natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The purpose of the conference was to present Lista air base, and the possible transformation of the air base from military to civilian commercial use, to interested parties.
Namen konference je bil zainteresiranim strankam predstaviti letalsko oporišče Lista in možno preoblikovanje letalskega oporišča iz vojaške uporabe v civilno gospodarsko uporabo.
After the conference, a consultant, Mr Hjort, was appointed to assist with the sales process.
Po konferenci je bil za svetovalca za pomoč pri prodaji imenovan g. Hjort.
He concluded that ‘the air base was difficult to sell to real estate developers as there were no viable buyers, and the fact that the property’s potential for utilisation was very limited due to the LILAS’ agreement’.
Ugotovil je, da „je letalsko oporišče razvijalcem nepremičnin težko prodati zato,ker ni primernih kupcev in zaradi dejstva, da so možnosti za uporabo nepremičnine zaradi pogodbe podjetja LILAS zelo omejene.“
In August 2001, the NDEA decided that the property should be sold en bloc in order to prevent that certain areas of the air base would become totally unattractive to potential purchasers.
Avgusta 2001 je NDEA odločila, da je nepremičnino treba prodati v svežnju, da se prepreči, da bi nekatera območja letalskega oporišča postala popolnoma neprivlačna za morebitne kupce.
In the context of negotiations in early 2002 with real estate developers Intervest Eiendom AS and Interconsult Prosjektutvikling AS, the NDEA ordered two value assessments by the real estate value assessors Verditakst and OPAK.
V okviru pogajanj v začetku leta 2002 z razvijalci nepremičnin Intervest Eiendom AS in Interconsult Prosjektutvikling AS je NDEA pri cenilcih vrednosti Verditakst in OPAK naročila dve oceni vrednosti.
Those negotiations failed, but on 12 September 2002, a sales agreement was reached between the NDEA and Lista Flypark AS.
Pogajanja niso bila uspešna, vendar sta se 12. septembra 2002 NDEA in podjetje Lista Flypark AS sporazumela o prodaji.
The purchase price was based on three elements: (i) the actual price to be paid for the property, (ii) an additional payment corresponding to 50 % of the net resale and (iii) an amount corresponding to 30 % of the net income from the lease agreement.
Nakupna cena je temeljila na treh elementih: (i) dejanski ceni, ki jo je treba plačati za nepremičnino, (ii) dodatnem plačilu, ki ustreza 50 % neto nadaljnje prodaje in (iii) znesku, ki ustreza 30 % čistega dobička iz zakupne pogodbe.
Price of the property
Cena nepremičnine
The OPAK report, dated 29 May 2002, distinguished between the three following scenarios: sale of the property to a new purchaser (NOK 32000000), sale of the property to the lessee on the basis of its pre-emptive right to buy part of the leased building and land at the end of the 10 year lease (NOK 34000000) and sale of the property to the lessee on the basis of its pre-emptive right to buy the property en bloc during the lease period (NOK 25000000).
Poročilo OPAK-a z dne 29. maja 2002 razlikuje tri scenarije: prodajo nepremičnine novemu kupcu (32000000 NOK), prodajo nepremičnine zakupniku na podlagi njegove predkupne pravice, da ob koncu desetletnega zakupa kupi del zakupljenega objekta in zemljišča (34000000 NOK) ter prodajo nepremičnine zakupniku na podlagi njegove predkupne pravice, da v obdobju zakupa kupi nepremičnino v svežnju (25000000 NOK).
The Verditakst report, dated 7 June 2002, concluded that the market value of the property was NOK 11000000.
Poročilo podjetja Verditakst z dne 7. junija 2002 je ugotovilo, da je tržna vrednost nepremičnine 11000000 NOK.
The sales price was actually agreed on the basis of the valuation carried out by Verditakst, i.e. NOK 11000000.
Prodajna cena je bila dejansko dogovorjena na podlagi ocene, ki jo je opravil Verditakst, tj. 11000000 NOK.
Based on the fire safety report referred to above, an amount of NOK 7500000 was deducted from the value of the property to take into account the works that needed to be carried out in order to comply with applicable fire safety standards.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega poročila o požarni varnosti je bil od vrednosti nepremičnine odštet znesek v višini 7500000 NOK, s čimer je bila upoštevana vrednost del, ki jih je bilo treba opraviti, da bi bili izpolnjeni veljavni standardi požarne varnosti.
The sales price of the property was therefore reduced to NOK 3500000.
Prodajna cena nepremičnine je bila tako znižana na 3500000 NOK.
50 % split of the net resale
50 % razdelitev neto nadaljnje prodaje
According to Article 3 of the sales agreement, the NDEA was entitled to 50 % of any income generated from sale of plots on the property.
