natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
the transfer of passengers is not without security costs, which is a significant difference in relation to many European airports.
Zato vnaprejšnja izključitev prevoznikov, ki so leta 2012 prepeljali manj kot 400000 odhajajočih potnikov, iz področja uporabe ukrepa, brez upoštevanja tranzitnih in transfernih potnikov, ni v skladu s ciljem, da se v pristojbini za varovanje bolje upoštevajo dejanski stroški varovanja.
According to Belgium, this analysis leads to the conclusion that passenger carriers have been overcharged and that corrective measures are necessary since the development of the airport specifically requires an increase in the number of passengers departing from Brussels airport.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno druga glavna točka trditev Belgije, kot je navedena v uvodni izjavi 174, ne omogoča utemeljitve praga 400000 odhajajočih potnikov letno, ki se upošteva v členu 2(1) kraljeve uredbe z dne 7. januarja 2014.
In presenting its justifications, Belgium adds that it aimed to stabilise the operations of the main carriers by means of a clear and objective incentive.
Nadalje, medtem ko so na podlagi člena 2(1) kraljeve uredbe z dne 7. januarja 2014 transferni in tranzitni potniki izključeni iz števila potnikov, ki se upošteva za določitev upravičenih letalskih prevoznikov, so ti potniki vključeni pri izračunu zneskov, ki se povrnejo posameznemu upravičenemu letalskemu prevozniku na podlagi člena 2(2) navedene kraljeve uredbe.
According to Belgium, the incentive can take effect from the threshold of 400000 passengers.
Način izračuna subvencij bi moral biti skladen z merilom, uporabljenim za določitev upravičencev, sicer ne more biti skladen s cilji, na katerih temelji izbira merila za izbor upravičencev.
It believes that a lower value would have the effect of diluting the measure, which subsidises only one-third of the airport security costs, while a higher value would make the objective unattainable for airlines wishing to develop at Brussels airport.
Družba Ryanair je v svojih stališčih omenila to neskladje.
Finally, Belgium added in its comments on the opening decision: ‘the aim was to encourage airlines to expand in Brussels by compensating them for the reduced safety costs entailed by an increase in passengers’.
Belgija se je v svojih pripombah na stališča družbe Ryanair v zvezi s tem omejila na sklicevanje na svoja prejšnja sporočila.
First of all, the Commission notes that the considerations put forward by Belgium with regard to freight carriers cannot justify the differences that the measure causes among passenger carriers; those differences are the subject of this analysis.
Vendar navedena sporočila ne vsebujejo pojasnila glede različne obravnave transfernih in tranzitnih potnikov pri opredelitvi merila za izbor upravičencev in pri načinu izračuna subvencije.
The other arguments put forward by Belgium, as summarised in recitals 169 to 172, cannot justify either the existence of the threshold of 400000 passengers per year or its level, or the fact that it relates to historical data from 2012.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da bi bila v primeru vključitve tranzitnih in transfernih potnikov v število potnikov na podlagi člena 2(1) kraljeve uredbe z dne 7. januarja 2014 do ukrepa a priori upravičena dva dodatna letalska prevoznika, in sicer Lufthansa in Jet Airways.
Indeed, these arguments can be summarised in two main points.
Glede na vse zgoraj navedeno se zdi, da omejitev števila upravičencev samo na letalske prevoznike, ki so leta 2012 prepeljali več kot 400000 potnikov, odhajajočih z letališča Bruxelles-National, brez upoštevanja tranzitnih in transfernih potnikov, ni objektivno utemeljena z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, v katerega spada zadevni ukrep.
First, the threshold would be justified by the desire to promote or develop airport traffic, in particular by stabilising the traffic of operators carrying the most passengers.
Izbira leta 2012
Secondly, it would be justified by the desire to offset the effects of the current security charge, which does not correctly reflect the actual security costs incurred by the passenger traffic of each airline.
Po navedbah Belgije je bilo leto 2012 izbrano za referenčno leto, ker je to zadnje leto, za katero so bili podatki na voljo takrat, ko se je svet ministrov odločil sprejeti ukrep.
With regard to the first point, the Commission notes that the objective of stabilising or increasing the traffic at Brussels airport is not relevant to the stated purpose of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, namely the financing of security infrastructure.
Po mnenju Belgije upoštevanje podatkov za leto 2012 omogoča zagotoviti določeno pravno varnost upravičenim podjetjem.
