natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On 15 January 2015, Belgium sent the Commission its comments on the opening decision.
Zato je treba po mnenju Belgije v obravnavanem primeru za presojo obstoja prednosti v smislu pravil o državni pomoči ukrep, ki je predmet tega postopka, primerjati s primerljivim položajem v Belgiji, da se preveri, ali sporni ukrep upravičenim letalskim prevoznikom daje tako prednost ali ne.
The existence of State aid
Belgija navaja, da je do sprejetja zadevnega ukrepa samo letališče Bruxelles-National svojim uporabnikom zaračunavalo pristojbino, ki je pokrivala stroške varovanja, nastale zaradi njihove uporabe letališča, brez javne intervencije.
Belgium first recalls the conditions that must all be met to classify a measure as State aid, in particular that (1) the beneficiary or beneficiaries must be undertakings within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU; (2) the measure must be granted through state resources and be imputable to the State; (3) the measure must confer a selective advantage on its recipient(s); and (4) the measure must distort or threaten to distort competition and must be likely to affect trade between Member States.
Zaradi tega je položaj letališča Bruxelles-National po mnenju Belgije drugačen od položaja drugih letališč v valonski regiji in flamski regiji, kjer celotne stroške v zvezi s storitvami varovanja in varnosti na letališčih prevzame zadevna regija.
Belgium goes on to state that it does not dispute that the measure in question is imputable to the State and that it is likely to affect trade between Member States.
Belgija se sklicuje na sklep Komisije z dne 1. oktobra 2014 v zadevi v zvezi z ukrepi, ki jih je Belgija izvedla v korist letališča Charleroi in družbe Ryanair (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklep o letališču Charleroi), in zlasti na njegovi uvodni izjavi 269 in 270.
On the other hand, Belgium considers that it is not (1) a subsidy granted to an undertaking engaged in an economic activity, or (2) a selective advantage, which are sufficient grounds to rule out the measure introduced by the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014 being classified as State aid.
Po mnenju Belgije iz tega izhaja, da v Belgiji tržna cena na področju letaliških storitev, zaračunana letalskim prevoznikom, očitno ne vključuje celotnih stroškov v zvezi z varovanjem na letališčih.
The arguments put forward by Belgium in support of these two conclusions are summarised in recitals 60 to 72.
Glede na to meni, da Komisija v sklepu o letališču Charleroi tega dejstva ni štela za državno pomoč.
Notion of undertaking and economic activity
Prag 400000 potnikov letno in njegov vpliv na selektivnost ukrepa
Belgium notes that, according to Article 107 of the TFEU, the definition of undertaking covers every entity engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity and the way in which it is financed.
V zvezi s pragom 400000 potnikov se Belgija v glavnem sklicuje na svoj dopis z dne 2. aprila 2014, v katerem je pred začetkom formalnega postopka preiskave predstavila svoje trditve v zvezi z utemeljenostjo tega praga, ki so povzete v točkah od 46 do 49 sklepa o začetku postopka.
It also points out that activities carried out for the exercise of the official powers of the public authorities are not regarded as ‘economic’.
Belgija tem trditvam dodaja, da „je bil cilj spodbuditi letalske prevoznike k razvoju v Bruslju z nadomestilom za znižanje stroškov za varovanje zaradi povečanja števila potnikov“.
Regarding airports, such activities include, in particular, security, air traffic control and policing.
Združljivost morebitne pomoči
In the view of Belgium, it follows that activities related to airport security do not constitute an economic activity within the meaning competition law and that their financing does not therefore constitute State aid.
Ker Belgija meni, da ukrep, uveden s kraljevo uredbo z dne 7. januarja 2014, ni državna pomoč, po njenem mnenju ni pomembno navesti, na kateri pravni podlagi bi bil lahko navedeni ukrep razglašen za združljivega z notranjim trgom, in dokazati, da so pogoji za združljivost izpolnjeni.
In that respect, Belgium considers that it is possible for an entity to combine the exercise of powers of a public authority with the exercise of certain economic activities, and that the entity is therefore subject to the rules applicable to State aid only for its economic activities.
Zakonitost in izterjava morebitne pomoči
Belgium takes the view that the financing of services relating to airport security, as laid down by the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, does not constitute State aid, in that such activities fall within the scope of the exercise of the official powers of the public authorities.
Belgija meni, da preučitev vprašanja, ali je bil zadevni ukrep priglašen Evropski komisiji v skladu s členom 108(3) PDEU, ni upoštevna.
Existence of a selective advantage
Meni tudi, da zato niti ni pomembno vprašanje, ali bi moral biti navedeni ukrep predmet izterjave.
