natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This latter element would not therefore prove that concession holders are less able to meet their obligations.
To torej ne bi dokazovalo manjše zmogljivosti pooblaščenih izvajalcev za izpolnjevanje obveznosti, ki veljajo zanju.
THE SECOND ALTMARK CRITERION
DRUGO MERILO IZ SODBE ALTMARK
In accordance with the position of the French authorities (see paragraph 66 above), SNCM considers that Article 7(1) of the public service delegation contract is sufficient to determine the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated.
V skladu s stališčem francoskih organov (glej uvodno izjavo 66 zgoraj) SNCM meni, da bi člen 7(1) pogodbe o PPJS zadoščal za določitev meril, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo.
Moreover, only the measure adopted on the basis of that provision might be subject to control, to the exclusion of the existence of Article 7(1) itself.
Poleg tega bi bilo mogoče ob izključitvi obstoja člena 7(1) nadzorovati samo akte, sprejete na podlagi te določbe.
SNCM and CMN consider that the reasoning put forward by France in the paragraph mentioned above also applies to the issue of adjusting the compensation based on the real revenue provided for in the public service delegation contract.
SNCM in CMN poleg tega menita, da sklepanje Francije iz zgoraj navedene uvodne izjave velja tudi za vprašanje prilagajanja nadomestila glede na dejanske prihodke, predvidene v pogodbi o PPJS.
This clause applies automatically and does not give rise to any possibility for subjective interpretation.
Uporaba te klavzule bi bila samodejna in ne bi omogočala nikakršne subjektivne razlage.
The ‘fuel’ safeguard clause is in turn justified by the fact that it is impossible to predict market trends and the impact of changes in legislation.
„Samodejna“ zaščitna klavzula bi bila upravičena na podlagi nezmožnosti predvidevanja razvoja trgov in vpliva razvoja predpisov.
Finally, CMN underlines that the revenue safeguard clause applies equally to increases and decreases in revenue.
Na koncu CMN poudarja, da se klavzula o zaščiti prihodkov uporablja za zmanjševanje in tudi za povečevanje prihodkov.
SNCM considers that the variation in the amount of forecast revenues between the various bids tendered by the joint concession holders was unlikely to jeopardise the transparency of the parameters of the compensation mechanism.
SNCM meni, da razlika v višini predvidenih prihodkov med različnimi ponudbami pooblaščenih soizvajalcev ne vzbuja dvoma o preglednosti meril mehanizma finančnih nadomestil.
SNCM also points out that no compensation was paid outside the framework provided by the public service delegation.
Družba SNCM prav tako poudarja, da nobeno finančno nadomestilo ni bilo izplačano zunaj okvira, predvidenega s PPJS.
The company points out that, in some cases of service disruptions, the public service delegation contract provides that expenses incurred by the concession holder in implementing alternatives or compensating customers will be deducted from the contractual penalty charged to the concession holders by the Corsican Transport Board.
Poudarja, da pogodba o PPJS v nekaterih primerih motenj v storitvah določa, da bi se odhodki pooblaščenega izvajalca za vzpostavitev nadomestnih sredstev ali za povračilo stroškov strankam odšteli od pogodbene kazni, ki jo OTC zaračuna pooblaščenim izvajalcem.
However, if the relevant request sent by SNCM to Corsican Transport Board actually amounts to EUR 600000, it was not paid and corresponds only to a provision estimating the compensation paid by SNCM as a result of the 2010 industrial action.
Vendar če zahtevek, ki ga je družba SNCM poslala OTC v zvezi s tem, dejansko znaša 600000 EUR, ta znesek ni bil plačan in pomeni le ocenjeni znesek nadomestil, ki jih je SNCM izplačal za stavko v letu 2010.
As regards the level of compensation for the costs of public service obligations, SNCM and CMN consider that they have not benefited from any overcompensation.
Glede višine nadomestila stroškov, ki so nastali zaradi obveznosti gospodarske javne službe, SNCM in CMN menita, da to ni bilo previsoko.
On the contrary, with regard to the requirements applying to the return on capital, SNCM points out that the costs of the public service obligations were insufficiently compensated, leading to a negative result after capital charges.
Glede zahtev, ki veljajo na področju nadomestila za kapital, SNCM nasprotno poudarja, da bi bili stroški, nastali zaradi obveznosti gospodarske javne službe, nezadostno nadomeščeni, kar bi povzročilo negativni poslovni izid po obračunu stroškov kapitala.
As far as the service provider selection procedure is concerned, SNCM points out that the privatisation protocol included a single termination clause that should be analysed in the same terms as those put forward by the French authorities in paragraph 55 above.
