natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Moreover, PCT argues that both from a supply and demand side perspective, the central and southern part of Greece constitute a geographic market which is distinct from the northern part of Greece, due to: (a) the capability of PCT's container port terminal to handle a far greater volume of traffic than the Thessaloniki port and any other Greek port, and under more competitive terms given its greater technical capacity; (b) the concentration of industry, commerce and the population principally in the wider Athens area and generally the central/southern part of the country; (c) the topography of Greece which dictates the additional cost of transporting container traffic between the Thessaloniki port in the northern part of Greece and the central and southern parts of the country and vice versa.
Na podlagi navedenega podjetje PCT trdi, da pristanišč, navedenih v sklepu o začetku postopka, ni mogoče obravnavati kot dejanskih ali morebitnih nadomestnih pristanišč za kontejnersko pristanišče podjetja PCT, kar zadeva zagotavljanje prekladalnih storitev za promet s pretovarjanjem v vzhodnem Sredozemlju.
Concerning the transhipment container services, PCT refers to the Maersk/ECT and Hutchinson/Evergreen Commission decisions where the Commission identified, as relevant geographic market for the transhipment container services, the Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea area.
Poleg tega se podjetje PCT sklicuje na sklep Komisije o pomembnih naložbah v pristanišče Pirej, v katerem je menila, da konkurenca med posebnimi pristanišči in pristaniščem Pirej ni pomembna [39].
It also considers that the Commission in its opening decision considers the geographic scope of the market as encompassing ‘Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean’.
Trdi tudi, da Komisija ni analizirala vpliva davčnih določb na konkurenco in trgovino na upoštevnih trgih.
Competitive conditions in the relevant market
Ocena tega vpliva bi zahtevala proučitev enakovrednih davčnih sistemov, ki veljajo na upoštevnih trgih, ker druga pristanišča lahko koristijo podobne ali enakovredne davčne določbe.
As regards transhipment traffic, PCT argues the PCT container terminal does not compete with EU ports on the provision of stevedoring services for deep-sea container transhipment traffic in the Eastern Mediterranean, other than PPA's Pier I container terminal.
Podjetje PCT nadalje trdi, da se na zadevnih trgih srečuje samo s konkurenco podjetja PPA, ki upravlja kontejnerski terminal na pomolu I v pristanišču Pirej.
Moreover it argues that the Commission did not explain why it considers that there are various ports in EU Member States [33] in this market that compete with PCT's container terminal port.
Vendar je Komisija v zvezi s podjetjem PPA priznala, da bo koncesija, podeljena podjetju PCT, povečala konkurenco na področju prekladalnih storitev za kontejnerski promet v pristanišču Pirej [40].
According to PCT the Commission's statement that ‘… the port of Thessaloniki, the port of Constanza in Romania, the port of Koper in Slovenia and a number of ports in Italy may be considered as direct competitors’ contradicts the Commission's findings in case C 21/09 [34].
Podjetje PCT v zvezi s potencialnimi konkurenti, ki bi lahko izhajali iz privatizacije podjetja PPA in drugih grških pristanišč, trdi, da upravljavci grških pristanišč, ki jim ni bila podeljena podobna koncesija, niso v podobnem položaju, zato zadevne davčne določbe ne dajejo konkurenčne prednosti in ne izkrivljajo konkurence.
The ports of Italy and the port of Koper in Slovenia are not located in the eastern Mediterranean segment of the market that the Commission identified according to PCT, but rather in the central Mediterranean one.
Poleg tega podjetje PCT ugotavlja, da Komisija ne navaja nobenega dokaza o zanimanju drugih upravljavcev pristanišč za večjo naložbo, da bi se vzpostavil glavni pristaniški kontejnerski terminal v Grčiji.
Moreover, transhipment traffic destined for the hinterland covered by these ports (‘catchment area’) is not handled presently through Piraeus port [35].
Po njegovem mnenju je malo verjetno, da bi prišlo do take konkurence, ker ne bi nobeno drugo obstoječe pristanišče v Grčiji združevalo značilnosti Pireja [41].
From a supply-side perspective, PCT argues that these ports could be considered to some extent as substitutes for PCT's container port terminal, as they could service some of the types of container ship that the PCT container port could service, but not all, due to the fact that they have a smaller sea depth and crane capacity [36].
Kar zadeva konkurenco podjetja PPA, podjetje PCT trdi, da je mnenje Komisije zmotno, ker se podjetje PCT že srečuje s konkurenco kontejnerskega terminala na pomolu I, ki ga upravlja podjetje PPA, in da je učinek koncesije odprtje trga za konkurenco, ne pa njeno izkrivljanje.
