo AGVO, ki po njihovih navedbah opravlja le naloge javnega interesa.
The Belgian authorities have mentioned that AGVO performs ‘public interest tasks’ (‘taken van openbaar belang’).
Belgijski organi so navedli, da družba AGVO opravlja „naloge javnega interesa“ („taken van openbaar belang“).
However, it appears that AGVO engages in economic activities and must therefore be considered an undertaking [16] within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU, for the reasons detailed in recitals 123 to 129 inclusive.
Vendar se zdi, da družba AGVO sodeluje v gospodarskih dejavnostih in jo je zato treba zaradi razlogov iz uvodnih izjav od 123 do 129 obravnavati kot podjetje [16] v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
AGVO offers buildings for rent to public and semi-public institutions and to undertakings.
Družba AGVO daje stavbe v najem javnim in delno javnim ustanovam ter podjetjem.
AGVO is thus directly offering services (rental services) on the market.
S tem družba AGVO neposredno ponuja storitve na trgu (storitve najema).
AGVO is also entrusted with the operation and management of the fishing port.
Družba AGVO je odgovorna tudi za izkoriščanje in upravljanje ribiškega pristanišča.
As the General Court and the Court of Justice have confirmed in the Aéroports de Paris [17] case, the management of infrastructure facilities can constitute an economic activity.
Kot sta Splošno sodišče in Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti potrdili v zadevi Aeroport de Pariz [17], se lahko upravljanje infrastrukturnih objektov obravnava kot gospodarska dejavnost.
This has been confirmed, so far as port infrastructure is concerned, among others in the Flemish Ports and Rotterdam port development cases [18].
V zvezi s pristaniško infrastrukturo je bilo to med drugim potrjeno v zadevi o razvoju flamskih pristanišč in rotterdamskega pristanišča [18].
The Commission notes that AGVO is offering services, goods and infrastructure facilities against payment.
Komisija ugotavlja, da ponuja družba AGVO storitve, blago in objekte infrastrukture v zameno za plačilo.
Indeed, according to its articles of association, AGVO is entitled to establish and levy fees for the remuneration of its services.
Družba AGVO je v skladu s svojim statutom dejansko upravičena do določanja in obračunavanja davkov za plačilo svojih storitev.
Moreover, AGVO also offers indirectly, through its subsidiaries EVO and PAKHUIZEN, goods and services on the market.
Poleg tega družba AGVO tudi prek svojih hčerinskih družb EVO in PAKHUIZEN posredno ponuja blago in storitve na trgu.
AGVO holds a controlling interest in EVO and PAKHUIZEN and actually exercises that control by involving itself directly or indirectly in the management:
Družba AGVO ima kontrolni delež družb EVO in PAKHUIZEN in ta nadzor izvaja tako, da neposredno ali posredno sodeluje pri upravljanju:
almost all members of the Board of Directors in AGVO are also members of the Board of Directors of EVO and PAKHUIZEN.
skoraj vsi člani upravnega odbora družbe AGVO so tudi člani upravnih odborov družb EVO in PAKHUIZEN.
Between 2005 and 2007 AGVO and EVO were members of the Board of Directors of PAKHUIZEN;
V obdobju 2005–2007 sta bili družbi AGVO in EVO članici upravnega odbora družbe PAKHUIZEN,
according to its articles of association, AGVO is entrusted with the management, development and operation of the fish auction and the fish dock of Ostend and its annexes as well as with the development of all directly and indirectly related activities.
v skladu s statutom je družba AGVO odgovorna za upravljanje, razvoj in izkoriščanje dražbe rib in ribiškega doka v Ostendeju, v skladu s prilogami statuta pa tudi za razvoj vseh dejavnosti, ki so neposredno ali posredno povezane s tem.
In other words, AGVO is compelled by its articles of association to involve itself in the management of the fish auction.
Z drugimi besedami, družbo AGVO njen statut zavezuje k sodelovanju pri upravljanju dražbe rib.