Glede postopka izbire izvajalca storitve SNCM opozarja, da je protokol privatizacije vključeval enotno razvezno klavzulo. Analizirati bi jo bilo treba na podlagi pogojev, ki jih predlagajo francoski organi in so navedeni v uvodni izjavi 55 zgoraj.
It also believes that the privatisation process of SNCM was of no concern to the Corsican regional authorities and did not have any influence on the process of awarding the public service delegation.
Med drugim meni, da postopek privatizacije SNCM, ki ne bi mogel vključevati ozemeljske skupnosti Korzike, ne bi imel nikakršnega vpliva na postopek PPJS.
SNCM and CMN also consider that the requirements of the specifications did not call into question the competitive nature of the procedure awarding the delegation.
SNCM in CMN med drugim menita, da zahteve pogodbenih pogojev ne zahtevajo ponovne razprave o konkurenčnosti postopka za dodelitev prenosa pooblastil.
They believe that the appropriateness of the public service obligations imposed on carriers which are not parties to the public service delegation does not enter into checks on the fulfilment of the fourth Altmark criterion.
Menita, da nadzor izpolnjevanja četrtega merila iz sodbe Altmark ne zadeva ustreznosti obveznosti gospodarske javne službe, ki jih morajo upoštevati tretji izvajalci v okviru PPJS.
Moreover, SNCM and CMN emphasise that the limitations imposed on the content of public service contracts by Regulation 3577/92 do not preclude Member States from imposing other requirements.
Poleg tega SNCM in CMN poudarjata, da omejitve vsebine pogodb o opravljanju javnih storitev, ki jih določa Uredba št. 3577/92, ne pomenijo, da države članice ne smejo dodati drugih zahtev.
Basing its approach on all of the arguments put forward by the French authorities and presented in paragraph 67 above, SNCM further considers that the selection procedure for the service was not discriminatory.
Na podlagi vseh trditev francoskih organov, ki so navedene v uvodni izjavi 67 zgoraj, SNCM poleg tega meni, da postopek izbire pooblaščenega izvajalca ni diskriminacijski.
For SNCM, the fact that Corsica Ferries challenges the impartiality of the Bastia Administrative Court and the Corsican regional authorities merely confirms this.
SNCM meni, da to potrjuje dejstvo, da družba Corsica Ferries izpodbija nepristranskost upravnega sodišča v Bastii in ozemeljske skupnosti Korzike.
In the alternative, assuming that the Altmark criteria are not fulfilled, SNCM and CMN believe that the compensation should be viewed as aid compatible with the internal market under the SGEI Framework. In this regard, they believe that the duration of the delegation is reasonable.
Podredno SNCM in CMN menita, da bi morala biti ob predpostavki, da merila iz sodbe Altmark niso izpolnjena, izplačana nadomestila opredeljena kot pomoč, ki je združljiva z notranjim trgom v skladu z okvirom SSGP.
The cost accounting mechanisms for the routes lying outside the scope of the public service are separate from those for the routes operated under the delegation, and comply with Directive 2006/111/EC on financial transparency.
V zvezi s tem menita, da je trajanje prenosa pooblastil razumno in da se pri povezavah zunaj PPJS izvaja stroškovno računovodstvo, ki je neodvisno od linij, vključenih v prenos pooblastil, pri čemer se upošteva Direktiva 2006/111/ES o finančni preglednosti.
COMMENTS FROM FRANCE ON THE OBSERVATIONS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
STALIŠČA FRANCIJE DO PRIPOMB ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI
Concerning the observations from Corsica Ferries cited above on whether the first Altmark criterion was fulfilled, the French authorities first of all reiterate their position on the inseparability of the basic service and the additional service.
Kar zadeva pripombe družbe Corsica Ferries glede spoštovanja prvega merila iz zgoraj navedene sodbe Altmark, francoski organi najprej poudarjajo svoje mnenje glede neločljive povezanosti osnovnih in dodatnih storitev.
They consider that employing temporary staff to operate the additional service is not proof to the contrary.
Menijo, da zaposlitev začasnih uslužbencev za izvajanje dodatnih storitev ne dokazuje nasprotnega.
Next, they contest the statement from Corsica Ferries that capacity is the only criterion required in the case of the additional service; the quality criterion set by the specifications applies to them as well.
Poleg tega izpodbijajo trditev družbe Corsica Ferries, da je edino merilo v zvezi z dodatnimi storitvami zmogljivost. Opozarjajo, da se upošteva tudi merilo kakovosti, ki ga določajo pogodbeni pogoji.
