natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In that case, it is unclear that the aggrieved party would have a claim for compensation or damages, since the contract no longer exists, as opposed to a claim for restitution of what has already been given in consideration of the contract.
Ta metoda se lahko uporablja le, če je zemljišče s pripadajočo infrastrukturo mogoče prodati in če do prodaje pride takoj po gradnji.
In that regard, Spain and Real Madrid argue that the legal impossibility for Madrid City Council to transfer plot B-32 entails the nullity of the entire 1998 implementation agreement and thus a return of all the plots of land involved in that agreement and the 1996 swap agreement or, where such return is impossible, their value when they were lost, i.e. sold.
Za določitev trenutne vrednosti zemljišča za namen izračuna višine nadomestila na osnovi te vrednosti se zdi, da ni primerno prevzeti ali določiti hipotetične vrednosti, ki temelji na značilnostih, ki vplivajo na vrednost zemljišča in ki dejansko niso izpolnjene.
However, it is unclear whether the fact that only one obligation under the 1998 implementation agreement could not be performed by one party to that agreement, entails the nullity of the entire agreement under Spanish civil law.
V primeru zahtevka za nadomestilo zoper Mestni svet v Madridu je relevantna tista vrednost zemljišča B-32, ki ga ima zemljišče za Mestni svet v Madridu, ki ne more koristiti hipotetične vrednosti zemljišča, če bi bila prenosljiva.
Partial nullity is a complex issue under Spanish civil law and the Madrid City Council did not obtain any legal advice before entering into the 2011 settlement agreement.
Tretjič, študija CEIAM vsebuje podrobno in natančno primerjavo z drugimi športnimi objekti z različnimi funkcijami in zanimivostmi za oceno stroškov in prihodkov.
In this regard, the Commission notes, first of all, that under the 1998 implementation agreement three separate plots valued at EUR 13522772 were to be transferred by the Madrid City Council to Real Madrid, of which plot B-32 was located in a different area and thus unconnected to the two other plots to be transferred (plots 33 and 34, which were located in the Julian Camarillo Sur area).
Študija glede domnevnega neupoštevanja virov prihodkov iz drugih dejavnosti poleg športa in popolne pozidave zemljišča v oddelku 1.6.4 ponuja podrobno hipotezo o tem, kako bi se zemljišče lahko uporabljalo za različne kombinacije športnih infrastruktur.
Moreover, plot B-32 was valued at EUR 595194, representing less than 5 % of the value of the entire 1998 implementation agreement.
Vključuje tudi podrobnejše opise glede uporabe za parkirišča, trgovine in restavracije ter pričakovane prihodke od uporabnin za različne infrastrukture.
The Commission notes, next, that the 1998 implementation agreement was entered into by the Madrid City Council to fulfil its obligation to compensate Real Madrid for its transfer of the Ciudad Deportiva to the City Council under the 1996 swap agreement.
CEIAM v oddelku 1.6.5 študije pojasnjuje, da se zaveda, da njegove ocene niso v celoti izčrpale pravne možnosti uporabe zemljišča v smislu zazidljivosti.
It is clear from the 1996 swap agreement that there was a distinct interest on the part of the Madrid City Council to acquire the Ciudad Deportiva, as confirmed by Real Madrid, and that the 1998 implementation agreement was concluded so that the Madrid City Council could fulfil its obligation under the 1996 swap agreement to transfer lands to Real Madrid of a certain value as compensation for the Ciudad Deportiva.
Urbanistično načrtovanje pogosto postavlja tovrstne odstotke zelo visoko in tako omogoči odziv na različna povpraševanja v letih do uresničitve predvidene uporabe.
There was therefore no distinct interest on the part of Real Madrid to include plot B-32 in the 1998 implementation agreement and, had the parties known of the legal impossibility to transfer that plot of land when the 1998 implementation agreement was concluded, that plot would likely have been replaced with another plot of land of similar value.
To pa v primeru zemljišč za javno uporabo ni nič nenavadnega, saj se teh največjih odstotkov ponavadi ne izčrpa popolnoma.
Thirdly, the 2011 settlement agreement itself demonstrates that the parties wanted to address the legal impossibility of transferring plot B-32 separate from the implementation of the entire 1998 implementation agreement and did not call into question the validity of the transfer of the other plots of land concerned by that agreement.
Intenzivnost rabe zemljišč je odvisna od pričakovanega povpraševanja in vrste športnih aktivnosti ali infrastrukture, ki so na voljo.
