natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The method proposed by CEIAM is particularly appropriate for plot B-32, since no opportunity exists to sell the land with the infrastructure because the type of use and the public ownership of that land are determined for the long term.
Kraljevina Španija Komisijo obvešča o napredku nacionalnih ukrepov, sprejetih za izvajanje tega sklepa, do dokončne izterjave pomoči iz člena 1.
The static residual valuation method proposed by Real Madrid is not appropriate in a case of the intended operation of sport infrastructure against payment of user fees.
Na zahtevo Komisije nemudoma predloži informacije o že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepih za izpolnitev tega sklepa.
That method can only be applied if the land and the infrastructure on it can be sold and only if this sale occurs immediately following the construction.
Prav tako zagotovi podrobne informacije v zvezi z zneski pomoči in obrestmi vračila, ki jih je upravičenec že vrnil.
For the purposes of determining the current value of a plot in order to determine the value of a compensation claim depending on that value, it does not appear to be appropriate to assume or determine a hypothetical value based on characteristics which influence the value of the land but which actually are not fulfilled.
Člen 5
If there were a claim for compensation against the Madrid City Council, the relevant value of plot B-32 is the value it has for the Madrid City Council, which could not benefit from a hypothetical value of the plot if it would be transferable.
Ta sklep je naslovljen na Kraljevino Španijo.
Third, the CEIAM study contains a detailed and careful comparison with other sport installations of various characters and attractiveness for the estimation of the costs and revenues.
V Bruslju, 4. julija 2016
Regarding the alleged failure to consider revenue streams from other activities than sport and to fully exhaust the buildability of the land, the study provides in Section 1.6.4 a detailed hypothesis on the way in which the land could be used for several mixes of sport infrastructure.
Za Komisijo
It also includes parking, shop and restaurant use and the expected revenues from user fees, elaborated in detail for the various infrastructures.
Članica Komisije
Those percentages of land use are often set very high by urban planning to allow it to react to varying demands over the years until the expected use materialises.
Glej opombo 1.
However, that would not be unusual in case of public use land, since it is common that those maximum percentages are not fully exhausted in those cases.
Sodba z dne 6. oktobra 2004 Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid, Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, Seccion 2a.
The intensity of the land use would depend on the expected demand and on the type of sport activities or infrastructure offered.
Sodba št. 77/2015, Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, Sección Primera.
In this regard, CEIAM analysed 22 comparable sport complexes for the development of the scenario used by the study.
„Toda alteración de la ordenación establecida por un Plan de Ordenación Urbanística que […], desafecte el suelo de un destino público […], deberá contemplar las medidas compensatorias precisas para mantener la cantidad y calidad de las dotaciones previstas respecto del aprovechamiento urbanístico del suelo […].“
Regarding the percentage of sport users in the neighbourhood, which Real Madrid considers too low, the study used the existing official statistical data on sport activity of the inhabitants of the catchment area of sport installations on plot B-32 in Madrid, as reproduced in Section 3.2 of the study's information annex.
Poročilo Aguirre Newman, ki ga je predložil Real Madrid, str.
The study also considers the possible demand by employees of the surrounding offices.
122–126.
In this regard, Real Madrid fails to provide figures based on market research in the neighbourhood to support its arguments that the percentage of sport users is too low, so that the Commission must accept the more prudent estimates provided by CEIAM.
Poročilo Aguirre Newman, str. 113–117.
Finally, regarding the fact that the land value is appraised under a scenario with a mere right to use the land (derecho de superficie) and not on the transfer of full possession and title to the land, the Commission refers to recital 111 above, in particular the observation that no opportunity exists to sell the land with the infrastructure because the type of use and the public ownership of that land are determined for the long term.
Poročilo Aguirre Newman, str. 106–112.
For all the foregoing reasons, the Commission considers that the criticisms expressed by Spain and by Real Madrid on the CEIAM study are unfounded.
Sodba vrhovnega sodišča z dne 6. junija 1997, pritožba št. 1610/1993 („que por su enajenación a terceros de buena fe la cosa vendida se hizo irreivindicable, no el de la sentencia que así lo declara habida cuenta que esta sentencia es declarativa, no constitutiva, y se limita a constatar una situación preexistente; de ahí que la obligación de restitución surja en el momento en que los vendedores enajenaron las cosas, careciendo de poder dispositivo sobre ellas“).
Real Madrid fails to show by how much the alleged shortcomings of the CEIAM report result in a material underestimation in value.
UL C 209, 10.7.1997, str. 3.