From a demand-side perspective, these ports cannot be considered as substitutes for the Piraeus port, as: (a) Piraeus offers the shortest and cheapest [37] deviation from the Suez/Gibraltar axis which represents the principal deep-sea container shipping lines in the Mediterranean Sea [38]; (b) Piraeus offers the lowest bunker oil prices at a worldwide level; (c) Constanza in particular would involve additional costs of pilots in the Dardanelles and Bosphorus.
V zvezi s tem trdi tudi, da ima podjetje PPA koristi od nekaterih zakonskih davčnih določb, z vidika katerih se je sprejetje nekaterih zadevnih fiskalnih določb štelo za nujen mehanizem, ki bi podjetju PCT preprečil, da bi se znašlo v podrejenem konkurenčnem položaju.
In view of the above, PCT argues that the ports mentioned in the opening decision cannot be considered as actual or potential substitutes for the PCT container port as regards the provision of stevedoring services for transhipment traffic in the eastern Mediterranean.
O primerjavi domnevnih ukrepov državne pomoči s podobnimi določbami v drugih pogodbah o velikih infrastrukturnih projektih [42]
In addition PCT refers to the Commission decision relevant to investments in the port of Piraeus, where the Commission considered that the competition between specific ports and the Port of Piraeus is insignificant [39].
Grški organi in podjetje PCT navajajo, da so bile določbe, podobne tistim iz členov 2 in 3 Zakona, vključene v grške zakone, s katerimi so bili ratificirani številni posamezni javni infrastrukturni projekti in Zakon št. 3389/2005 o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih.
Moreover, it argues that the Commission failed to analyse the effect of the fiscal provisions on competition and trade in the relevant markets.
Ker je Komisija proučila te zakone, ki spadajo na področje uporabe člena 107(1) PDEU, in sklenila, da ti niso bili podlaga za državno pomoč, bi sklep, da davčne določbe v korist podjetja PCT pomenijo selektivni ukrep in dajejo neupravičeno prednost iz člena 107(1) PDEU, ogrozil pravno varnost ter bi bil v nasprotju s prakso Komisije in predhodnimi izjavami o uporabi takih določb pri javnih infrastrukturnih projektih v Grčiji.
Moreover the assessment of this effect would require an examination of the equivalent tax systems applying within the relevant markets as other ports may benefit from similar or equivalent fiscal provisions.
Glede zadeve v zvezi z Mednarodnim letališčem v Atenah [43], o kateri je Komisija menila, da davčne določbe, uporabljene za letališke storitve, ki takrat še niso bile liberalizirane, trdijo, da se lahko za storitve pristaniške infrastrukture iz sedanjega primera sklene enako.
It also argues that PCT only faces competition in the markets concerned from PPA, which operates the Pier I container terminal at the Piraeus port.
Grški organi vztrajajo pri trditvi, da je Komisija v danem primeru proučila navedene določbe.
However as regards PPA, the Commission has recognised that the concession to PCT will increase competition for stevedoring services for container traffic in the port of Piraeus [40].
Glede zadev v zvezi z atensko obvoznico [44] in avtocestnim mostom Rio Antirrio je po njihovem mnenju Komisija natančno proučila finančne prispevke javnega in zasebnega sektorja za stroške projekta ter zadevne davčne določbe.
As far as the potential competitors that may result from the privatisation of PPA and other Greek ports, PCT argues that the Greek port operators that are not entrusted with a similar concession are not in a similar position, thus no competitive advantage nor a distortion of competition arise from the fiscal provisions at stake.
Komisija je nato sklenila, da je bil znesek prispevka javnega sektorja (v obliki nepovratnih sredstev in državnih poroštev) določen za „tržno ceno“ (tj. najnižji zahtevani znesek prispevka javnega sektorja) prek javnega, nediskriminacijskega in za konkurenco odprtega javnega razpisa.
It also argues that the Commission does not refer to any evidence that other port operators would be interested in undertaking a major investment to establish a major container port terminal in Greece.
Komisija je v sklepu o atenski obvoznici sklenila, da davčne določbe pomenijo razjasnitev veljavnega davčnega režima, brez katerega bi se lahko ogrozila uspešnost projekta, zato jih ni obravnavala kot del plačila koncesionarja.
According to PCT it is highly unlikely that such competition would arise, since no other existing port in Greece would combine Piraeus's characteristics [41].
Katera koli finančna vrednost, ki bi lahko bila povezana z uporabo sprejetih davčnih določb, se ne bi mogla obravnavati kot del prispevka javnega sektorja, ker bi se lahko natančno določila šele po prenehanju veljavnosti koncesije.
