natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In this regard, EasyJet argued that in the NEO business plan FD took into account costs which go beyond the incremental costs.
Več zasebnikov je poslalo pripombe v okviru postopka in navedlo, da javno financiranje, odobreno letališču, pomeni državno pomoč in da se program NEO ni izvajal po tržnih pogojih.
EasyJet was further of the opinion that also costs related to tasks falling within the public policy remit and costs related to historical investments should not be taken into account when conducting the MEO test.
SKLEP O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA IZ LETA 2007
Moreover, EasyJet stated that the reduced rates pursuant to NEO were accessible to all airlines operating at the airport.
Nemčija je v stališčih do pripomb tretjih oseb menila, da njihove izjave v večini primerov podpirajo njeno mnenje, in je zato poudarila, da se pogodba o prenosu dobička in izgube iz leta 1991 ne more opredeliti kot državna pomoč.
Individual agreements between EasyJet and the airport did not go beyond the scope of NEO.
Še enkrat je poudarila, da je bila pogodba o prenosu dobička in izgube iz leta 1991 primerljiva z nepovratnimi sredstvi za pretekle naložbe v infrastrukturo in je bila vsekakor združljiva s skupnim trgom.
Germanwings clarified that its final charges including departing passenger charges and ground handling charges were on average between EUR […] and […] per departing passenger.
To so podprli družba FD, Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V., IHK Dortmund, družba DSW21 in mesto Dortmund.
In addition, Germanwings declared that the relevant market to compare charges would be the charges paid at low-cost airports.
Nemčija je tako kot družba FD navedla, da če Komisija sklene, da je treba pogodbo o prenosu dobička in izgube iz leta 1991, sklenjeno med družbama DSW21 in FD, šteti za nezakonito državno pomoč, se lahko oceni samo na podlagi smernic za letalski sektor iz leta 2005 od datuma njihovega začetka uporabe.
Germanwings clarified further that the charges at Dortmund airport would not have differed from charges at Graz or Maastricht.
Nadalje je poudarila, da je treba financiranje, ki ga je zagotovila družba DSW21, obravnavati kot financiranje storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena, za katero Komisija državam članicam običajno prepusti široko polje proste presoje.
Germanwings stated furthermore that a MEO would also have to accept losses at least during the first few years of a new project.
Trdila je, da je za mesto Dortmund ceneje financirati naložbe na letališču na podlagi pogodbe o prenosu dobička in izgube iz leta 1991 kot prek neposrednih nepovratnih sredstev, saj so bile skupne izgube med letoma 1998 in 2008 nižje, kot bi bile amortizacija in obresti.
Wizz Air stated that NEO is in line with the MEO principle and that it does not constitute State aid.
Nemčija je tako kot Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V. in družba DSW21 navedla, da bi bilo zaprtje celo manj stroškovno učinkovito, ker je bila družba FD vsaj sposobna plačati del svojih stalnih stroškov in je imela pozitivne napovedi za prihodnost glede povečevanja števila potnikov.
Wizz Air agreed in particular that NEO was more economical than the closure of the airport.
Udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu bi ravnal enako kot mesto in družba DSW21 ter bi vlagal vsaj omejeno obdobje.
According to Wizz Air, in the framework of the closure of the airport, the Commission should take into account the high costs of closure that the city of Dortmund would have incurred.
Nemčija se je s tretjimi osebami zlasti strinjala glede dejstva, da imajo letališča dolgo ekonomsko življenjsko dobo in da je obdobje izgub sprejemljivo.
Wizz Air asserted that the market conformity of airport charges needs to be compared with charges paid by low-cost airlines at different European regional airports, because a low-cost airline chooses its destinations not on a ‘one-catchment-area’ basis but across all of Europe.
Nadalje je trdila, da je bil program NERES na voljo vsem letalskim prevoznikom na podlagi objektivnih meril.