There are other links between AGVO, EVO and PAKHUIZEN which further illustrate the existence of organisational and functional links between AGVO and its subsidiaries: AGVO has guaranteed loans granted to EVO; AGVO puts buildings at the disposal of EVO and PAKHUIZEN and AGVO’s annual accounts reveal that AGVO has regularly granted loans to EVO and PAKHUIZEN.
Med družbami AGVO, EVO in PAKHUIZEN so še druge povezave, ki dodatno prikazujejo obstoj sistemskih in funkcionalnih povezav med družbo AGVO in njenimi hčerinskimi družbami: Družba AGVO je jamčila za posojila, dodeljena družbi EVO; družbama EVO in PAKHUIZEN daje na razpolago stavbe, njeni letni računovodski izkazi pa kažejo, da redno dodeljuje posojila družbama EVO in PAKHUIZEN.
All these elements allow AGVO to exercise functions relating not only to control, but also to direction and financial support of EVO and PAKHUIZEN.
Vse to družbi AGVO omogoča izvajanje funkcij v zvezi z nadzorom, vendar tudi z vodstvom in finančno podporo EVO in PAKHUIZEN.
For those reasons AGVO must also be considered an undertaking for the purposes of competition law, in particular through its participation in EVO and PAKHUIZEN [19].
Zato je treba AGVO obravnavati kot podjetje tudi za namene konkurenčnega prava, zlasti zaradi njenega sodelovanja z družbama EVO in PAKHUIZEN [19].
The Commission notes that the Belgian authorities have acknowledged that EVO and PAKHUIZEN are the operating arms of AGVO, that through EVO, AGVO participated in commercial activities and that measures favouring AGVO can have an impact on the market through EVO.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so belgijski organi priznali, da sta družbi EVO in PAKHUIZEN operativna dela družbe AGVO, da je družba AGVO prek družbe EVO sodelovala v trgovinskih dejavnostih in da lahko ukrepi, ki dajejo prednost družbi AGVO, vplivajo na trg prek družbe EVO.
In their comments and answers they tend to treat AGVO, PAKHUIZEN and EVO as one single undertaking and have also explicitly claimed that AGVO and EVO should be seen as one single entity.
V pripombah in odgovorih se družbe AGVO, PAKHUIZEN in EVO obravnavajo kot eno samo podjetje, pri čemer so belgijski organi tudi izrecno izrazili, da je treba družbi AGVO in EVO obravnavati kot en subjekt.
Finally, it should be noted that AGVO does not have any separate accounts for its economic and non-economic tasks, so that cross-subsidies cannot be excluded.
Nazadnje je treba upoštevati, da družba AGVO nima ločenih računov za svoje gospodarske in negospodarske naloge, zato ni mogoče izključiti navzkrižnega subvencioniranja.
ADVANTAGES FOR THE UNDERTAKINGS CONCERNED
UGODNOSTI ZADEVNIH PODJETIJ
Advantages for AGVO
Ugodnosti družbe AGVO
Initial Capital
Začetni kapital
Public investments are regarded as State aid where it is apparent that a public authority which injects capital in a company is not merely providing equity capital under normal market economy conditions.
Javne naložbe se obravnavajo kot državna pomoč, če je očitno, da javni organ, ki vlaga kapital v družbo, ne zagotavlja le lastniškega kapitala pod običajnimi pogoji tržnega gospodarstva.
This is the case where the financial position of the company, and particularly the structure and volume of its debts, is such that a normal return (in dividend or capital gains) cannot be expected within a reasonable time from the capital investment.
To velja za družbo, katere finančni položaj ter zlasti struktura in obseg njenih dolgov so takšni, da v razumnem času ni mogoče pričakovati običajnega dobička (v dividendah ali kapitalskih dobičkih) iz vloženega kapitala.
It is thus necessary to assess whether, in similar circumstances, a private investor of a dimension comparable to that of the bodies managing the public sector could have been prevailed upon to make capital contributions of the same size in connection with the restructuring of that undertaking or whether it would instead have chosen to wind it up having regard in particular to the information available and foreseeable developments at the date of those contributions [20].