Furthermore, in its submission of information of 18 June 2012 during the preliminary investigation of this case, Spain declared that the parties to the 2011 settlement agreement had an interest to keep in force the parts of the 1998 implementation agreement which did not concern plot B-32.
CEIAM je v zvezi s tem analiziral 22 primerljivih športnih kompleksov za razvoj scenarija, ki je uporabljen v študiji.
Fourthly, it was unclear at the time of the 2011 settlement agreement whether the Madrid City Council could have remedied the legal impossibility arising under the 1998 implementation agreement by changing the classification of the land under urban planning rules as being reserved for basic sport use.
Glede odstotka športnih uporabnikov v soseski, ki je po mnenju Real Madrida prenizek, so bili v študiji uporabljeni obstoječi uradni statistični podatki glede športne dejavnosti prebivalcev na prispevnem območju športnih objektov na zemljišču B-32 v Madridu, kot je navedeno v oddelku 3.2 v prilogi študije.
Real Madrid argued that such a change would be possible.
Študija obravnava tudi morebitno povpraševanje s strani zaposlenih v okoliških pisarnah.
Indeed, the Madrid City Council did offer such an amendment of the PGOU in the context of the 2011 urban development agreement.
Real Madrid v podporo svoji trditvi, da je odstotek športnih uporabnikov prenizek, ni predložil podatkov, ki temeljijo na tržnih raziskavah soseske, tako da mora Komisija sprejeti bolj preudarne ocene, ki jih je predložil CEIAM.
However, Spain explained that the Madrid City Council could not make such a change on its own, but would have had to propose an amendment of the PGOU to the Community of Madrid.
Kar zadeva dejstvo, da je vrednost zemljišča ocenjena po scenariju zgolj pravice do uporabe zemljišča (derecho de superficie) in ne na prenosu zemljišča in lastninske pravice, se Komisija sklicuje na uvodno izjavo 111, zlasti na ugotovitev, da ne obstaja možnost prodaje zemljišča z infrastrukturo, ker sta vrsta uporabe in javno lastništvo tega zemljišča dolgoročna.
Furthermore, such a change needs to serve the general interest.
Zaradi zgoraj navedenih razlogov Komisija meni, da so kritike, ki sta jih glede študije CEIAM izrazila Španija in Real Madrid, neutemeljene.
That view has since been confirmed by a 2015 judgment in which the Tribunal Superior de Justicia annulled the modification of the PGOU in relation to the land surrounding the Bernabéu Stadium which was the subject of the 2011 urban development agreement.
Real Madridu ni uspelo pojasniti, za koliko domnevne pomanjkljivosti v poročilu CEIAM pomenijo podcenitev vrednosti zemljišča.
However, since the 2011 urban development agreement was concluded shortly after the 2011 settlement agreement was concluded, that legal issue did not appear to be adequately settled at that time, so that there was legal uncertainty whether the Madrid City Council could have remedied the legal impossibility arising from the 1998 implementation agreement by changing the classification of plot B-32.
Posledično ni mogoče domnevati, da bi bila vrednost zemljišča B-32 v letu 2011 višja od vrednosti 4275000 EUR, ki jo je ocenila študija CEIAM, tako da preudaren udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu v podobnih okoliščinah ne bi sklenil sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011, s katerim je Mestni svet v Madridu privolil v poplačilo Real Madrida v višini 22693054,44 EUR ter tako rešil negotovo pravno odgovornost glede neizpolnitve svoje obveznosti prenosa zemljišča B-32 v skladu z izvedbenim sporazumom iz leta 1998.
In light of the above, the Commission considers that a prudent market economy operator, faced with the same legal uncertainties, would have sought legal advice before entering into the 2011 settlement agreement and accepting full legal liability for its failure to transfer plot B-32 under the 1998 implementation agreement, which the Madrid City Council did not do.
Glede na negotovo verjetnost, da bi bil Mestni svet v Madridu odgovoren za neuspešen prenos zemljišča B-32 v skladu z izvedbenim sporazumom iz leta 1998, ter precejšnjo razliko med višino nadomestila Real Madridu, ki ga je Mestni svet sprejel (22693054,44 EUR) v okviru sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011 in največjo stopnjo pravne odgovornosti (4275000 EUR) Komisija ugotavlja, da preudaren udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu v podobnih okoliščinah kot Mestni svet v Madridu ne bi sklenil sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011.
The possible amount of compensation
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da Mestni svet v Madridu s sklenitvijo sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011 z Real Madridom ni ravnal, kot bi ravnal udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu v primerljivih okoliščinah.