Finally, Wizz Air expressed its view that its arrangement with FD were also market conform because they are incrementally profitable for the airport.
Kot so potrdile tretje osebe, so WizzAir, GermanWings, Sterling, AirBerlin in EasyJet izpolnjevali ta merila.
Such an assessment should take into account network effects.
Kot so navedli Nemčija, EasyJet in družba FD, se je zaradi programa NERES pričakovalo povečanje števila potnikov in donosov.
To support its argument of market conformity, Wizz Air provided the Oxera study.
Nemčija se je v zvezi s pripombami IHK in Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V., ki sta navedla, da program NERES ni vplival na konkurenco in notranji trg, strinjala in navedla, da na bližnjih letališčih Münster/Osnabrück, Paderborn, Köln-Bonn in Düsseldorf nizkocenovni letalski prevozniki niso delovali.
Oxera first compared the charges Wizz Air paid at Dortmund airport to those paid at Doncaster, Liverpool, Memmingen, Prestwick and Stockholm-Skavsta airports.
Nemčija je navedla, da se ne strinja z ugotovitvami letalskega prevoznika Air France in Združenja evropskih letalskih prevoznikov, ker očitno niso dokazane ali utemeljene.
These airports are claimed to be similar to Dortmund airport in relation to traffic volume, type of airport traffic, and catchment area.
SKLEP O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA IZ LETA 2012
According to Oxera, these airports are privately owned.
Nemčija se je na splošno strinjala s pripombami, ki so jih predložili EasyJet, Germanwings, Wizz Air, DSW21 in FD.
They received public financing, which was, however, relatively small compared to their total asset base.
Trdila je, da so bili program NEO ter vsaka posamezna pogodba, sklenjena z letalskimi prevozniki, ki so uporabljali letališče, nediskriminacijski, ker so veljali za vsakega letalskega prevoznika, ki je želel delovati na letališču.
Oxera submitted that the charges paid by Wizz Air at Dortmund airport are on average significantly higher than those paid by Wizz Air at the airports used for the comparison, if the government security charge is taken into account.
Strinjala se je tudi, da je bil program NEO skladen z načelom udeleženca v tržnem gospodarstvu in da so različni scenariji pokazali, da bi povišanje pristojbin nad ravnjo programa NEO povzročilo zmanjšanje števila potnikov in zaradi stalnih stroškov letališča tudi višje izgube.
Oxera further submitted that the charges (net of the security charge) paid by Wizz Air are comparable to the levels of airport charges paid at the airports used for the comparison.
Navedla je, da bi zasebni vlagatelj neko obdobje sprejel izgube.
Oxera concluded thereby that Wizz Air payed a market price at Dortmund airport and that the airport-airline arrangement is in line with the MEO principle.
Po njenem mnenju je v zvezi s tem ključen predhodni vidik, saj je bil s predhodnega vidika program NEO najboljša gospodarska možnost.
Secondly, Oxera made an incremental profitability analysis of Wizz Air's contribution to the profitability of FD in the years 2009 to 2014.
Jasno je navedla, da je program NEO temeljil na poslovnem načrtu.
Oxera presented an approach to calculating incremental costs and revenues which is different from the one presented by Germany.
Nemčija se je nadalje strinjala, da je upoštevni trg za ugotovitev obstoja učinka na konkurenco širši od sistema letalskih povezav med dvema točkama in da primerljiva konkurenčna letališča ne bi smela biti manj kot 100 km oddaljena od letališča Dortmund.
Oxera included into this analysis incremental aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues as well as incremental costs per passenger.
Pozdravila je sklepe primerjalne študije o pristojbinah na drugih letališčih, ki jih je pripravila družba Oxera in jih je predložil letalski prevoznik Wizz Air.