Consequently, the value of plot B-32 in 2011 could not have been assumed to be higher than the EUR 4275000 value estimated by the CEIAM study, so that a prudent market economy operator in similar circumstances would not have entered into the 2011 settlement agreement by which the Madrid City Council agreed to compensate Real Madrid in the amount of EUR 22693054,44 to buy off an uncertain legal liability for its failure to fulfil its obligation to transfer plot B-32 under the 1998 implementation agreement.
Kraljevi odlok 1020/1993, ki vsebuje tehnične standarde za katastrsko vrednotenje, in tabela vrednosti zemljišč in gradnje („Real Decreto 1020/1993 por el que se aprueban las Normas Técnicas de Valoración y el Cuadro Marco de Valores del Suelo y de las construcciones para determinar el valor catastral de los bienes inmuebles de naturaleza urbana“).
In light of the uncertain probability that the Madrid City Council would have been found liable for its failure to transfer plot B-32 under the 1998 implementation agreement and the considerable disparity between the amount the Madrid City Council agreed to compensate Real Madrid under the 2011 settlement agreement (EUR 22693054,44) and the maximum extent of its legal liability (EUR 4275000), the Commission concludes that a prudent market economy operator, operating in circumstances similar to the Madrid City Council, would not have entered into the 2011 settlement agreement.
Člen 114.1 zakona 33/2003 o premoženju javne uprave ( „Ley 33/2003, de 3 de noviembre, del Patrimonio de las Administraciones Públicas“) določa, da vrednotenja javnih zemljišč, izdelana za namene omenjenega akta, smejo izvajati (i) tehnično osebje pri javnem organu, ki upravlja premoženje ali pravice, ki jih je treba prenesti ali za katere obstaja zanimanje za pridobitev/najem, (ii) tehnično osebje na Ministrstvu za finance in javno upravo, (iii) družbe za vrednotenje, vpisane v Register cenilnih družb Banke Španije ( „Registro de Sociedades de Tasación del Banco de España“), in druge ustrezno pooblaščene cenilne družbe.
The Commission therefore concludes that the Madrid City Council, in concluding the 2011 settlement agreement with Real Madrid, did not behave as a market economy operator would have in comparable circumstances.
Glej zadevo C-399/08 P Komisija proti Deutsche Post, ECLI:EU:C:2010:481, točka 38 in tam citirano sodno prakso.
Consequently, the 2011 settlement agreement should be considered to confer an economic advantage on Real Madrid amounting to the difference between the amount of the compensation and the maximum amount of its legal liability and therefore constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Glej zadevo C-399/08 P Komisija proti Deutsche Post, ECLI:EU:C:2010:481, točka 39 in tam citirano sodno prakso.
Finally, regarding Spain's claim that if the Madrid City Council had transferred plot B-32 to Real Madrid in 2011 instead, no aid would be present, the Commission considers that claim irrelevant for its conclusion that Real Madrid obtained an economic advantage under the 2011 settlement agreement.
Združene zadeve od C-180/98 do C-184/98 Pavlov in drugi ECLI:EU:C:2000:428.
The Madrid City Council could only have transferred plot B-32 if it was legally entitled to do so.
Zadeva C-415/93 Bosman, ECLI:EU:C:1995:463, točka 73, zadeva C-519/04 P Meca-Medina in Majcen proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:2006:492, točka 22 in zadeva C-325/08 Olympique Lyonnais, ECLI:EU:C:2010:143, točka 23.
If that were the case, not only would there have been no need to enter into the 2011 settlement agreement, but Real Madrid would have obtained the actual plot of land to which it was entitled under the 1998 implementation agreement, so that there would have been no need to assess whether the compensation offered to Real Madrid in lieu of that plot of land corresponded to the value of that land.
Zadeva C-172/03 Heiser, ECLI:EU:C:2005:130, točka 55, združene zadeve C-71/09 P, C-73/09 P in C-76/09 P Comitato „Venezia vuole vivere“ in drugi proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:2011:368, točka 136.
In other words, the Madrid City Council would have implemented the 1998 implementation agreement, which is not the subject-matter of the present decision.
Glej tudi zadevo C-156/98, Nemčija proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:2000:467, točka 30 in tam citirano sodno prakso.
Compatibility of the aid
Zadeva C-342/96, Španija proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:1999:210, točka 41.
State aid shall be deemed compatible with the internal market if it falls within any of the categories listed in Article 107(2) of the Treaty [29] and it may be deemed compatible with the internal market if it is found by the Commission to fall within any of the categories listed in Article 107(3) of the Treaty [30].
Zadeva C-39/94 SFEI in drugi, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, točki 60 in 61.