In addition, the specifications of the public service delegation do not require the use of different vessels for the permanent service and the additional service.
Pogodbeni pogoji PPJS tudi ne določajo, da je treba za stalne storitve uporabiti druge ladje kot za dodatne storitve.
They also believe that it is unfounded to limit the analysis of a possible shortage of private initiative only to the periods covered by the additional service.
Menijo tudi, da je neutemeljeno omejiti analizo morebitnega pomanjkanja zasebnih pobud le na obdobja, pomembna za dodatne storitve.
They believe that to fail to classify the additional service as a public service because it is used mainly to transport tourists is unfounded, as the purpose of this service is to ensure territorial continuity and to limit the drawbacks of Corsica's insularity.
Menijo, da zavračanje statusa javnih storitev dodatnim storitvam na podlagi trditve, da so namenjene predvsem prevozu turistov, ni utemeljeno, saj je namen dodatnih storitev zagotavljati ozemeljsko povezanost za ublažitev omejitev, ki so posledica otoške lege Korzike.
The French authorities do not agree with Corsica Ferries' analysis regarding the appropriateness of the level of the tender for the public service delegation contract that was finally accepted for the additional service.
Francoski organi se ne strinjajo z analizo družbe Corsica Ferries v zvezi s ponudbo, zajeto v pogodbi o PPJS v zvezi z dodatnimi storitvami.
They consider that the reference period for passenger traffic should be limited to the period after 2006, since the years from 2002 to 2005 were marked by a disruption of service caused by industrial action.
Menijo, da bi moralo biti referenčno obdobje za prevoz potnikov omejeno na obdobje po letu 2006, ker so bile v obdobju od leta 2002 do leta 2005 storitve motene zaradi stavk.
They also attribute the general oversizing of supply during the period 2010-2013 to the commissioning of the Smeralda by Corsica Ferries.
Skupni prekomerni obseg ponudbe v obdobju 2012-2013 pripisujejo dejstvu, da je družba Corsica Ferries v promet vključila ladjo Smeralda.
Finally, the French authorities point out that Corsica Ferries is the primary beneficiary of the social assistance system, since the amount paid depends upon the number of passengers carried.
Francoski organi na koncu ugotavljajo, da je družba Corsica Ferries glavna upravičenka mehanizma socialne podpore, saj je njen znesek odvisen od števila prepeljanih potnikov.
In addition, Corsica Ferries considers transport capacity only, without reference to other criteria such as quality of service.
Poleg tega družba Corsica Ferries upošteva samo zmogljivosti prevoza, ne upošteva pa drugih meril, kot je kakovost storitve.
With regard to Corsica Ferries’ observations on compliance with the second and third Altmark criteria, cited above, the French authorities indicate that the amendment of the public service delegation by a supplementary contract on 28 December 2009 resulted from the difference between a traffic forecast based on ambitious economic development goals and the real situation of the economic slowdown and the increasing supply of maritime transport.
Pri pripombah družbe Corsica Ferries o upoštevanju drugega in tretjega merila iz zgoraj navedene sodbe Altmark francoski organi navajajo, da je sprememba PPJS z dopolnilno pogodbo z dne 28. decembra 2009 posledica razlike med predvidenim prometom, določenim na podlagi ambicioznih ciljev na področju gospodarskega razvoja, in dejanskim stanjem, ki je posledica upada gospodarske dejavnosti in povečanja ponudbe pomorskega prometa.
They emphasise that monitoring of the compensation system by the competent financial bodies does not address whether it complies with the applicable law on State aid but the regularity, efficiency and effectiveness of its management.
Poudarjajo, da se nadzor mehanizma nadomestil, ki ga izvajajo finančna sodišča, ne nanaša na njegovo skladnost z veljavnim pravom na področju državne pomoči, ampak na rednost, učinkovitost in uspešnost obravnavanega upravljanja.
Moreover, the French authorities emphasise that these observations also related firstly to the social assistance system from which Corsica Ferries benefited, with the funds involved rising from EUR 13,8 million to EUR 20,8 million between 2002 and 2009, according to the French authorities.
Poleg tega francoski organi poudarjajo, da so se predstavljene pripombe nanašale tudi na sistem socialne podpore, do katerega je zlasti upravičena družba Corsica Ferries, pri čemer so se zneski, namenjeni zanjo, od leta 2002 do leta 2009 po navedbah francoskih organov povečali s 13,8 milijona EUR na 20,8 milijona EUR.
Regarding the observations by Corsica Ferries concerning compliance with the fourth Altmark criterion, the French authorities indicate that the Court's judgment of 11 September 2012 in Case T-565/08 has no connection with the award of the public service delegation contract.