Belgium further considers that the measure in question does not confer on its beneficiaries any advantage within the meaning of the State aid rules.
PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH TRETJIH STRANI
More specifically, it makes reference to the fact that the existence of an advantage must be established by making a comparison between the situation being considered and the normal situation.
Pripombe družbe Ryanair
Belgium points out that, until the adoption of the measure in question, only Brussels airport charged its users a fee covering the security costs incurred by their use of the airport, with no public subsidy.
Morebitna odredba o začasni ukinitvi pomoči
According to Belgium, the situation of Brussels airport therefore differs from that of the other airports, located in the Walloon Region and the Flemish Region, where all costs related to airport safety and security services are borne by the regions concerned.
Družba Ryanair se strinja s predhodnimi ugotovitvami Komisije glede obstoja državne pomoči in Komisijo poziva, naj Belgiji odredi začasno ukinitev zadevnega ukrepa.
Belgium makes reference to the Commission Decision of 1 October 2014 in the case concerning the measures implemented by Belgium in favour of Charleroi Airport and Ryanair (hereinafter ‘the Charleroi decision’) and in particular recitals 269 and 270 thereof.
Po mnenju družbe Ryanair je sam cilj ukrepa očitno preprečevanje konkurence, saj je namen tega ukrepa izkrivljati konkurenco s postavljanjem drugih letalskih prevoznikov, zlasti nizkocenovnih prevoznikov, prisotnih na letališču Bruxelles-National, v slabši položaj.
Belgium claims that, as a result, in Belgium the market price for airport services charged to airlines appears not to include the total costs related to airport security.
Družba Ryanair poleg tega meni, da so upravičenci ukrepa (in sicer Brussels Airlines, TUI Airlines Belgium in Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium) to izkoristili za okrepitev predhodno obstoječega strateškega partnerstva, katerega namen je kljubovati vsem učinkovitim konkurentom, kot sta družbi Ryanair in Vueling, na vozlišču Bruxelles-National.
In that regard, it takes the view that the Commission, in the Charleroi decision, did not consider that this constituted State aid.
Struktura ukrepa in njegova narava državne pomoči
The threshold of 400000 passengers per year and its impact on the selectivity of the measure
Družba Ryanair najprej izraža strinjanje s predhodnimi ugotovitvami Komisije glede samovoljne narave praga 400000 potnikov, ki se družbi Ryanair zdi brez ekonomske logike.
Regarding the threshold of 400000 passengers, Belgium refers in particular to its letter of 2 April 2014, in which, before the opening of the formal investigation procedure, it put forward its arguments as to the merits of this threshold; these arguments are summarised in points 46 to 49 of the opening decision.
Drugič, družba Ryanair poudarja, da so letalski prevozniki, ki so upravičeni do ukrepa, izbrani na podlagi merila, ki izključuje transferne in tranzitne potnike, medtem ko zneski, ki se izplačajo posameznemu upravičencu, ti kategoriji potnikov vključujejo.
Belgium adds to these arguments that ‘the aim was to encourage airlines to expand in Brussels by compensating them for the reduced safety costs entailed by an increase in passengers’.
Družba Ryanair tu vidi neskladje in predpostavlja, da je mogoče razlike v obravnavi, ki jih ukrep uvaja v zvezi s tranzitnimi in transfernimi potniki, logično pojasniti z željo Belgije, da ostanejo nebelgijske družbe zunaj področja uporabe ukrepa.
Moreover, on the basis of the periodic assessment clause of the scheme, provided for in Article 4 of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, Belgium refers to a possible extension of the measure for a further three years mutatis mutandis, i.e. benefiting the airlines that have carried more than 400000 departing passengers in 2015.
Nazadnje, družba Ryanair se strinja s predhodno analizo Komisije, da je izbira leta 2012 kot referenčnega leta za določitev upravičencev do ukrepa samovoljna.
Belgium concludes that the mechanism is an incentive in that it is likely to lead to a redistribution of the list of beneficiaries every three years, for all carriers having exceeded the threshold of 400000 passengers over the three-year assessment period.
Opozarja, da to ni bilo edino leto, za katero so bili podatki na voljo, saj družba BAC na svojem spletišču vsak mesec objavlja podatke o potniškem prometu za predhodni mesec.
Compatibility of the possible aid
Nezdružljivost pomoči
Since Belgium considers that the measure introduced by the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014 does not constitute State aid, it does not see the relevance of indicating the legal basis on which the measure could be declared compatible with the internal market and demonstrating that the conditions for compatibility are met.