However, it is the Member State granting the aid which bears the burden of proving that State aid granted by it is compatible with the internal market pursuant to Articles 107(2) or 107(3) of the Treaty [31].
Zadeva C-73/11 P Frucona Košice proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:C:2013:32, točka 71 in tam citirano sodno prakso.
Neither Spain nor Real Madrid have claimed that any of the exceptions provided for in Article 107(2) and 107(3) of the Treaty apply in the present case.
Zadeva C-124/10 P Komisija proti EDF, ECLI:EU:C:2012:318, točke 84, 85 in 105; glej, po analogiji, Sklep komisije z dne 12 marca 2014 v zadevi SA.36249 (2014/N-3): Španija – Sprememba prestrukturiranja CEISS preko integracije z Unicaja Banco, uvodni izjavi 59, 60; UL C 141, 9.5.2014, str. 1.
The Commission notes in this regard that since the aid in question results in an income from which Real Madrid would not normally have benefited in the course of its business operations, the 2011 settlement agreement should be considered as granting operating aid to Real Madrid.
Zadeva C-124/10 P Komisija proti EDF, ECLI:EU:C:2012:318, točka 85.
As a general rule, such aid can normally not be considered compatible with the internal market under Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty in that it does not facilitate the development of certain activities.
Španija je potrdila neobstoj takšnega zunanjega svetovanja na telefonski konferenci z dne 6. novembra 2015 in v pisni izjavi z dne 9. marca 2016.
Consequently, the State aid granted to Real Madrid through the 2011 settlement agreement is incompatible with the internal market.
Glej opombo 4.
UNLAWFULNESS OF THE AID
V najboljšem in najslabšem primeru bi pričakovana donosnost na naložbe preko prihodkov znašala 6350000 EUR oziroma 2350000 EUR.
According to Article 108(3) of the Treaty, Member States are obliged to inform the Commission of any plan to grant aid (notification obligation) and they may not put into effect any proposed aid measures until the Commission has taken a final position decision on the aid in question (standstill obligation).
Pripombe Španije z dne 15. junija 2015 o študiji CEIAM, ki jo je Komisija posredovala dne 22. aprila 2015.
The Commission notes that Spain did not notify the Commission of any plan to grant aid through the 2011 settlement agreement, nor did it respect the standstill obligation laid down in Article 108(3) of the Treaty.
Vloga Real Madrida z dne 10. julija 2015.
RECOVERY
85, de 9 de abril de 2003, p.
According to the Treaty and the Court's established case-law, the Commission is competent to decide that the Member State concerned must abolish or alter aid when it has found that it is incompatible with the internal market [33].
13678.
The Court has also consistently held that the obligation on a Member State to abolish aid regarded by the Commission as being incompatible with the internal market is designed to re-establish the previously existing situation [34].
Odstopanja iz člena 107(2) Pogodbe zadevajo: (a) pomoč socialnega značaja, dodeljeno posameznim potrošnikom; (b) pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izjemni dogodki; in (c) pomoč, dodeljeno posameznim območjem Zvezne republike Nemčije.
In this context, the Court has established that this objective is attained once the recipient has repaid the amounts granted by way of unlawful aid, thus forfeiting the advantage which it had enjoyed over its competitors on the market, and the situation prior to the payment of the aid is restored [35].
Odstopanja iz člena 107(3) Pogodbe, zadevajo: (a) pomoč za pospeševanje gospodarskega razvoja območij; (b) pomoč za določene pomembne projekte skupnega evropskega interesa ali odpravljanje resne motnje v gospodarstvu države članice; (c) pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij; (d) pomoč za pospeševanje kulture in ohranjanja kulturne dediščine; in (e) druge vrste pomoči, kakršne lahko Svet določi v sklepu.
Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes an obligation on the Commission to order recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid.
Zadeva T-68/03 Olympiaki Aeroporia Ypiresies proti Komisiji, ECLI:EU:T:2007:253, točka 34.
That provision also provides that the Member State concerned shall take all necessary measures to recover unlawful aid that is found to be incompatible.
Uredba Sveta (EU) 2015/1589 z dne 13. julija 2015 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 108 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (UL L 248, 24.9.2015, str. 9).
Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 establishes that the aid is to be recovered, including interest from the date on which the unlawful aid was at the disposal of the beneficiary until the date of its effective recovery.
Glej zadevo C-70/72, Komisija proti Nemčiji, EU:C:1973:87, točka 13.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 [36] elaborates the methods to be used for the calculation of recovery interest.
Glej združene zadeve C-278/92, C-279/92 in C-280/92, Španija proti Komisiji, EU:C:1994:325, točka 75.