Moreover, the goal of stabilising or expanding traffic is in fact part of BAC's strategy and commercial policy.
Vendar Komisija meni, da ta trditev ne drži.
It should be recalled in this respect that the airport charges system at Brussels airport does not in any way provide for the federal government to act on behalf of BAC to implement financial incentives to foster traffic.
V členu 2(2) kraljeve uredbe z dne 7. januarja 2014 je določeno, da se subvencije, ki jih prejmejo letalski prevozniki, izračunajo za določeno leto (2013, 2014 ali 2015) ob upoštevanju števila odhajajočih potnikov (vključno s tranzitnimi in transfernimi potniki) v tistem letu.
As noted above, under the current schedule, it is the responsibility of BAC to determine the level of airport charges, within the regulatory framework described in section 2.1.3.
Torej ni nobenega objektivnega razloga, da se s seznama upravičencev a priori izključijo nekateri letalski prevozniki glede na podatke za leto 2012.
Furthermore, while Belgium aims to increase traffic at Brussels airport, it is unclear why financial incentives should be restricted to airlines that carried more than 400000 passengers in 2012, prior to the entry into force of the Royal Decree.
V resnici je pri merilu iz člena 2(1) navedene kraljeve uredbe gotovo edino to, da so iz ukrepa izključeni letalski prevozniki, ki ga ne izpolnjujejo.
In particular, airlines that did not achieve this traffic threshold in 2012 are excluded from the scope of the measure whereas they might to significantly increase their traffic in subsequent years if they received appropriate incentives.
Trditev Belgije v zvezi s pravno varnostjo je torej brezpredmetna.
The only quantified elements put forward by Belgium to justify the threshold of 400000 passengers a year are data on the number of departing passengers carried in 2012 and 2013 by the airlines that carried more than 100000 departing passengers during either of these two years, broken down into transfer passengers, transit passengers and other departing passengers.
Družba Brussels Airlines, ki se pri tem pridružuje Belgiji, meni, da je mogoče uporabo referenčnega leta 2012 pojasniti s tem, da je to zadnje leto, za katero so bili podatki na voljo takrat, ko se je svet ministrov odločil sprejeti ukrep.
Belgium comments on its data as follows: ‘An analysis of the figures in Appendix 2 shows for 2012 that the growth rate — the angular coefficient of the curve derived from these data — increases significantly from the threshold of 400000 departing passengers. It is therefore from this value that the incentive can achieve these effects.’.
Družba Brussels Airlines meni, da je izbira referenčne točke očitno vedno v določeni meri samovoljna, vendar z izbiro referenčnega leta 2012 Belgija ni presegla svoje diskrecijske pravice.
However, as these data only include changes in the number of passengers carried between 2012 and 2013, and not the relationships between airport charges, in particular the security charge, and the number of passengers carried, they do not in principle allow the incentive effects of the proposed measure on the traffic at Brussels airport to be assessed.
Vendar te trditve implicitno temeljijo na predpostavki, da je bilo treba a priori omejiti število upravičencev izmed vseh uporabnikov letališča Bruxelles-National glede na podatke za določeno preteklo referenčno leto.
The Commission therefore considers that the first main point of the arguments put forward by Belgium, as summarised in recital 174, cannot justify the threshold of 400000 departing passengers a year specified in Article 2(1) of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014.
Komisija iz zgoraj navedenih razlogov meni, da je ta predpostavka napačna, zaradi česar je trditev družbe Brussels Airlines brezpredmetna.
As regards the second main point mentioned in recital 174, the Commission notes that the concern to correct the way in which BAC passes on its security costs to the various airlines, which Belgium considers necessary to reflect the reality of the costs incurred by the various airlines, runs counter to the objective of the measure, namely support for safety-related infrastructure.
Po mnenju Belgije ukrep omogoča novo določitev upravičenih letalskih prevoznikov na podlagi števila potnikov, prepeljanih leta 2015, za proračunsko obdobje 2016, 2017 in 2018, s čimer bodo lahko do ukrepa upravičeni še drugi letalski prevozniki ali izključen en ali več sedanjih upravičencev.
Indeed, while the grant of a subsidy to BAC to reduce its cost structure for security has the potential to support the security infrastructure, the way in which BAC distributes the portion of the subsidy between the various airlines does not seem to support that objective.
Belgija tako meni, da je mehanizem spodbujevalen, saj povzroči prerazvrstitev seznama upravičencev vsaka tri leta.