Finally as regards competition from PPA, it argues that the Commission's view is inaccurate, as PCT already faces competition from PPA's Pier I container terminal and the effect of the concession is the opening of the market to competition and not a distortion of competition.
Te določbe so bile samo nujne razjasnitve, da zasebni vlagatelji ne bi bili odvrnjeni zlasti od takih ekonomsko neupravičenih, visoko tveganih gradbenih projektov.
In this respect it also argues that PPA benefits from certain legislative provisions of fiscal nature, in the light of which the adoption of some of the fiscal provisions as stake was seen as a necessary mechanism for ensuring that PCT was not put in a competitive disadvantage.
Tako se podjetje PCT v teh primerih ne more ločiti od koncesionarjev, ker so bile te določbe v vseh primerih „razjasnitev“ in ne „plačilo“, kot je menila Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka.
On the comparison of the alleged State aid measures with similar provisions in other contracts of big infrastructure projects [42]
Poleg tega sodna praksa [45], ki jo Komisija v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka navaja v zvezi z dejstvom, da čeprav se glede posebnih ukrepov ni opredelila, to ne pomeni, da so bili ti odobreni [46], se ne more uporabljati v priglašenih primerih, kot so tisti, ki jih navajajo grški organi in podjetje PCT.
The Greek authorities and PCT indicate that similar provisions to those of Article 2 and 3 of the Law were included in the Greek laws that ratified several individual public infrastructure projects as well as Law 3389/2005 concerning Public Private Partnerships.
Komisiji se v zvezi z naknadnimi sklepi o državni pomoči za druge infrastrukturne projekte ni bilo treba podrobno sklicevati na zadevne davčne določbe, ker ni spremenila svojega mnenja glede zadev o avtocestnem mostu Rio Antirrio in atenski obvoznici [47].
As the Commission examined those laws under Article 107(1) TFEU and decided that they did not give rise to State aid, a conclusion that the fiscal provisions in favour of PCT constitute a selective measure and confer an undue advantage falling within the scope of Article 107(1) TFEU would jeopardise legal certainty and would be contrary to the Commission's practice and previous statements concerning the application of such provisions to public infrastructure projects in Greece.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT se sprašujejo, ali se glede na odobritev Komisije v navedenih predhodnih sklepih zadevne davčne določbe lahko štejejo za skladne s pravili o državni pomoči, in ne, ali so bile te določbe predmet predhodne ocene s strani Komisije, kot je navedeno v sklepu o začetku postopka.
Concerning the Athens International airport case [43], where the Commission considered that the fiscal provisions applied in respect of airport services that were not liberalised at the time, they argue that the same conclusion can also be drawn for port infrastructure services in the current case.
Poleg tega, če bi bile te določbe vključene v razpisno dokumentacijo o tej koncesiji, bi Komisija sklenila enako kot v svojih predhodnih sklepih.
Moreover the Greek authorities retain their argumentation that the Commission examined the said provisions in that case.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo tudi, da razlikovanje med sedanjo in preteklimi zadevami, navedeno v sklepu Komisije o začetku postopka, temelji na formalnosti, tj. na sprejetju davčnih določb z Zakonom št. 3755/2009 in ne na njihovi vključitvi v koncesijsko pogodbo.
Concerning the Athens Ring Road case [44] and the Rio Antirrio Motorway Bridge case, according to them the Commission examined carefully the public and private sector financial contributions to the costs of the project as well as the fiscal provisions concerned.
Poleg tega tako razlikovanje kaže: (i) da so bili ponudniki v javnem razpisu seznanjeni, da so te davčne določbe standardni okvir, ki ga Grčija uporablja za javne infrastrukturne projekte in za javno-zasebna partnerstva v Grčiji; (ii) da so bile pogodbe podjetja PCT glede koncesij za kontejnerski pristanišči Pirej in Solun izvedene na ravni grškega ministrskega predsednika in ministra za ladijski promet, ki sta vlagatelje na mednarodni ravni spodbujala k prevzemu tega projekta in ponujala celoten sveženj ukrepov, ki jih ima Grčija za javne infrastrukturne projekte, financirane s sredstvi zasebnega sektorja; (iii) da je bilo podjetje PCT seznanjeno, da je Komisija proučila vse take predhodne projekte in v zvezi z njimi ni podala nobenega ugovora; (iv) da je podjetje PCT od grške vlade in podjetja PPA med postopkom oddaje javnega naročila zahtevalo, da se te določbe vključijo v koncesijsko pogodbo; (v) da je podjetje PCT ponovno izpostavilo to vprašanje pred grškim ministrskim predsednikom in ministrom za ladijski promet, ki sta mu vnovič zagotovila, da se bo uvedla taka zakonodaja; (vi) da je podjetje PCT ob upoštevanju teh zagotovil ter v celotnem javnem razpisu in pri pripravi svoje ponudbe upoštevalo, da se bo koncesijska pogodba izvajala na isti podlagi kot vse druge infrastrukturne koncesije, zato so posojilodajalci seznanjeni s koncesijskimi pogoji.