Finally, Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 states, that ‘recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures under the national law of the Member State concerned, provided that they allow for the immediate an effective execution of the Commission decision’.
Glej zadevo C-75/97, Belgija proti Komisiji, EU:C:1999:311, točki 64 in 65.
No provision of Union law requires the Commission, when ordering the recovery of aid declared incompatible with the internal market, to quantify the exact amount of the aid to be recovered.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 z dne 21. aprila 2004 o izvajanju Uredbe Sveta (EU) 2015/1589 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 108 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (UL L 140, 30.4.2004, str.
Rather, it is sufficient for the Commission's decision to include information enabling the addressee of the decision to work out that amount itself without overmuch difficulty [37].
1).
Nevertheless, in the present case, the Commission deems the aid resulting from the 2011 settlement agreement which Spain must recover from Real Madrid to be equal to the difference between the value of plot B-32 as agreed to in the 2011 settlement agreement, being EUR 22693054,44, and the maximum extent of its legal liability under the 1998 implementation agreement, taking EUR 4275000 as the accurate market value of plot B-32 in 2011.
Glej zadevo C-441/06 Komisija proti Franciji, ECLI:EU:C:2007:616, točka 29 in tam citirano sodno prakso.
Thus to remove the advantage granted to Real Madrid as a result of the 2011 settlement agreement, Spain must recover EUR 18418054,44 from that entity.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 271/2008 z dne 30. januarja 2008 o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 794/2004 o izvajanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES (UL L 82, 25.3.2008, str.
CONCLUSION
1).
In conclusion, the Commission finds that Spain, by way of the 2011 settlement agreement concluded between Madrid City Council and Real Madrid, has unlawfully granted State aid to Real Madrid, in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty, which Spain is required to recover by virtue of Article 16 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 from Real Madrid,
Dne 20. decembra 2011 je bila Španija zaprošena, da predloži pripombe na te informacije, kar je storila 23. decembra 2011 in 20. februarja 2012.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Na nadaljnjo zahtevo Komisije za predložitev informacij z dne 2. aprila 2012 je 18. junija 2012 Španija predložila dodatne informacije.
Article 1
Komisija je pripombe Španije prejela z dopisom z dne 17. novembra 2014.
The State aid amounting to EUR 18418054,44, unlawfully granted on 29 July 2011 by the Kingdom of Spain in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in favour of Real Madrid Club de Fútbol is incompatible with the internal market.
Dne 4. novembra 2015 in 14. marca 2016 se je Komisija sestala s predstavniki Real Madrida.
Article 2
Ta klasifikacija je bila prvotno vsebovana v delnem načrtu (plan parcial) območja „UZI 0.08 Las Tablas“ z dne 28. julija 1995.
The Kingdom of Spain shall recover the aid referred to in Article 1 from the beneficiary.
Kasneje je bila vsebovana v načrtu rabe zemljišč mesta Madrid (Plan General de Ordenación Urbana de Madrid, v nadaljnjem besedilu: PGOU), ki sta ga dne 17. aprila 1997 potrdila Mestni svet v Madridu in Občina Madrid.
The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date on which they were put at the disposal of the beneficiary until their actual recovery.
Mestni svet v Madridu se je strinjal, da bo za nezmožnost prenosa zemljišča B-32 v skladu s sporazumom iz leta 1998 Real Madridu nadomestil škodo z zneskom v višini vrednosti zemljišča B-32 v letu 2011.
The interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 and to Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 [38] amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
Tehnične službe, pristojne za vrednotenje zemljišč v lasti Mestnega sveta v Madridu, so v poročilu o vrednotenju z dne 27. julija 2011 vrednost zemljišča B-32 v letu 2011 ocenile na 22693054,44 EUR.
The Kingdom of Spain shall cancel all outstanding payments of the aid referred to in Article 1 with effect from the date of adoption of this decision.
Za vrednotenje zemljišča B-32 so bila uporabljena enaka splošna merila za določanje vrednosti mestnega premoženja kot leta 1998, ob upoštevanju iste klasifikacije zemljišč in ob predpostavki, da je zemljišče prenosljivo.
Article 3
V sklepu o začetku postopka je Komisija izrazila dvom glede znatnega povečanja domnevne vrednosti zemljišča B-32 med letoma 1998 in 2011.
Recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 shall be immediate and effective.
Vrednost tega zemljišča, ki je bila v času nakupa ocenjena na 595194 EUR, se je domnevno povečala na več kot 22 milijonov EUR, kar je sedemintridesetkratno povečanje.