Oxera took into account the aeronautical revenues stemming from the airport charges net of the relevant discounts, based on the following agreements between Wizz Air and FD):
Nemčija je zavrnila ugotovitve zasebnikov, ki so se po njenem mnenju delno opirali na netočna dejstva.
the Airport Service Agreement (ASA) between FD and Wizz Air dated 1 July 2009: The ASA specified the airport charges payable by Wizz Air.
Pojasnila je, da se letno nadomestilo za izgube ne more samodejno šteti za pomoč, ker v nasprotju s predpostavkami zasebnikov rezultati poslovanja vključujejo tudi stroške, ki spadajo na področje javne politike, podpora za trženje pa je bila del pristojbin.
The charges included a […] charge per departing passenger, a charge for […] per departing passenger ([…] charge), a […] charge per departing passenger, […] per departing passenger, and an […] charge per departing passenger;
OCENA
the Standard Ground Handling Agreement dated 1 July 2009: it sets out the handling charge (which is already included in the ASA) and handling services;
V skladu s členom 107(1) Pogodbe 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“.
the Side Letter for airport and ground handling charges dated 1 July 2009: it specifies an […] charge per departing passenger. […];
Da bi bil ukrep opredeljen kot državna pomoč v smislu te določbe, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji kumulativni pogoji:
the agreement on additional flights and marketing support dated 10 December 2009: FD and Wizz Air agreed on FD co-financing additional flights through marketing contribution;
ukrep mora biti financiran iz državnih sredstev in pripisljiv državi;
the Side Letter for winter cash support dated 1 July 2010: concerned cash support to Wizz Air subject to a year-to-year increase by […] % of the number of passengers in the winter season 2010;
upravičencu mora dati gospodarsko prednost;
the Incentive System for Passenger Development (Schedule 6) dated 1 October 2010: set up a discount for each passenger between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2011 that exceeded the number of departing passengers […] and increase in […] charge in the same period;
prednost mora biti selektivna in
the Side Letter for airport charges dated 6 June 2011: it specifies that FD shall pay to Wizz Air the difference between […].
ukrep mora izkrivljati konkurenco ali ustvarjati možnost izkrivljanja konkurence.
The Incentive System referred to in point (f) ended on 31 May 2011;
UKREP 1 – UPORABA PRAVIL O DRŽAVNI POMOČI ZA 100-ODSTOTNA DRŽAVNA POROŠTVA ZA DRUŽBO FD
the Amendment to the ASA made on 1 October 2011: modifies certain charges, but not affecting the all-inclusive charge determined above.
Komisija opozarja, da ukrep pomoči pomeni obstoječo pomoč v skladu s členom 1(b)(v) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 [28], če je mogoče ugotoviti, da takrat, ko se je začel izvajati, ni bil državna pomoč, pozneje pa je postal pomoč zaradi razvoja skupnega trga in ne da bi ga država članica spremenila.
Oxera estimated the non-aeronautical revenues (for example relating to car parking, car rentals and other rentals relating to restoration) on the basis of the business plan provided by FD.
Nemčija trdi, da 100-odstotna državna poroštva, dodeljena letališču Dortmund, pomenijo – če pomenijo pomoč – obstoječo pomoč v skladu s členom 1(b)(v) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999, ker so bila sklenjena, ko se javno financiranje letališč še ni štelo za državno pomoč, in od takrat niso bila spremenjena.
Based on FD's business plan, Oxera included into the analysis the incremental costs of marketing, incentive and cash support deriving from the agreements listed in recital 151, points (a) to (h).
Do nedavna so namreč razvoj letališč pogosto opredeljevala le vprašanja prostorskega načrtovanja ali v nekaterih primerih vojaške zahteve.
Moreover, it included an estimate of additional costs contained in the business plan of the airport, such as costs for personnel, material and other operating expenses that are not specific for Wizz Air.
Delovanje letališč je bilo organizirano kot del javne uprave in ne kot gospodarska dejavnost.
According to Oxera, to assess the amount of general costs that is incremental to the agreement, a regression analysis has been carried out.