V skladu s členom 3 prodajne pogodbe je bila NDEA upravičena do 50 % prihodka, ustvarjenega pri prodaji parcel nepremičnine.
The sales of two plots has resulted in a transfer of NOK 795263 to the NDEA.
Zaradi prodaje dveh parcel je bilo NDEA nakazanih 795263 NOK.
In addition, NOK 5000000 is outstanding pending disagreement as to the interpretation of that provision in relation to the purchase by LILAS of the area on which it had an option under the lease agreement.
Poleg tega je 5000000 NOK neplačanih zaradi nerešenega nesoglasja glede razlage navedene določbe v zvezi z LILAS-ovim nakupom območja, za katero je imel možnost na podlagi zakupne pogodbe.
30 % of the net income from the lease agreement
30 % čistega dobička iz zakupne pogodbe
The NDEA was also entitled to 30 % of any profit after tax generated under the lease agreement.
NDEA je bila upravičena tudi do 30 % dobička po obdavčitvi, ustvarjenega na podlagi zakupne pogodbe.
However, no income was generated from Lista Flypark AS in the period from 2003 until 2006.
Vendar podjetje Lista Flypark AS v obdobju od leta 2003 do leta 2006 ni ustvarilo nič prihodka.
The value attached to the obligations relating to the land and buildings
Vrednost, pripisana obveznostim v zvezi z zemljiščem in objekti
It was agreed that the purchaser would be compensated for obligations attached to the property which had not been taken into account in the valuation.
Dogovorjeno je bilo, da bo kupec dobil nadomestilo za obveznosti, povezane z nepremičnino, ki pri oceni niso bile upoštevane.
Compensation covered the following:
Nadomestilo je zajemalo:
compensation related to technical installations (such as electrical transmission lines): NOK 3500000
nadomestilo, ki se nanaša na tehnično opremo (na primer električne napeljave): 3500000 NOK
The NDEA took on the responsibility of contributing to the transformation of the air base from a military air base to a commercial business in compliance with the Parliament’s decision: ‘in accordance with the parliamentary resolution, the Armed Forces are obliged to prepare the area for civilian use.
NDEA je prevzela odgovornost, da prispeva k preoblikovanju letalskega oporišča iz vojaškega letalskega oporišča v poslovno dejavnost v skladu s sklepom Parlamenta: „v skladu z resolucijo parlamenta so oborožene sile dolžne pripraviti območje za civilno uporabo.
This obligation especially involves any commitment towards adjacent land owners when it comes to drainage, as well as facilitating new infrastructure in conjunction with the development of the area.’;
Ta obveznost zlasti vključuje kakršne koli zaveze do lastnikov sosednjih zemljišč, kadar gre za odvodnjavanje in tudi pri olajševanju infrastrukture v povezavi z razvojem območja.“;
compensation related to the development of new infrastructure: NOK 5500000
nadomestilo, ki se nanaša na razvoj nove infrastrukture: 5500000 NOK
The NDEA was again obliged to bear the costs of transforming the air base from military to civilian use.;
NDEA je bila spet dolžna nositi stroške preoblikovanja letalskega oporišča iz vojaške v civilno uporabo;
compensation related to LILAS’ lease agreement: NOK 5375000
nadomestilo, ki se nanaša na zakupno pogodbo podjetja LILAS: 5375000 NOK
The lease agreement provides that the owner of the air base is responsible for running expenses and external maintenance of the buildings and maintenance of the runway.
Zakupna pogodba določa, da je lastnik letalskega oporišča odgovoren za tekoče stroške ter zunanje vzdrževanje objektov in vzdrževanje vzletno-pristajalne steze.
These liabilities were however limited to NOK 1500000 per annum.
Te obveznosti pa so bile omejene na 1500000 NOK na leto.
As the NDEA was, at the time of the sale in 2002, obliged to pay LILAS a yearly amount of NOK 1500000 for approximately another 4 years, the amount of NOK 5375000 was credited to Lista Flypark AS in order to fulfil these obligations towards LILAS.
Ker je bila NDEA v času prodaje leta 2002 dolžna podjetju LILAS plačevati letni znesek 1500000 NOK še približno štiri leta, je bil znesek 5375000 NOK knjižen v dobro podjetja Lista Flypark AS zaradi izpolnitve teh obveznosti do podjetja LILAS.
The total compensation, amounting to NOK 14375000, was set off against the purchase price of NOK 3500000.
Skupna nadomestila v višini 14375000 NOK so bila odpisana od nakupne cene 3500000 NOK.