Kar zadeva pripombe družbe Corsica Ferries o spoštovanju četrtega merila iz sodbe Altmark, francoski organi navajajo, da sodba Splošnega sodišča Evropske unije v zadevi T-565/08 z dne 11. septembra 2012 ni povezana z dodelitvijo PPJS.
They thus challenge Corsica Ferries' interpretation of the judgment, considering that the termination clause may be exercised only if the Commission were to adopt a decision classifying the measures in question as State aid incompatible with the internal market or if the public service delegation contract were not to be awarded to SNCM.
Ugovarjajo torej razlagi te sodbe, kot jo predstavlja družba Corsica Ferries, in v zvezi s tem ocenjujejo, da je mogoče razvezno klavzulo uveljavljati samo v primeru, če bi Komisija sprejela sklep, s katerim bi bili zadevni ukrepi opredeljeni kot državna pomoč, ki je nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, ali če s SNCM ne bi bila sklenjena pogodba o prenosu pooblastil javne službe.
Finally, the French authorities consider that relying on a statement by the President of the Territorial Assembly to judge the degree of competition is not consistent with applicable law, since this authority has no jurisdiction to adopt the specifications of the public service delegation on its own.
Francoski organi na koncu menijo, da sklicevanje na izjavo predsednika ozemeljske skupščine pri presoji učinkovite konkurence ni v skladu z veljavnim pravom, saj ta organ nima pristojnosti, da bi sam sprejel pogodbene pogoje PPJS.
At the same time, they point out that the analysis of the bids led the awarding authority to consider that Corsica Ferries failed to meet the conditions of that specification, did not provide criteria for assessing its debt and could not guarantee the relevance of its projected profit-and-loss account.
Obenem organi ugotavljajo, da analiza ponudbe razkriva, da družba Corsica Ferries ni spoštovala pogojev iz navedenih pogodbenih pogojev, ni priskrbela dokazov o svojem dolžniškem kapitalu in ni zagotavljala ustreznosti predvidenega izkaza poslovnega izida.
EXISTENCE OF AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 107(1) TFEU
IZVAJANJE POMOČI V SKLADU S ČLENOM 107(1) PDEU
Under Article 107(1) TFEU, aid granted by a Member State or through State resources which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, is incompatible with the internal market.
V skladu s členom 107(1) PDEU je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli oblika pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, če vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
Characterising a national measure as State aid presupposes that the following cumulative conditions are met: (1) the beneficiary or beneficiaries are undertakings within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, (2) the measure in question is granted out of State resources and is imputable to the State, (3) the measure confers a selective advantage on its beneficiaries, and (4) the measure in question distorts or threatens to distort competition, and is liable to affect trade between Member States [52].
Za opredelitev nacionalnega ukrepa kot državne pomoči morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji kumulativni pogoji, in sicer: 1) prejemnik ali prejemniki so podjetja v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, 2) zadevni ukrep je dodeljen iz državnih sredstev in ga je mogoče pripisati državi, 3) ukrep daje selektivno prednost prejemniku ali prejemnikom in 4) zadevni ukrep izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljal konkurenco ter lahko prizadene trgovino med državami članicami [52].
CONCEPTS OF UNDERTAKING AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
POJEM PODJETJA IN GOSPODARSKE DEJAVNOSTI
As highlighted in paragraph 62 of the opening decision, SNCM and CMN are two operators engaged in the provision of international maritime transport services and, as such, carry out economic activities.
Kot je bilo že poudarjeno v sklepu o začetku postopka (uvodna izjava 62), sta SNCM in CMN izvajalca, ki opravljata storitve pomorskega prometa in pri tem opravljata gospodarske dejavnosti.
STATE RESOURCES AND ATTRIBUTION TO THE STATE
DRŽAVNA SREDSTVA IN ODGOVORNOST
As outlined in paragraphs 63 to 65 of the opening decision, the resolution to conclude the public service delegation contract was passed by the Assembly of Corsica, and, as a public authority, the resources of the Corsican Transport Board are public resources provided particularly from the budget for territorial continuity paid by the State.
Kot je navedeno v sklepu o začetku postopka (uvodne izjave od 63 do 65), je odločitev o sklenitvi pogodbe o PPJS sprejela skupščina Korzike; sredstva OTC, tj. javnega organa, so javna sredstva, ki izhajajo zlasti iz proračuna za ozemeljsko povezanost, ki ga zagotavlja država.
The compensation paid under the public service delegation therefore constitutes a transfer of State resources imputable to the State.
Nadomestila, izplačana v okviru PPJS, so torej sestavni del prenosa državnih sredstev, ki ga je mogoče pripisati državi.