Konkurenca med letališči in upravljavci letališč je bila prav tako omejena in se je razvijala postopno.
On this basis, according to Oxera it would be possible to determine which fraction of the costs is fixed and which fraction varies depending on the passenger volume.
Ob upoštevanju teh razmer je Komisija državno financiranje letališč in letališke infrastrukture prej obravnavala kot splošni ukrep gospodarske politike, za katerega ni mogoče uporabljati pravil o državni pomoči iz Pogodbe.
Oxera estimated that the following costs vary with passenger numbers:
Vendar so se razmere spremenile.
the cost of personnel increases by about EUR […] with each additional departing passenger;
Sodišče je v sodbi Aéroports de Paris navedlo, da je upravljanje letališča, vključno z zagotavljanjem letaliških storitev letalskim prevoznikom in različnim ponudnikom storitev na letališčih, gospodarska dejavnost [29].
the cost of materials increases by about EUR […] with each additional departing passenger;
Zato od sprejetja navedene sodbe (12. decembra 2000) upravljanja in gradnje letališč ni več mogoče obravnavati kot nalogo, ki jo v okviru javne politike izvaja uprava in ne spada na področje nadzora državne pomoči.
other operating expenses [27] increase by about EUR […] with each additional departing passenger.
Splošno sodišče je v sodbi letališče Leipzig-Halle potrdilo, da ni mogoče vnaprej izključiti uporabe pravil o državni pomoči za letališča, saj sta upravljanje letališča in gradnja letališke infrastrukture gospodarska dejavnost [30].
These costs are averages across the whole airport and all its airlines and Oxera subsequently attributed them to Wizz Air based on its share of passenger departures.
Ko začne upravljavec letališča opravljati gospodarske dejavnosti, se ne glede na njegov pravni status ali način financiranja šteje za podjetje v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe, zato se uporabljajo pravila Pogodbe o državni pomoči [31].
Oxera estimated further the incremental costs of investments based on a schedule of investments for the period 2009 to 2019 as well as on the actual investments from 2004 to 2008 when Wizz Air was also operating at Dortmund airport.
Komisija glede na uvodne izjave 176–178 meni, da so lahko javni organi pred sodbo Sodišča v zadevi Aéroports de Paris upravičeno menili, da ukrepi financiranja, ki so bili dokončno sprejeti pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris, ne pomenijo državne pomoči in jih zato ni treba priglasiti Komisiji.
Investments before the arrival of Wizz Air to the airport were considered as sunk costs, and thus not incremental to the deal.
Komisija torej na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči ne more več dvomiti o posameznih ukrepih financiranja, ki niso bili odobreni na podlagi sheme pomoči [32] in so bili dokončno sprejeti pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris.
According to Oxera, the costs of the investment cannot be attributed to the customers in the year of the investments, but must be spread over the lifetime of the investment.
Komisija mora torej oceniti, prvič, ali so bila 100-odstotna državna poroštva uvedena pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris (12. decembra 2000) in, drugič, ali je bil ukrep od takrat spremenjen.
Therefore, Oxera took into account the annual depreciation costs and costs of financing of the relevant investment.
Tretjič, oceniti mora tudi, ali se zadevni ukrepi štejejo za „individualno pomoč“ v skladu s členom Article 1(e) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 ali za „shemo pomoči“ v skladu s členom 1(d) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
The total annual costs of new investments were allocated to Wizz Air's passenger share of the passenger capacity of the airport of 2,5 million passengers as indicated by FD.
Komisija lahko le v zvezi s slednjim predlaga ustrezne ukrepe v skladu s členom 108(1) Pogodbe in členom 17 Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
Oxera considered this as a very conservative estimate, as not all of the envisaged investments were incremental to Wizz Air's presence, for example the runway extension planned originally for 2014.