In addition, it should be recalled that it is BAC's responsibility to propose a tariff system and a tariff control formula that reflect the real costs.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno omejitev števila upravičencev glede na podatke o prometu za leto 2012 ni objektivno utemeljena z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, v katerega spada zadevni ukrep.
The economic regulatory authority may only in certain circumstances and after a consultation process involving the users of Brussels airport make a final decision.
Ukrep daje prednost trem konkretnim uporabnikom letališča Bruxelles-National pred drugimi in ta prednost ni utemeljena z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, v katerega spada zadevni ukrep.
By taking unilateral action, through the measure at issue, to make a de facto correction to the structure of the security charge, the federal government has departed for no objective reason from the general system for setting airport charges.
Ta ugotovitev potrjuje selektivnost ukrepa.
Moreover, even assuming that the federal government could legitimately make such a correction to reflect the real security costs incurred by the various airlines, the exclusion of airlines that carried less than 400000 departing passengers in 2012, not including transit and transfer passengers, cannot achieve that goal.
Poleg tega iz zgoraj navedenega izhaja, da so vsi drugi uporabniki letališča Bruxelles-National izključeni iz ukrepa in zato ne prejemajo nobene subvencije, ne da bi bila ta izključitev utemeljena z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, v katerega spada zadevni ukrep.
Although it cannot be ruled out that the marginal cost per passenger of security costs is decreasing, nothing in the evidence provided by Belgium indicates that it is only from the 400000th passenger that this decreasing effect is worth taking into account, or that airlines carrying fewer passengers should not benefit from the State taking over some of BAC's security costs.
Zato celotna subvencija, ki jo prejemajo upravičenci do ukrepa, pomeni selektivno gospodarsko prednost.
Belgium has not provided any qualitative or quantitative justification on this point.
Vpliv na trgovino med državami članicami in konkurenco
It should be noted that in any given year of application of the scheme, an eligible airline may be refunded the full security charge due for any departing passenger in excess of 400000 provided that this can be done within the budget envelope of EUR 19 million.
Javna podpora podjetjem v skladu s členom 107(1) PDEU pomeni državno pomoč samo, če „izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga“, in le „kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
However, according to Belgium, a significant proportion of BAC's security costs (59 %) is variable.
Če pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, okrepi položaj podjetja v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji, ki konkurirajo na notranjem trgu, je treba ta podjetja obravnavati kot podjetja, na katera vpliva navedena pomoč.
It follows that any additional passenger, including above and beyond the 400000th, incurs significant additional security costs.
Glede na sodno prakso za opredelitev, da ukrep lahko izkrivlja konkurenco, zadostuje, da prejemnik pomoči neposredno konkurira drugim podjetjem na trgih, odprtih za konkurenco.
The measure in question is therefore unlikely to accurately reflect the real security costs incurred by the various users of Brussels airport.
V zvezi z vplivom na trgovino ni treba ugotavljati, ali pomoč dejansko vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami, temveč samo, ali bi pomoč lahko vplivala na navedeno trgovino.
Brussels Airlines, for its part, considered that a threshold related to the number of passengers was relevant in the case of a subsidy for airport security-related services because airport security costs are also related to the number of passengers.
Sodišči Unije sta zlasti odločili, da se, kadar finančna pomoč države članice okrepi položaj enega podjetja v razmerju do drugih konkurenčnih podjetij v trgovini znotraj Unije, šteje, da pomoč vpliva na ta zadnja podjetja.
However, Brussels Airlines did not specify how the way in which security costs vary precisely according to the number of passengers justifies the choice of a threshold expressed as a number of passengers, thereby excluding from the outset a whole category of airlines.
Zadevni ukrep upravičenim letalskim prevoznikom omogoča uporabo agresivnejše cenovne politike in umetno ohranjanje ali povečanje ponudbe storitev glede na običajne tržne pogoje ter s tem izkrivljanje konkurence v razmerju do drugih prevoznikov, ki niso upravičeni do ukrepa.
Neither did Brussels Airlines provide any justification regarding the level of the threshold chosen.
Ukrep lahko torej okrepi položaj upravičenih podjetij v primerjavi z drugimi letalskimi prevozniki, dejavnimi na trgu letalskega prevoza potnikov znotraj Unije.