Družba Ryanair meni, da pomoči ni mogoče razglasiti za združljivo z notranjim trgom, ker krši pravila o svobodi opravljanja storitev.
Legality and recovery of the possible aid
Po mnenju družbe Ryanair pomoč daje prednost storitvam, ki jih ponuja nekaj skrbno izbranih belgijskih letalskih prevoznikov.
Belgium considers that the consideration of whether or not the measure in question was notified to the European Commission in accordance with Article 108(3) TFEU is irrelevant.
Družba Ryanair poudarja, da očitno s seznama upravičencev ni izključen noben velik belgijski letalski prevoznik in da je belgijski minister za promet sam priznal, da je bil namen ukrepa podpreti nacionalne letalske prevoznike.
It therefore considers that the question as to whether the measure is subject to recovery is not relevant either.
Poleg tega družba Ryanair poudarja sovražne izjave proti njej, ki prihajajo od belgijske vlade, ki naj bi po mnenju družbe Ryanair nasprotovala njeni uporabi letališča Bruxelles-National in želela s to protikonkurenčno pomočjo odvrniti vse nove ponudbe storitev nizkocenovnih prevoznikov, ki letijo s tega letališča.
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED THIRD PARTIES
Finančne težave družbe Brussels Airlines
Comments by Ryanair
Družba Ryanair navaja, da je imela družba Brussels Airlines izgube iz poslovanja vsako leto od leta 2009.
On 13 February 2015, Ryanair sent the Commission its comments on the opening decision.
Po njenem mnenju bi bila družba Brussels Airlines brez posredovanja Belgije verjetno izključena iz trga v kratkoročnem ali srednjeročnem obdobju.
Possible injunction to suspend the aid
Po mnenju družbe Ryanair je bil položaj tako kritičen, da je družba Brussels Airlines takoj vključila pričakovano pomoč v svoje letne računovodske izkaze za leto 2013, čeprav je bila njena pravica do prejetja tega zneska še negotova.
Ryanair shares the Commission's preliminary findings regarding the existence of State aid, and calls upon the Commission to order Belgium to suspend the measure in question.
Pripombe skupine International Airlines Group (IAG)
According to Ryanair, the very purpose of the measure is clearly anti-competitive because this measure aims to distort competition by putting other airlines at a disadvantage, notably the low-cost airlines operating at Brussels airport.
Skupina IAG je svoje pripombe k sklepu o začetku postopka Komisiji poslala 16. februarja 2015.
Furthermore, Ryanair considers that the beneficiaries of the measure (notably Brussels Airlines, TUI Airlines Belgium and Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium) have used it to strengthen a pre-existing strategic partnership aimed at facing up to a range of efficient competitors, such as Ryanair and Vueling, at the Brussels airport hub.
Pripisljivost ukrepa državi
The structure of the measure and its status as State aid
Po mnenju skupine IAG je očitno, da je ukrep odobrila Belgija s kraljevo uredbo z dne 7. januarja 2014 in da temelji na državnih sredstvih, zlasti proračunu „Service Public fédéral Mobilité et Transport“ (zvezna javna služba za mobilnost in promet).
First, Ryanair agrees with the Commission's preliminary findings regarding the arbitrary nature of the 400000 passenger threshold, which Ryanair considers to be devoid of economic logic.
Skupina IAG poudarja tudi, da je vloga družbe BAC pri upravljanju in razdelitvi teh sredstev omejena na uporabo sklepov belgijske države, saj so pravila razdelitve sredstev, ki jih družba BAC prejme od države, v celoti določena z določbami navedene kraljeve uredbe.
Secondly, Ryanair emphasises that the eligible airlines are selected on the basis of a criterion that excludes transfer and transit passengers, while the amounts due to each beneficiary do take account of those categories of passengers.
Po mnenju skupine IAG dejstvo, da je družba BAC zasebni gospodarski subjekt, ne postavlja pod vprašaj prisotnosti državnih sredstev in pripisljivosti ukrepa državi.
Ryanair sees this as an inconsistency, and assumes that the differences in treatment caused by the measure concerning transit and transfer passengers are logically explained by Belgium's aim to exclude non-Belgian airlines from the scope of the measure.
Obstoj selektivne prednosti, dane letalskim prevoznikom
Finally, Ryanair agrees with the Commission's preliminary analysis that the choice of 2012 as the reference year for identifying the beneficiaries of the measure is arbitrary.
Vidiki v zvezi s tranzitnimi in transfernimi potniki
Incompatibility of the aid
Skupina IAG to trditev ublaži z navedbo različnih primerov velikih evropskih letališč.