As regards the amount of compensation the Madrid City Council agreed to pay Real Madrid to settle the legal dispute arising from the 1998 implementation agreement, the Commission considers that the EUR 22693054,44 value Madrid City Council agreed to for plot B-32 as a result of the 2011 settlement agreement far exceeds the maximum extent of its legal liability for its failure to transfer that plot to Real Madrid.
Zato je treba v skladu s tem opozoriti, da daje sporazum o poravnavi iz leta 2011 Real Madridu gospodarsko prednost v višini razlike med zneskom nadomestila in najvišjega zneska njegove pravne odgovornosti in zato pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
The value of plot B-32 in 2011 was established by the technical services of Madrid to be EUR 22693054,44, according to the same general criteria for determining the value of municipal assets which were already applied in 1998.
V takem primeru namreč ne bi bilo le nepotrebno skleniti sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011, ampak bi Real Madrid dejansko pridobil zemljišče, do katerega je bil upravičen v skladu z izvedbenim sporazumom iz leta 1998, tako da ocena, ali nadomestilo, ki je bilo ponujeno Real Madridu namesto tega zemljišča, ustreza vrednosti tega zemljišča, ne bi bila potrebna.
Spain notes that that valuation has the character of a cadastral value, which is used as a reference base for e.g. taxation of land transfers or the internal value for the municipality, for accounting purposes.
Z drugimi besedami, Mestni svet v Madridu bi izvajal izvedbeni sporazum iz leta 1998, ki ni predmet tega sklepa.
Spain and Real Madrid refer in that regard to the report of the Ministry of Finance of 2011, which estimated the cadastral value of plot B-32 at EUR 25776296.
Združljivost pomoči
Spain stresses that it would be legally obliged to valuate for its inventory all plots of land it owns, irrespective of their legal nature of public or private domain.
Državna pomoč se šteje za združljivo z notranjim trgom, če spada v katero koli od kategorij, navedenih v členu 107(2) Pogodbe [29], in se lahko šteje za združljivo z notranjim trgom, če Komisija ugotovi, da spada v katero koli od kategorij, navedenih v členu 107(3) Pogodbe [30].
Real Madrid points to the valuation of EUR 22690000 made in the Aguirre Newman report, which was prepared after the adoption of the Opening Decision.
Vendar pa mora država članica, ki pomoč podeli, dokazati, da je državna pomoč, ki jo je podelila, združljiva z notranjim trgom v skladu s členom 107(2) ali (3) Pogodbe [31].
The Commission notes that all these valuations are based on the mistaken assumption that plot B-32 could have been transferred in 2011, which, as explained in recital 97 above, appears to be legally impossible.
Tako Španija kot Real Madrid nista trdila, da se katero od odstopanj, določenih v členih 107(2) in 107(3) Pogodbe uporablja v obravnavani zadevi.
Assuming the Madrid City Council could not be held liable for that legal impossibility, for which it never solicited legal advice, it is at least arguable that the market value of the plot in its relationship with Real Madrid would be zero, since the land in question cannot be transferred.
Komisija v zvezi s tem navaja, da zadevna pomoč predstavlja dohodek, do katerega Real Madrid ne bi bil upravičen v običajnem okviru svojega poslovanja, zato se mora sporazum o poravnavi iz leta 2011 šteti kot dodelitev pomoči za tekoče poslovanje Real Madridu.
Nevertheless, the Commission accepts that the purpose of concluding a settlement agreement is to buy legal certainty in return for compensation.
Praviloma se takšna pomoč običajno ne šteje za združljivo z notranjim trgom na podlagi člena 107(3)(c) Pogodbe, ker ne pospešuje razvoja določenih dejavnosti.
Assuming the Madrid City Council could be held fully liable for the impossibility to transfer plot B-32 to Real Madrid, then its financial exposure for that liability cannot exceed the value of the plot at the time the 2011 settlement agreement was concluded.
Zato je državna pomoč, dodeljena Real Madridu s sporazumom o poravnavi iz leta 2011, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom.
Spain admits, in this regard, that the technical services of the Madrid City Council did not use the correct classification of plot B-32 (public sport use) when preparing their valuation in 2011, but considered that plot to fall into the category ‘public service use of various kinds’ when preparing that valuation.
NEZAKONITOST POMOČI
In addition, the cadastral value of EUR 25776296 referred to by Spain and Real Madrid was, inter alia, based on information regarding actual market transactions in the reference area, while the valuation of EUR 22690000 made in the Aguirre Newman report was based on the static residual value method, which is based on a scenario of a sale of the various units shortly after the construction of sport infrastructure on that land.