Moreover, an airline that carried more than 400000 departing passengers a year in 2013, 2014 or 2015, not including transfer or transit passengers, would not receive any partial reimbursement of its security charge for that year pursuant to Article 2 of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014 if it did not attain the threshold of 400000 passengers in 2012, and would be penalised by the structure of the security charge which, according to Belgium, insufficiently reflects the gradually decreasing security costs.
Vendar je bil ta trg z zakonodajo Unije povsem liberaliziran in odprt za vse letalske prevoznike v Uniji.
Against this background, the exclusion a priori of airlines that transported less than 400000 departing passengers in 2012 from the scope of the measure, not including transit and transfer passengers, is inconsistent with the objective of better reflecting the real security costs in the security charge.
Iz tega izhaja, da lahko ta ukrep z izkrivljanjem konkurence med letalskimi prevozniki, ki poslujejo na notranjem trgu, izkrivlja tudi trgovino med državami članicami.
Finally, in its justifications, Belgium noted that transfer passengers were not exempted from security charges at Brussels airport, which would not reflect the decreasing security costs.
Sklepna ugotovitev glede obstoja pomoči letalskim prevoznikom
Assuming that it is correct, this assertion is inconsistent with the fact that transfer and transit passengers are not taken into account when identifying airlines that exceed the threshold of 400000 departing passengers carried in 2012 and therefore eligible for a refund under the measure at issue.
Obravnavani ukrep pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU v korist letalskih prevoznikov, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje iz člena 2(1) kraljeve uredbe z dne 7. januarja 2014.
In the light of the above, the second main point of the arguments put forward by Belgium, as set out in recital 174, cannot justify the threshold of 400000 departing passengers a year, as specified in Article 2(1) of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014.
Zakonitost pomoči
Moreover, while pursuant to Article 2(1) of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, transfer and transit passengers are excluded from the number of passengers calculated to determine the beneficiary airlines, these passengers are included when calculating the amounts to be repaid to each of the beneficiary airlines pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Royal Decree.
V skladu s členom 108(3) Pogodbe „mora biti [Komisija] obveščena o vseh načrtih za dodelitev ali spremembo pomoči dovolj zgodaj, da lahko predloži pripombe.[…] Zadevna država članica ne sme izvajati svojih predlaganih ukrepov, dokler v tem postopku ni sprejet dokončen sklep.“
However, the methods for calculating the subsidies should be consistent with the criterion used to determine the beneficiaries, otherwise they cannot be consistent with the objectives underlying the choice of the criterion for selecting the beneficiaries.
V obravnavanem primeru se je zadevni ukrep že začel izvajati, saj je kraljeva uredba z dne 7. januarja 2014 začela veljati, ne da bi bil ukrep priglašen Komisiji.
In its comments on Ryanair's comments, Belgium merely made reference to this point in its previous submissions.
Komisija ni našla pravne podlage, ki bi Belgijo oproščala obveznosti priglasitve navedene pomoči.
However, those submissions do not contain any explanation about the difference in treatment of transfer and transit passengers in the definition of the criterion for the selection of beneficiaries and in the method for calculating the subsidy.
Za odobreno subvencijo namreč ne velja ne Uredba (ES) št. 800/2008 ne Uredba Komisije (EU) št. 651/2014, katere člen 58(1) določa, da se „[t]a uredba […] uporablja za individualno pomoč, dodeljeno pred njenim začetkom veljavnosti, če pomoč izpolnjuje vse pogoje iz te uredbe, z izjemo člena 9“.
The Commission observes in this respect that, if the transit and transfer passengers had been included in the passenger count made pursuant to Article 2(1) of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, two additional airlines would in principle have been eligible for the scheme, namely Lufthansa and Jet Airways.
Poleg tega je izključena iz področja uporabe Sklepa Komisije 2012/21/EU že zato, ker obseg prometa na letališču Bruxelles-National presega prag 200000 potnikov letno, ki je določen v členu 2(1)(e) navedenega sklepa.
In the light of the above, it appears that the restriction in the number of beneficiaries to only those airlines that carried more than 400000 passengers from Brussels airport in 2012, not including transit and transfer passengers, is not objectively justified by the nature and the economy of the system in which the measure exists.
Obravnavani ukrep torej pomeni nezakonito pomoč.
Choice of the year 2012
Ker navedena subvencija pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, je treba preučiti njeno združljivost z notranjim trgom.
According to Belgium, 2012 was chosen as the reference year since it was the last year for which figures were available when the Council of Ministers decided to adopt the measure.