Ryanair considers that the aid cannot be declared compatible with the internal market in that it infringes the rules on the freedom to provide services.
Pripombe družbe Brussels Airlines
According to Ryanair, the aid favours the services offered by some carefully selected Belgian airlines.
Družba Brussels Airlines je svoje pripombe k sklepu o začetku postopka Komisiji poslala 23. februarja 2015.
Ryanair points out that no major Belgian airline appears to be excluded from the list of beneficiaries, and that the Belgian Minister of Transport has himself admitted that the purpose of the measure is to support national airlines.
Družba Brussels Airlines meni, da zadevni ukrep ni državna pomoč, ker se nanaša na financiranje negospodarskih dejavnosti in v nobenem primeru ne daje selektivne prednosti prejemnikom subvencije.
In addition, Ryanair reports hostile statements against it, from the then Belgian government, which Ryanair claims is opposed to its establishment at Brussels airport; its aim, though this anticompetitive aid, is to discourage all new offerings of services by low-cost airlines from this airport.
Podredno družba Brussels Airlines meni, da je ukrep združljiv z notranjim trgom pred začetkom veljavnosti letaliških smernic.
The financial difficulties of Brussels Airlines
Družba Brussels Airlines meni, da se subvencija, dodeljena s kraljevo uredbo z dne 7. januarja 2014, nanaša na negospodarske dejavnosti, za katere je določeno delno finančno nadomestilo.
Ryanair notes that Brussels Airlines has reported operating losses every year since 2009.
Družba Brussels Airlines se v podporo tej analizi sklicuje na sklep o razširitvi postopka preiskave z dne 21. marca 2012 v zadevi SA.14093 (C76/2002) o ugodnostih, ki sta jih regija Valonija in letališče Brussels South Charleroi Airport priznala letalskemu prevozniku Ryanair.
According to Ryanair, the situation was so critical that Brussels Airlines immediately included the expected aid in its 2013 annual accounts, while its entitlement to receive this amount was still uncertain.
Družba Brussels Airlines poleg tega poudarja, da naj bi zgoraj navedeni sklep o letališču Charleroi, s katerim je bil končan formalni postopek preiskave, razširjen s sklepom z dne 21. marca 2012, po mnenju ministra regije Valonije potrdil finančna nadomestila na področju varovanja, ki jih je regija Valonija odobrila letališču Charleroi in s tem, po mnenju družbe Brussels Airlines, njegovim upravljavcem.
Ryanair calls upon the Commission to use ‘all its powers under Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999’, replaced by Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589, to request detailed and up-to-date financial information on the accounts of Brussels Airlines, TUI Airlines Belgium and Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium for 2012, 2013 and 2014.
Selektivna prednost
Ryanair also asks the Commission to check how the aid was reflected in the beneficiaries' accounts in order to determine whether those beneficiaries are firms in difficulty within the meaning of the version of the guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring that were applicable at the time.
Družba Brussels Airlines omenja točko 44 sklepa o začetku postopka, v kateri je Komisija zaradi treh razlogov ugotovila, da je ukrep selektiven: (1) ukrep koristi samo letalskim prevoznikom in ne drugim načinom prevoza potnikov, (2) ukrep koristi letalskim prevoznikom, ki uporabljajo letališče Bruxelles-National, in (3) ukrep koristi letalskim prevoznikom, ki izpolnjujejo določene pogoje v zvezi s prometom na letališču Bruxelles-National.
On 16 February 2015, IAG sent the Commission its comments on the opening decision.
Meni, da obstajajo objektivni razlogi, ki pojasnjujejo razlikovanje med letalskim prometom in drugimi načini prevoza potnikov, ker ti ne pomenijo takšnih tveganj v zvezi z varnostjo kot zračni promet.
Imputability of the measure to the State
Kar zadeva drugo točko, se družba Brussels Airlines sklicuje na belgijski pravni red, s katerim je pomoč dodeljena samo prevoznikom, ki letijo prek letališča Bruxelles-National.
According to IAG, it is clear that the measure was approved by Belgium by means of the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014, and that it is based on State resources, in particular on the budget of the ‘Federal Public Service for Mobility and Transport’.
Belgijske regije so pristojne za opremo in upravljanje letališč in javnih aerodromov, razen letališča Bruxelles-National, ki je v zvezni pristojnosti.
IAG also emphasises that BAC's role in the management and distribution of this resource is restricted to implementing the decisions of the Belgian State, as the rules for the distribution of the funds received by BAC from the State are determined solely by the provisions of the Royal Decree.
Družba Brussels Airlines iz tega sklepa, da lahko zvezna država subvencijo odobri samo letališču Bruxelles-National, ne pa drugim letališčem.