SELECTIVE ADVANTAGE FOR THE JOINT CONCESSION HOLDERS
SELEKTIVNA PREDNOST ZA POOBLAŠČENE SOIZVAJALCE
To determine whether a State measure constitutes aid to an undertaking, it must be determined whether the company in question enjoys an economic advantage enabling it to avoid costs that would otherwise have been borne by its own financial resources or whether it enjoys an advantage which it would not have received under normal market conditions [53].
Pri presoji, ali državni ukrep pomeni pomoč podjetju, je treba ugotoviti, ali ima zadevno podjetje gospodarsko prednost, zaradi katere se izogne stroškom, ki bi običajno morali bremeniti lastna finančna sredstva podjetja, oziroma ali ima prednost, ki je v običajnih tržnih razmerah ne bi moglo pridobiti [53].
In this context, contrary to the claims made by CMN, the Commission considers that gains in market share by competing operators do not by any means indicate the absence of any benefit granted to the joint concession holders.
V tem smislu Komisija meni, da v nasprotju s trditvijo CMN tržni deleži, ki jih pridobijo konkurenčni izvajalci, na noben način ne pomenijo odsotnosti gospodarske prednosti, dodeljene pooblaščenima soizvajalcema.
Indeed it is clear that, without public intervention, the concession holders would not have received any compensation for their operational costs as provided for by the public service delegation contract.
V tem primeru pooblaščena izvajalca brez javnega posredovanja ne bi pridobila nadomestila za svoje stroške poslovanja, kot je predvideno v pogodbi o PPJS.
France refers in particular to the Council of State's ruling of 13 July 2012, cited above, to conclude that there are no elements of State aid in the public service delegation contract as a whole.
Francija se pri odločitvi o pomanjkanju elementov državne pomoči v pogodbi o PPJS kot celoti sklicuje zlasti na zgoraj navedeno sodbo državnega sveta z dne 13. julija 2012.
However, the Commission notes that the judgment by the national court holds merely that the safeguard clause in Article 7(1) of the public service delegation contract [54], considered in isolation, could not be characterised as State aid [55].
Komisija kljub temu trdi, da je nacionalno sodišče v svoji sodbi razsodilo, da se zaščitna klavzula iz člena 7(1) pogodbe o PPJS [54] ne more šteti za državno pomoč, kadar je obravnavana ločeno [55].
As the Commission does not consider the safeguard clause in isolation, but takes into account the public service delegation contract as a whole, it considers that the grounds for this ruling on the above-mentioned clause are not relevant in determining whether the public service delegation contract as a whole includes elements of State aid.
Ker Komisija zaščitne klavzule ne obravnava ločeno, ampak upošteva celotno pogodbo o PPJS, meni, da obrazložitev te sodbe o zgoraj navedeni klavzuli ni upoštevna pri določitvi, ali pogodba o PPJS kot celota vključuje elemente državne pomoči.
It will examine the substance of the arguments presented in the judgment in the context of its review of the definition of public service obligations covered by the public service delegation contract (see section 7.1.3.1 below).
V okviru pregleda opredelitve obveznosti javne službe iz pogodbe o PPJS bo obravnavala vsebino trditev iz te sodbe (glej oddelek 7.1.3.1 spodaj).
Insofar as France argues that such compensation does not provide a selective advantage to the beneficiaries under the Altmark judgment mentioned above, the Commission must consider whether all the Altmark criteria are fulfilled by the compensation granted under the public service delegation contract, as the French authorities and joint concession holders claim.
Pri navedbah Francije, da ta nadomestila ne bi povzročila selektivne prednosti njenim prejemnikom na podlagi sodne prakse iz zgoraj navedene sodbe Altmark, mora Komisija proučiti, ali so pri nadomestilih, dodeljenih na podlagi pogodbe o PPJS, upoštevana vsa merila iz sodbe Altmark, kot trdijo francoski organi in pooblaščena soizvajalca.
In this regard, it should be recalled that the Court ruled in that case [56] that the compensation granted in discharging public service obligations does not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU when four criteria are cumulatively met:
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da je Sodišče v tej sodbi [56] razsodilo, da se nadomestila, dodeljena za izpolnjevanje obveznosti gospodarske javne službe, ne štejejo za pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, če so kumulativno izpolnjena štiri merila:
the recipient undertaking is actually required to discharge public service obligations and those obligations have been clearly defined (criterion 1);
podjetje, ki prejema nadomestilo, mora dejansko izpolnjevati obveznosti javne službe, te pa morajo biti jasno opredeljene (merilo 1),