Ker je Belgija menila, da ukrep ni državna pomoč, ni navedla pravne podlage ali utemeljitve, na podlagi katerih bi bil ukrep lahko razglašen za združljivega z notranjim trgom, če bi se štel za državno pomoč.
According to Belgium, the use of the figures for 2012 ensures a measure of legal security for the beneficiary undertakings.
Družba Brussels Airlines je trdila, da če bi Komisija ugotovila, da državna pomoč obstaja, bi bilo treba to pomoč razglasiti za združljivo vsaj do 4. aprila 2014, ko so začele veljati nove letališke smernice.
The Commission does not consider this argument to be relevant, however.
Pri tem se sklicuje na sklep o letališču Charleroi, v katerem je Komisija menila, da je bilo več ukrepov, ki jih je odobrila regija Valonija, združljivih z notranjim trgom do 4. aprila 2014.
Article 2(2) of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014 provides that the subsidies received by the airlines are calculated for a given year (2013, 2014 or 2015) taking account of the number of departing passengers. (not including transit and transfer passengers) during that year.
Vendar so bili ukrepi, obravnavani v sklepu o letališču Charleroi, na katere se sklicuje družba Brussels Airlines, ukrepi pomoči upravljavcu letališča Charleroi, ki so bili razglašeni za delno združljive z notranjim trgom na podlagi oddelka 5.1.2 letaliških smernic v zvezi s pomočjo za tekoče poslovanje v korist letališč.
There is therefore no objective reason to exclude a priori some airlines from the list of beneficiaries based on data for the year 2012.
Ker je obravnavani ukrep pomoč letalskim prevoznikom in ne upravljavcem letališč, trditev družbe Brussels Airlines ni upoštevna.
In fact, the criterion of Article 2(1) of the Royal Decree provides no certainty other than that of being excluded from the scheme for airlines which do not satisfy it.
Komisija je kljub temu, da Belgija ni navedla argumentov za utemeljitev združljivosti pomoči z notranjim trgom, preučila morebitno združljivost pomoči glede na člen 107(3)(c) PDEU, v skladu s katerim se lahko za združljivo z notranjim trgom šteje „pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi“.
Belgium's argument relating to legal certainty is therefore invalid.
Zdi se namreč, da pomoči ni mogoče razglasiti za združljivo na nobeni drugi pravni podlagi.
According to Brussels Airlines, which agrees with Belgium in this respect, the use of 2012 as the reference year is explained by the fact that this was the last year for which the figures were available when the Council of Ministers decided to adopt the measure.
Zlasti ukrepa ni mogoče šteti za nadomestilo, ki bi bilo odobreno letalskim prevoznikom za opravljanje storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena.
Brussels Airlines is of the opinion that the choice of a reference point is still to some extent arbitrary, but by choosing 2012 as the reference year, Belgium does not appear to have exceeded the bounds of its discretion.
Zato ukrepa ni mogoče razglasiti za združljivega z notranjim trgom na podlagi člena 106(2) PDEU.
However, these arguments are implicitly based on the assumption that it was necessary a priori to restrict the number of beneficiaries among all users at Brussels airport based on data for a certain past reference year.
Letališke smernice so splošni okvir za oceno združljivosti pomoči letalskim prevoznikom glede na člen 107(3)(c) PDEU.
For the reasons given above, the Commission considers that this assumption is incorrect, which invalidates Brussels Airlines' argument.
Razen pomoči socialnega značaja, ki jo prejme končni potrošnik v zvezi z ruto, kamor zadevni ukrep očitno ne spada, je zagonska pomoč edina, ki je lahko letalskim prevoznikom odobrena na podlagi letaliških smernic.
According to Belgium, the measure allows for the beneficiary airlines to be determined again on the basis of the number of passengers carried in 2015, for the budget period 2016, 2017 and 2018, which will make it possible, if appropriate, to include. other airlines or to exclude one or more of the current beneficiaries.
V skladu s točko 174 letaliških smernic bo Komisija za nezakonito zagonsko pomoč letalskim prevoznikom uporabila pravila, ki so veljala v času dodelitve pomoči.
Belgium considers that the mechanism is an incentive in that it is likely to result in a redistribution of the list of beneficiaries every three years.
V skladu s točko 79(c) smernic iz leta 2005 se zagonska pomoč dodeljuje le za odprtje novih rut ali novih frekvenc, ki vodijo v povečanje neto števila potnikov.