The Kingdom of Spain shall ensure that this decision is implemented within four months following the date of notification of this Decision.
Španija domneva, da je sporazum iz leta 1998 v celoti ničen, in ugotavlja, da bi morala Mestni svet v Madridu in Real Madrid vrniti tudi druga zemljišča, ki so zajeta v sporazumu o menjavi iz leta 1996 in izvedbenem sporazumu iz leta 1998.
Article 4
Ker pa so bila ta zemljišča v vmesnem času prodana in jih ni mogoče vrniti, bi moral Mestni svet v Madridu vrniti znesek v višini vrednosti zemljišč v času njihove prodaje.
Within two months following notification of this Decision, the Kingdom of Spain shall submit the following information to the Commission:
Španija se nadalje sklicuje na sodno prakso, ki podpira njeno stališče, da bi moral Mestni svet v Madridu plačati nadomestilo Real Madridu zaradi neizpolnjevanja svojih obveznosti iz izvedbenega sporazuma iz leta 1998.
the total amount (principal and recovery interests) to be recovered from the beneficiary;
Sklicuje se na sodbe, ki zadevajo naknadno nezmožnost, ki jo je namerno ali iz malomarnosti povzročila ena od pogodbenih strank.
a detailed description of the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision;
Španija pojasnjuje, da je bistveno razliko v vrednotenju zemljišča v letih 1998 in 2011 mogoče razložiti z dejstvom, da je bila urbanizacija zemljišča leta 1998 v zelo zgodnji in osnovni fazi.
documents demonstrating that the beneficiary has been ordered to repay the aid.
Takrat je bilo zaključeno le načrtovanje.
The Kingdom of Spain shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of the national measures taken to implement this Decision until recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 has been completed.
Ta situacija je bila leta 2011 popolnoma spremenjena.
It shall immediately submit, on simple request by the Commission, information on the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision.
V obeh primerih je vrednotenje upoštevalo običajne standarde, ki jih je za vrednotenje zemljišč uporabljal Mestni svet v Madridu.
It shall also provide detailed information concerning the amounts of aid and recovery interest already recovered from the beneficiary.
Real Madrid ne bi bil pripravljen sprejeti poravnave, ki bi njegovi pravici do zemljišča B-32 dodelila vrednost, ki jo je zemljišče imelo leta 1998 ali 2003.
Article 5
Real Madrid bi bil pripravljen sprožiti sodni postopek za zaščito polne vrednosti svoje pravice do izpolnitve sporazuma o izvajanju iz leta 1998.
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.
To bi privedlo do zahtevka za nadomestilo v vrednosti, ki ga je imelo zemljišče v času sodbe, tj. vrednost, ki je bila predvidena v sporazumu o poravnavi iz leta 2011.
Done at Brussels, 4 July 2016.
Real Madrid bi lahko tudi prekinil pogodbo v skladu s členom 1124 civilnega zakonika, kar bi posledično pomenilo pravico do vrnitve tistega, kar je bilo že izvedeno v skladu s členom 1123 civilnega zakonika, in odškodninskega zahtevka.
For the Commission
Vračilo bi pomenilo vrnitev na stanje pred izvedbenim sporazumom iz leta 1998.
Member of the Commission
Mestni svet v Madridu bi bil načeloma prisiljen Real Madridu vrniti 15000 kvadratnih metrov, ki jih je prejel v Ciudad Deportiva, in Real Madrid bi moral Mestnemu svetu v Madridu vrniti zemljišči 33 in 34.
OJ C 69, 7.3.2014, p. 108.
V skladu s tem bi bil neto učinek vračanja 33,1 milijona EUR, ki bi ga Mestni svet v Madridu moral plačati Real Madridu, kar je 10,407 milijona EUR več od tistega, kar je klub prejel v skladu s sporazumom o poravnavi iz leta 2011.
Cf. footnote 1.
To pomeni, da se je s privolitvijo v sporazum o poravnavi iz leta 2011 Real Madrid odpovedal dodatnim 10,407 milijona EUR terjatev do Mestnega sveta v Madridu.
Real Decreto 1020/1993, de 25 de junio, por el que se aprueban las Normas Técnicas de Valoración y el Cuadro Marco de Valores del Suelo y de las construcciones para determinar el valor catastral de los bienes inmuebles de naturaleza urbana, BOE de 22 de Julio de 1993.
Real Madrid zato trdi, da je bila odpoved izvedbenega sporazuma iz leta 1998 in popolno vračilo na podlagi tega sporazuma in sporazuma o menjavi iz leta 1996 leta 2011 resnično in konkretno tveganje za Mestni svet v Madridu.