Komisija v zvezi z zadevnimi 100-odstotnimi državnimi poroštvi, izdanimi leta 1987 in do leta 2000 (glej preglednico 13), ugotavlja, da so bili nepreklicno dodeljeni pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris.
Table 22
Poleg tega so bila 100-odstotna državna poroštva časovno in po obsegu omejena.
Expected incremental revenues and costs from Wizz Air presence (EUR million)
Njihov namen je bil zavarovanje konkretnih posojil za financiranje posebnih naložb v letališko infrastrukturo na letališču Dortmund.
Source: Oxera, based on data provided by FD
Zato se morajo šteti kot individualni ukrepi.
Note: Figures for 2009 and 2014 are proportionate to the duration of the agreements.
Ko so bila ta poroštva, ki so bila konec leta 2008 vredna 74,182 milijona EUR, nepreklicno dodeljena, Komisija torej financiranja letališč ni štela za državno pomoč.
Aeronautical revenues
Tudi če bi pomenila državno pomoč, bi to bila individualna obstoječa pomoč, o kateri zdaj ni mogoče dvomiti.
Non-aeronautical revenues
Glede na navedeno ni treba nadalje preiskovati, ali so 100-odstotna državna poroštva pomenila pomoč.
Incremental operating costs
UKREP 2 – NARAVA POMOČI PRI POGODBI O PRENOSU DOBIČKA IN IZGUBE IZ LETA 1991
Incremental investment costs
GOSPODARSKA DEJAVNOST IN POJEM PODJETJE
Oxera calculated the incremental contribution of Wizz Air's presence as a difference between the incremental revenues and incremental costs.
Vsaka dejavnost ponudbe blaga ali storitev na določenem trgu je gospodarska dejavnost.
According to Oxera, the agreements resulted in a positive estimated net present value of about EUR [300000-400000] over their duration (2009 to 2014), and therefore, a private investor would have been willing to conclude similar agreements with Wizz Air.
Ko začne upravljavec letališča opravljati gospodarske dejavnosti, tako da zagotavlja plačljive letališke storitve, se ne glede na njegov pravni status ali način financiranja šteje za podjetje v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe, zato se pravila Pogodbe o državni pomoči lahko uporabljajo za prednost, ki mu jo je dodelila država ali ki mu je bila dodeljena iz državnih sredstev.
The District of Paderborn, the owner of Paderborn airport, stated that the possibility offered under the 2014 Aviation Guidelines for providing further operating aid to loss making airports for another 10 years gives these airports an unjustified advantage compared to profitable airports.
Pojem podjetje
PRIVATE PARTIES
Družba FD se ukvarja z gradnjo, vzdrževanjem in upravljanjem letališča Dortmund.
Several private individuals have sent their comments within the framework of the procedure, stating that the public financing granted to the airport constituted State aid and that NEO was not on market terms.
Zagotavlja letališke storitve in uporabnikom zaračunava za uporabo letališke infrastrukture, s čimer infrastrukturo izkorišča v komercialne namene.
COMMENTS OF GERMANY ON THIRD PARTIES
Glede na premisleke v uvodnih izjavah 184 in 185 je zato treba ugotoviti, da je družba FD od datuma sodbe Aéroports de Paris (tj. 12. decembra 2000) opravljala gospodarsko dejavnost in pomenila podjetje v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
2007 OPENING DECISION
Komisija torej ne bo več dvomila o nadomestilu za stroške vlaganja v projekte naložb v infrastrukturo, o katerih je bilo nepreklicno odločeno pred 12. decembrom 2000.
In its observations on the comments of third parties, Germany took the view that the statements in most instances supported its opinion, and therefore, Germany emphasised the fact that 1991 PLTA could not be qualified as State aid.
V zadevnem primeru je Nemčija predložila podatke iz preglednice 23 o stroških kapitala, povezanih z naložbami, o katerih je bilo nepreklicno odločeno pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris (AdP), in drugih stroških naložb v letih 2000–2012.