V skladu s členom 108(3) Pogodbe morajo države članice Komisijo obvestiti o vsakem načrtu za dodelitev pomoči (obveznost obveščanja) in ne smejo izvajati predlaganih ukrepov pomoči, dokler Komisija ne sprejme dokončne odločitve glede zadevne pomoči (obveznost mirovanja).
Since the classification of plot B-32 in 2011 was for sport use and Real Madrid had the intention to use plot B-32 for sport use, the Commission considers the correct parameter for the valuation of that plot is the long-term exploitation of the land for sport use.
Komisija ugotavlja, da Španija Komisije ni obvestila o nobenem načrtu za dodelitev pomoči na podlagi sporazuma o poravnavi iz leta 2011, niti ni spoštovala obveznosti mirovanja iz člena 108(3) Pogodbe.
In that regard, the CEIAM study commissioned by the Commission starts, with regard to the envisaged sport use of plot B-32, from the assumption that an investor acquires the land, constructs the infrastructure for various types of sport, and generates revenues by charging user fees.
Zato v skladu s členom 1(f) Uredbe Sveta (EU) 2015/1589 [32] sporazum o poravnavi iz leta 2011 pomeni nezakonito pomoč, ki se izvaja v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe.
The scenario proposed by CEIAM appears to be reasonable because the long term exploitation of the sport infrastructures on plot B-32 by a single operator is the only realistic option under the land classification of that plot, which determines its use and excludes its further sale.
IZTERJAVA
Under that assumption, the CEIAM study arrives at a valuation for plot B-32 in 2011 of EUR 4275000 [25].
V skladu s Pogodbo in ustaljeno sodno prakso Sodišča je Komisija pristojna za odločanje, ali mora zadevna država članica ukiniti ali spremeniti pomoč, ko ugotovi, da je nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom [33].
Spain criticises the fact that the CEIAM study bases one of the scenarios of the valuation on the use of the plot for social housing arriving at a value between EUR 12245000 and EUR 18000000, since that scenario would not assure highest and best use of the ground [26].
Sodišče se je dosledno držalo stališča, da je obveznost države članice, da ukine pomoč, za katero Komisija meni, da je nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, namenjena ponovni vzpostavitvi predhodnega stanja [34].
According to Spain, the CEIAM study arrived at a value that was 50 % below the value of a comparable plot for use for public services (uso lucrativo de interés general: education, cultural services and institutions, hospitals, churches) which would represent the highest and best use of land devoted for public purposes.
V tem okviru je Sodišče odločilo, da je ta cilj dosežen, če prejemnik vrne zneske, ki so bili dodeljeni z nezakonito pomočjo, in se tako odpove ugodnostim, ki jih je užival v primerjavi s konkurenti na trgu, ter če se ponovno vzpostavi stanje pred plačilom pomoči [35].
In response, the Commission notes that that alternative scenario under the CEIAM study was done for the purpose of comparison.
Člen 16(1) Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589 določa, da je Komisija zavezana zahtevati vračilo nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči.
The appropriate reference for the ultimate outcome of the study is the sport use scenario, since the Madrid City Council did not change the public service use classification of plot B-32, nor could it legally have changed that classification from sport use, for the reasons given in recital 104 above.
Ta določba tudi predpisuje, da morajo zadevne države članice sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe za vračilo nezakonite pomoči, za katero je ugotovljena nezdružljivost.
Real Madrid criticises the CEIAM study on several points [27].
Člen 16(2) Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589 določa, da je treba pomoč vrniti, vključno z obrestmi od dne, ko je bila nezakonita pomoč na razpolago upravičencu, do datuma njenega dejanskega vračila.
First, it criticises the valuation of the alternative, non-sport, scenarios, because they would be based on too many subjective and discretional elements and, moreover, presuppose a use of plot B-32 that is not consistent with the profit-maximising behaviour of a hypothetical private property owner.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 [36] opredeljuje načine, ki se uporabljajo za izračun obresti pri vračilu.
Second, regarding the valuation based on sport use, Real Madrid observes that the result of the study is not a proper market value.
Člen 16(3) Uredbe (EU) 2015/1589 poleg tega določa, da „se vračilo izvede nemudoma in skladno s postopki, določenimi v nacionalnem pravu zadevne države članice, če omogočajo takojšnjo in učinkovito izvajanje sklepa Komisije“.