Zato je treba oceniti, ali bi bilo v podobnih okoliščinah zasebnega vlagatelja, primerljivega z organi, ki upravljajo javni sektor, mogoče prepričati, da prispeva enak znesek kapitala za prestrukturiranje zadevnega podjetja, ali bi se namesto tega zlasti na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij in predvidenega razvoja dogodkov na dan prejema zadevnih prispevkov odločil odstopiti [20].
The Belgian authorities argue that the decision of the City to provide an initial capital to AGVO of BEF 250 million (EUR 6179338) was an economically rational choice.
Belgijski organi trdijo, da je bila odločitev mesta o zagotovitvi začetnega kapitala družbi AGVO v znesku 250 milijonov BEF (6179338 EUR) gospodarsko smiselna.
The choice to restructure the auction was made on the basis of a financial and business plan showing that, with a limited investment, the auction could become profitable again after eight years if it did not take over the losses of the past.
Odločitev o prestrukturiranju dražbe je bila sprejeta na podlagi finančnega in poslovnega načrta, ki prikazuje, da bi lahko dražba z omejeno naložbo v osmih letih ponovno postala donosna, če ne bi prevzela preteklih izgub.
The Belgian authorities claim that a private investor in the same situation would have made the same decision.
Belgijski organi trdijo, da bi se zasebni vlagatelj v enakem položaju odločil enako.
On the basis of the information available to it, the Commission cannot share this opinion.
Na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij Komisija ne more izraziti svojega mnenja v zvezi s tem.
As indicated above, the Ostend fish auction was performing badly and its market share had been decreasing constantly in the years preceding the restructuring.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, dražba rib v Ostendeju ni bila uspešna, njen tržni delež pa se je v letih pred prestrukturiranjem stalno zmanjševal.
The Commission considers that a normal private operator, in a similar situation, would not have made the choice to provide an initial capital of more than EUR 6000000 on the basis of merely one financial plan, containing the financial forecast for the period 2002/10 in a ‘positive hypothesis’, and a business plan of just two pages.
Komisija meni, da običajni zasebni subjekt v podobnem položaju ne bi prispeval začetnega kapitala, višjega od 6000000 EUR, na podlagi le enega finančnega načrta s finančno napovedjo za obdobje 2002–2010 ob „pozitivni domnevi“ in poslovnega načrta, ki obsega le dve strani.
This is all the more so since, as set out in greater detail in recital 259, AGVO, as the continuation of the Ostend fish auction, could be described as a company in difficulty at the time when the initial capital was granted.
Kot je podrobneje navedeno v uvodni izjavi 259, je to dodatno utemeljeno s tem, da je družba AGVO kot nadaljevanje dražbe rib v Ostendeju v času dodelitve začetnega kapitala izpolnjevala pogoje za družbo v težavah.
When faced with a company in difficulties, a normal private operator would have sought solid assurances as to the future prospects of the company and would not have been satisfied with the documents on the basis of which the City took its decision.
Običajni zasebni subjekt bi pri poslovanju z družbo v težavah želel pridobiti trdna zagotovila glede prihodnjih možnosti družbe in se ne bi zadovoljil z dokumenti, na podlagi katerih je mesto sprejelo odločitev.
The Commission points out the scale of the investment on the one hand and the long-term situation of ongoing losses of the Ostend fish auction [21] on the other hand.
Komisija poudarja pomembnost naložb na eni strani in dolgoročno stanje tekočih izgub dražbe rib v Ostendeju [21] na drugi strani.
Especially in the light of these facts, combined with the facts that the firm was operating in a highly competitive but shrinking market, a normal private operator would have based its decision on a much more thorough financial and business plan containing different hypotheses and scenarios instead of taking into account a financial plan based only on one hypothesis, which was, moreover, qualified as ‘positive’.
Zlasti ob upoštevanju teh dejstev in dejstva, da je družba delovala na zelo konkurenčnem trgu, ki pa se je krčil, bi običajni zasebni subjekt svojo odločitev sprejel na podlagi veliko bolj temeljitega finančnega in poslovnega načrta, ki bi vseboval različne možnosti in scenarije, in ne na podlagi finančnega načrta z eno samo možnostjo, ki je bila poleg tega označena kot „pozitivna“.