It pointed out once again that the 1991 PLTA was comparable to a historical investment grant for the infrastructure and in any case was compatible with the common market.
Preglednica 23
This was supported by FD, the Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V., the IHK Dortmund, DSW21 and the city of Dortmund.
Stroški investicijskega vzdrževanja za naložbe v infrastrukturo, o katerih je bilo odločeno pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris (v tisoč EUR)
In agreement with FD, Germany stated that if the Commission reached the conclusion that the 1991 PLTA between DSW21 and FD has to be considered as unlawful State aid, it could only be assessed under the 2005 Aviation Guidelines as from their date of application.
Amortizacija za naložbe pred AdP
Furthermore, Germany emphasised that the financing provided by DSW21 has to be seen as financing of a service of general economic interest (‘SGEI’) for which the Commission usually granted Member States a wide margin of discretion.
Druge amortizacije
Germany brought forward the argument that it is cheaper for the city Dortmund to finance the investments at the airport through the 1991 PLTA than through direct grants, since overall losses between 1998 and 2008 were lower than the depreciation and interests would have been.
Skupaj amortizacije 1 + 2
Joining the Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V. and DSW21, Germany stated that the closure would have been even less cost-efficient because FD was at least able to pay part of its own fixed costs and had positive forecasts for the future in terms of passenger increase.
Obresti za naložbe pred AdP
An MEO would have behaved as the city and DSW21 did and at least have invested for a limited period of time.
Druge obresti
Germany especially agreed with the third parties about the fact that airports have a long economic life and that a period of losses was acceptable.
Skupaj obresti 4 + 5
Germany then argued that NERES was accessible for all airlines on the basis of objective criteria.
Stroški investicijskega vzdrževanja za naložbe pred AdP 1 + 4
As the third parties had confirmed, Wizz Air, Germanwings, Sterling, AirBerlin and EasyJet fulfilled these criteria.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da nima pravice preučiti prenose izgub, s katerimi so se krili zneski, navedeni v stolpcu 7 preglednice 23, in dvomiti o njih.
According to Germany and also according to EasyJet and FD, an increase of passengers as well as an increase of returns were to be expected as a consequence of NERES.
Področje javne politike
As regards comments of the IHK and Verkehrsverband Westfalen e.V., stating NERES did not affect competition and the internal market, Germany agreed and stated that the nearby airports Münster/Osnabrück, Paderborn, Cologne/Bonn and Düsseldorf did not serve low-cost carriers.
Čeprav je treba družbo FD šteti za podjetje v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe, je treba spomniti, da niso nujno vse dejavnosti lastnika in upravljavca letališča gospodarske [33].
Germany made clear that NERES was introduced after the extension of Dortmund airport.
V skladu s smernicami za letalski sektor iz leta 2014 in sodno prakso Sodišča [34] dejavnosti, ki običajno spadajo v pristojnost države pri izvrševanju uradnih pooblastil, ki jih ima kot javni organ, niso gospodarske in ne spadajo na področje uporabe pravil o državni pomoči.
It was a reaction to the decline in passengers after 11 September 2001 in order to increase the use of the airport's underused capacity.
Take dejavnosti vključujejo na primer varnost, kontrolo zračnega prometa, dejavnosti policije in carino.
Germany stated that it does not agree with the observations of Air France and the Association of European Airlines because they were obviously not proven or substantiated in any way.
Financiranje mora biti strogo omejeno na nadomestilo za stroške, ki nastanejo zaradi teh dejavnosti, in se ne sme uporabiti za financiranje drugih gospodarskih dejavnosti [35].
Germany commented that the 2005 Aviation Guidelines could be applied only as from 1 June 2007.
Zato financiranje dejavnosti, ki spadajo na področje javne politike, ali infrastrukture, ki je neposredno povezana z navedenimi dejavnostmi, na splošno ne pomeni državne pomoči [36].