The Commission then concluded that the amount of the public sector contribution (in the form of grants and state guarantees) was determined as ‘market price’ (i.e. the lowest amount of the public sector contribution required) through an open, non-discriminatory and competitive tender.
Iz tega sledi, da se postopek oddaje javnega naročila za dodelitev koncesijske pogodbe podjetju PCT ne more razločevati od preteklih primerov, ker je bil standardni davčni okvir za velike infrastrukturne projekte znan vsem ponudnikom.
In the Athens Ring Road decision the Commission concluded that the fiscal provisions constituted a clarification of the applicable tax regime, the absence of which could risk jeopardising the success of the project and did not consider them as part of the remuneration of the concessionaire.
Poleg tega grški organi in podjetje PCT navajajo, da ni bilo posebnega razloga za evidentiranje takih izmenjav v okviru razpisnega postopka, ker podjetje PPA ni pooblaščeno za sprejemanje takih določb, ki so se v vsakem primeru uporabile zaradi ustaljene prakse v Grčiji v skladu z dosedanjo prakso odločanja Komisije.
Any financial value that might be associated with the application of the fiscal provisions adopted could not have been considered as part of the public sector contribution, since it could have been determined with accuracy only upon the expiry of the concession period.
Če se torej Komisija opira na formalnost kot edini razlog za razločevanje podjetja PCT od vseh podjetij, ki izvajajo javne infrastrukturne projekte v Grčiji, je ta formalnost v nasprotju z načelom pravne varnosti in legitimnih pričakovanj.
These provisions were only the necessary clarifications so that private investors would not be discouraged in particular as regards this type of non-viable construction projects of high risk.
Kar zadeva izjavo Komisije, da „dokazi, ki so jih zagotovili grški organi, podpirajo ugotovitev, da ponudniki niso upoštevali posebnih prednosti …“ [48], podjetje PCT trdi, da ni seznanjeno z navedenimi dokazi in da sprejetje teh določb z zakonom, s katerim se je ratificirala koncesijska pogodba, ni noben dokaz o tem.
Thus PCT cannot be distinguished from the concessionaires in these cases, as these provisions were in all cases a ‘clarification’ and not a ‘remuneration’ as the Commission considered in its opening decision.
O združljivosti domnevnih ukrepov državne pomoči
Moreover, the case-law [45] the Commission mentions in its opening decision as regards the fact that its silence of the Commission on specific measures does not mean that they have been approved [46], cannot be applied in notified cases as the ones invoked by the Greek authorities and PCT.
Grški organi in podjetje PCT trdijo, da kadar Komisija sklene, da so zadevne davčne določbe podlaga za državno pomoč, bi se morala taka pomoč v skladu s členoma 107(3)(a) in (c) šteti za združljivo z notranjim trgom glede na pomen ustreznih naložb, infrastrukture in storitev za gospodarski razvoj Grčije in zlasti za razvoj in posodobitev sektorja pomorskega kontejnerskega prevoza.
Concerning the subsequent State aid decisions on the rest of the infrastructure projects, the Commission did not need to refer in detail to the fiscal provisions in question because it did not change its position expressed in Rio Antirrio Motorway bridge and Athens Ring Road cases [47].
Cilj zadevnega naložbenega projekta je razviti pristanišče Pirej v sodoben pomorski kontejnerski terminal v Sredozemskem morju, z večjo zmogljivostjo in prostorom za skladiščenje, da se poveča njegova učinkovitost pri oskrbi pomorskega kontejnerskega prometa.
They argue that the issue that arises is whether in the light of the Commission's approval in the above past decisions, the fiscal provisions at stake can be considered as consistent with State aid rules and not whether these provisions are concerned by the Commission's past assessment, as indicated in the opening decision.
Podatki o učinkovitosti, ki se nanašajo na upravljanje pomola II [49], že izkazujejo doseganje tega cilja.
Moreover, had these provisions been included in the tender documents of this concession, the Commission would have concluded the same as in the past Commission decisions.
Poleg tega je namen projekta izpolniti cilj Komisije o skupnem interesu v povezavi s prometno politiko EU, ker je bilo to analizirano v okviru različnih uredb in sporočil EU.