CEIAM would use a national valuation method (the ‘order ECO 805/2003’) which leads only to a ‘mortgage lending value’, which is a particularly cautious estimate of an enduring, long-term value and would tend to be lower than the ‘market value’ which refers to the value in an arm's-length transaction between a willing buyer and a willing seller.
Nobena določba prava Unije od Komisije ne zahteva, da pri odreditvi vračila pomoči, ki je bila razglašena za nezdružljivo z notranjim trgom, oceni natančen znesek pomoči, ki ga je treba vrniti.
This market value should be determined on the basis of the static residual valuation method, as described in recital 110.
Nasprotno, za odločitev Komisije zadostuje, da vključuje informacije, ki naslovniku odločitve omogočijo, da sam oblikuje znesek brez večjih težav [37].
Third, Real Madrid criticises the CEIAM on several other grounds:
SKLEPNA UGOTOVITEV
CEIAM did not consider e.g. the revenue streams from the 25 % of the land which the owner could have used, under existing regulations, for shops and parking spaces;
SPREJELA NASLEDNJI SKLEP:
the fact that its assumptions do not fully exhaust the legally possible land use in terms of ground on which may be built (buildability);
Člen 1
its underestimation of the existing demand in an attractive and affluent area.
Državna pomoč v višini 18418054,44 EUR, ki jo je Kraljevina Španija nezakonito odobrila 29. julija 2011, v nasprotju s členom 108(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, v korist klubu Real Madrid Club de Fútbol, ni združljiva z notranjim trgom.
Real Madrid contests the estimate by CEIAM of 42,9 % of the population which practises sport and proposes 50 %, also referring to the possible demand by the many employees working in the area;
Člen 2
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.
Kraljevina Španija mora od upravičenca izterjati pomoč iz člena 1.
These criticisms fail to convince.
Zneski, ki jih je treba izterjati, morajo vključevati obresti od datuma, ko so bili dani na razpolago upravičencu, do datuma dejanske izterjave.
First, regarding the hypothetical alternative use scenarios, as explained in recital 114, they serve only for the purposes of comparison of various hypothetical types of land use, since the classification of the land has not and cannot be changed from sport use.
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi obrestnoobrestnega računa v skladu s poglavjem V Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 in Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 271/2008 [38] o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 794/2004.
This analysis demonstrates that the value of plot B-32 could at least approximate the value assumed by the Madrid City Council if it had a classification with more commercial potential.
Kraljevina Španija prekliče vsa še neplačana izplačila pomoči iz člena 1 z učinkom od datuma sprejetja tega sklepa.
However, since the Madrid City Council did not change the classification of plot B-32, nor could legally have changed that classification from sport use, the appropriate reference for the ultimate outcome of the study is the sport use scenario.
Člen 3
Second, regarding the alleged valuation of the land on the basis of a ‘mortgage lending value’ or under the assumption of a mere land use right, the CEIAM study does not use these assumptions, as Real Madrid claims.
Izterjava pomoči, navedene v členu 1, se izvede takoj in učinkovito.
On the contrary, as explained in Section 2.5 of the part of the study referring to the sport use scenario, the study defines the value on the basis of the investment value of the land which is its value to a current or potential owner.
Kraljevina Španija zagotovi, da se ta sklep izvede v štirih mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tem sklepu.
The CEIAM study explains in Section 2.3.2 that the application of the method described in Order ECO/805/2003, criticised by Real Madrid, has the objective to determine the market value of a plot [28].
Člen 4
Independently of the purposes for which Order ECO/805/2003 applies, it describes a method for determining the value of land which can produce income linked to a certain economic activity and has nothing to do with a mortgage value.
Kraljevina Španija v dveh mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tem sklepu Komisiji predloži naslednje informacije:
For that purpose it applies generally accepted standards which do not depend on the reason for the valuation.
skupni znesek (glavnica in obresti), ki ga mora upravičenec vrniti;
That method depends on the existence of an investment project, since the value is determined by the net present value of long term future cash flows of the most likely investment project (in the case of plot B-32 building and operating sport infrastructure).
natančen opis ukrepov, ki so že sprejeti in načrtovani za izpolnitev tega sklepa;
Unlike the static residual valuation method used in the Aguirre Newman report, supplied by Real Madrid, the CEIAM study bases its calculation not on the price which a sport infrastructure investor would make with the short term sale of the infrastructure, but with its commercial exploitation over the next decades.
dokumente, ki dokazujejo, da se je od upravičenca zahtevalo vračilo pomoči.