According to IAG, the fact that BAC is a private operator does not therefore call into question the presence of state resources and the imputability of the measure to the State.
Družba Brussels Airlines meni tudi, 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.
Existence of a selective advantage in favour of the airlines
Družba Brussels Airlines meni, da je izbira referenčne točke očitno vedno v določeni meri samovoljna.
IAG points out that the airlines that did not operate in 2012 are automatically excluded from the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014.
Po analizi družbe Brussels Airlines se torej ne zdi, da bi Belgija z izbiro referenčnega leta 2012 presegla svojo diskrecijsko pravico v zvezi s tem.
It considers that, although the measure is presented as being of general application to all users of Brussels airport, the measure has been devised in such a way that it can apply only to a few of the airlines.
Družba Brussels Airlines iz tega sklepa, da ukrep ne daje selektivne prednosti.
Regarding transit and transfer passengers
Združljivost pomoči
IAG refers to one of Belgium's statements about the selectivity of the measure, namely that unlike the Brussels airport, many European airports do not exempt transit and transfer passengers and do pass their security charges on to them.
Družba Brussels Airlines želi opozoriti, da če bi Komisija kljub temu sklenila, da pomoč obstaja, je bila ta pomoč združljiva vsaj do 4. aprila 2014, ko so začele veljati letališke smernice.
IAG qualifies this statement on the basis of a number of examples of major European airports.
Pri tem se sklicuje na zgoraj navedeni sklep o letališču Charleroi, v katerem se je Komisija strinjala, da je več ukrepov, ki jih je regija Valonija odobrila upravljavcu letališča Charleroi, s katerimi je bila gospodarska dejavnost letališča subvencionirana selektivno in ki so zato pomenili nezakonito državno pomoč, postalo nezdružljivih z notranjim trgom šele z začetkom veljavnosti letaliških smernic.
Furthermore, IAG notes that following the losses posted by Brussels Airlines in recent years, Lufthansa decided to postpone its decision to acquire all the shares of Brussels Airlines until 2017, whereas this decision was initially planned in 2014.
To v skladu z analizo družbe Brussels Airlines pomeni, da subvencij, izplačanih za storitve v zvezi z varnostjo, zagotovljene pred tem datumom, ni nikakor mogoče izterjati od podjetij, ki so jih prejela.
According to IAG, Lufthansa is not likely to complete the acquisition of Brussels Airlines until it has improved its balance sheet, even with public funds.
Sklepna ugotovitev
Comments by Brussels Airlines
Družba Brussels Airlines meni, da zadevni ukrep ni državna pomoč, ker z njim ni subvencionirana gospodarska dejavnost, niti ne daje selektivne prednosti.
On 23 February 2015, Brussels Airlines sent the Commission its comments on the opening decision.
V vsakem primeru ugotavlja, da je treba ukrep šteti za združljiv z notranjim trgom pred začetkom veljavnosti letaliških smernic.
Secondarily, Brussels Airlines considers that the measure is compatible with the internal market before the entry into force of the aviation guidelines.
Še ena zainteresirana stran, ki je želela ostati anonimna (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zainteresirana stran, ki je želela ostati anonimna), je svoje pripombe k sklepu o začetku postopka Komisiji poslala 26. februarja 2015.
Brussels Airlines considers that the subsidy granted by the Royal Decree of 7 January 2014 relates to non-economic activities, providing for partial financial compensation for them.
Najprej, zainteresirana stran, ki je želela ostati anonimna, opozarja, da zakon o dolgoročnem programu z dne 30. decembra 2001 izrecno določa, da morajo biti letališke pristojbine, ki jih pobere družba BAC, nediskriminatorne, pregledne in stroškovno usmerjene.
In support of this analysis, Brussels Airlines refers to the decision to extend the examination procedure of 21 March 2012 in case SA.14093 (C76/2002) Advantages granted by the Walloon Region to Brussels South Charleroi Airport and Ryanair.
Nato poudarja, da kraljeva uredba z dne 7. januarja 2014 ne more pod vprašaj postaviti določb zakona o dolgoročnem programu, saj je ta nadrejen kraljevi uredbi.
According to Brussels Airlines, the airlines operating at Charleroi airport do not pay security charges at that airport and, according to the Commission's decision of 21 March 2012, this does not imply that they are receiving State aid.
Zainteresirana stran, ki je želela ostati anonimna, opozarja, da je Belgija na podlagi zakona o dolgoročnem programu družbi BAC izdala licenco, ki ji dovoljuje, da upravlja letališče Bruxelles-National.