They also argue that the distinction made by the Commission in its opening decision between the current case and the previous cases is based upon a technicality, i.e. the adoption of the fiscal provisions in Law 3755/2009 as opposed to including them in the concession contract.
Nakup opreme in gradnja pomola III veljajo za začetno naložbo v okviru ustreznih pravil EU o regionalni pomoči, ki spadajo na področje uporabe člena 107(3)(a) PDEU.
Furthermore it indicates that: (i) the bidders of the tender were aware of the application of these fiscal provisions as the standard framework used by Greece for public infrastructure projects and in respect of PPPs in Greece; (ii) PCT contacts in respect of the Piraeus and Thessaloniki container port concessions were carried out at the level of Greece's Prime Minister and Minister of Shipping who were promoting these project to investors at international level and were offering the full package of measures that Greece has in place for public infrastructure projects financed by private sector resources; (iii) PCT was aware that the Commission had examined and has raised no objections of all such previous projects; (iv) PCT requested from the Greek government and PPA during the tender procedure that these provisions be included in the concession contract; (v) PCT raised this issue again with the Greek Prime Minister and Minister for shipping and once again received reassurances that such legislation would be introduced; (vi) in the light of these reassurances and throughout the tender and the preparation of its offer, PCT took into account that the concession contract would be operated on the same basis as all other public infrastructure concessions and that therefore, lenders would be familiar with the concession terms.
Naložba je znašala […] [50] milijonov EUR in ustvarila 900 neposrednih in posrednih delovnih mest za polni delovni čas in za obdobje 35 let, kolikor bo trajala koncesija.
Therefore, the tender process for the award of the concession contract to PCT cannot be distinguished from the past cases, as the standard fiscal framework for big infrastructure projects was known to all bidders.
Glede na visok znesek naložbe bi bil vsak morebitni znesek pomoči bistveno nižji od največje intenzivnosti pomoči, ki znaša 30 % in ki je za regijo Attiki veljala do konca leta 2010, ali največjih zneskov pomoči, ki jih je Komisija odobrila v sklepih o pristaniški infrastrukturi [51].
They indicate further that there was no particular reason for keeping record of such exchanges in the context of the tender process since PPA does not have the power to adopt such provisions and at any case their application was a matter of established practice in Greece in line with the Commission's precedent.
Zato so ukrepi pomoči najmanjši potrebni in ustrezni ukrepi za podporo tako velikega infrastrukturnega projekta.
Thus, if the Commission relies on a technicality as the sole reason for distinguishing PCT from all undertakings carrying out public infrastructure in Greece, this formality would be contrary to the principle of legal certainty and legitimate expectations.
Lasten prispevek podjetja PCT k projektu je v mejah, določenih v pravilih o regionalni pomoči.
Concerning the Commission's statement that ‘the evidence provided by the Greek authorities reinforces the finding that the bidders did not take the specific advantages into account …’ [48], PCT argues that it is not aware of the evidence mentioned and that the adoption of these provisions through the law ratifying the concession contract does not amount to any evidence.
Poleg tega bi bila vsaka morebitna pomoč v skladu s členom 107(3)(a) PDEU združljiva s skupnim trgom iz istega razloga kot pomoč, ki jo je Komisija v zadevi C 21/2009 odobrila podjetju PPA [52].
On the compatibility of the alleged State aid measures
Pomoč se lahko šteje za potrebno zlasti glede na potrebo po javnem financiranju za razvoj pristaniške infrastrukture med finančno krizo v skladu s politiko EU v zvezi s tem [53] in zato, da se zagotovijo jasnost, prožnost in predvidljivost davčnega sistema, ki velja za koncesije, kot je ta.
The Greek authorities and PCT argue that in case the Commission concludes that the fiscal provisions at stake give rise to State aid, such aid should be considered compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 107(3)(a) and 107(3)(c), in view of the importance of the relevant investments, infrastructure and services for the economic development of Greece and, in particular, for the development and modernisation of the sea container transport sector.
Kar zadeva potrebo po ukrepih pomoči, trdijo, da so davčne določbe zagotavljale skladnost s finančnim režimom zasebnega sektorja v zvezi s projektom in omogočile, da je podjetje odplačalo svoja posojila in morebitne obveznosti.
The investment project at stake aims at developing Piraeus Port as modern sea container terminal in the Mediterranean Sea, with more capacity and storage space, enhancing its performance in handling sea container traffic more efficiently.
Brez teh davčnih določb bi bil finančni režim v zvezi s projektom, ki bi ga podjetje PCT lahko doseglo, bistveno težavnejši, kar bi utegnilo ogroziti njegovo ponudbo ali izvedbo koncesijske pogodbe (nedelovanje trga).