The Norwegian authorities thus paid the purchaser NOK 10875000.
Norveški organi so torej kupcu plačali 10875000 NOK.
COMMENTS BY THE NORWEGIAN AUTHORITIES
PRIPOMBE NORVEŠKIH ORGANOV
COMMENTS REGARDING LILAS’ LEASE AGREEMENT
PRIPOMBE GLEDE ZAKUPNE POGODBE PODJETJA LILAS
No aid or advantage was granted to LILAS under the lease agreement
Podjetju LILAS na podlagi zakupne pogodbe ni bila dodeljena nobena pomoč ali ugodnost
The Norwegian authorities indicated that even though the rent as specified in the lease agreement was indeed NOK 10000 per year, this value did not accurately reflect the actual amounts paid to NDEA.
Norveški organi navajajo, da čeprav je bila najemnina, določena v zakupni pogodbi, res 10000 NOK na leto, ta vrednost ne izraža natančno dejanskih zneskov, plačanih NDEA.
Indeed, NDEA was also entitled to 15 % of LILAS income from the sublease of the buildings.
NDEA je bila res upravičena do 15 % prihodkov podjetja LILAS od podnajema objektov.
Furthermore, in case the gross income related to commercial aviation exceeded NOK 4500000 annually, the NDEA was also entitled to 20 % of the income in excess of that figure.
V primeru, da je bruto dohodek komercialnega zračnega prevoza presegal 4500000 NOK na leto, je bila NDEA upravičena tudi do 20 % dohodka od zneska, ki presega to številko.
The income from subleasing paid to the NDEA was NOK 245405.
NDEA je bil plačan dohodek od podnajema v znesku 245405 NOK.
According to the Norwegian authorities, the income from subleasing of NOK 245405 must be added to the yearly rent of NOK 10000.
Po besedah norveških organov je treba dohodek od podnajema v znesku 245405 NOK prišteti letni najemnini 10000 NOK.
The total rent during the lease until the sale in 2002 amounted to NOK 310405.
Skupna najemnina med zakupom do prodaje v letu 2002 je znašala 310405 NOK.
The Norwegian authorities argue furthermore that LILAS was to develop, operate and maintain the property for commercial air services on the air base, which amounted to a public service obligation.
Norveški organi tudi trdijo, da je podjetje LILAS moralo razviti, upravljati in vzdrževati nepremičnino za komercialni letalski prevoz v letalskem oporišču, kar je enakovredno obveznosti javne službe.
In this context, the amount of rent paid should be considered as somewhat immaterial for the assessment of the lease agreement.
V tej zvezi je treba znesek najemnine obravnavati kot nebistven za ocenjevanje te zakupne pogodbe.
In case the project had been successful, LILAS’ profits under the lease agreement could have been significant.
Če bi bil projekt uspešen, bi podjetje LILAS na podlagi zakupne pogodbe lahko imelo znatne dobičke.
On the other hand, if the more moderate forecasts were to be fulfilled, then the lease of the air base, due to the financial risk of the lease agreement based on substantial unavoidable costs, would not be profitable for LILAS.
Če bi bile izpolnjene bolj skromne napovedi, pa po drugi strani zakup letalskega oporišča zaradi finančnega tveganja zakupne pogodbe, ki temelji na znatnih neizogibnih stroških, za podjetje LILAS ne bi bil donosen.
No effect on trade between EEA States
Ni vpliva na trgovino med državami EGP
The Norwegian authorities have argued that there was no indication that intra-EEA trade was affected and that competition was distorted by that aid.
Norveški organi trdijo, da nič ne kaže na to, da je bila prizadeta trgovina znotraj EGP in da je ta pomoč povzročila izkrivljanje konkurence.
They referred to the State Aid Guidelines on financing of airports and start up aid to airlines departing from regional airports [8] according to which Lista would be classified as a category D airport, i.e. a small airport with an annual passenger volume of less than 1 million.
Sklicevali so se na Smernice o državni pomoči za financiranje letališč in zagonski državni pomoči letalskim družbam z odhodi z regionalnih letališč [8], v skladu s katerimi bi bila Lista razvrščena kot letališče kategorije D, tj. malo letališče z letnim pretokom manj kot 1 milijon potnikov.
The total passenger basis of Lista airport is 32000 people.
Skupna baza potnikov letališča Lista je 32000 ljudi. Smernice o letališčih določajo, da „financiranja, odobrena majhnim regionalnim letališčem (kategorija D), malo verjetno izkrivljajo konkurenco ali vplivajo na trgovino v nasprotju s splošnim interesom“.
No unlawful aid was granted
Nezakonita pomoč ni bila dodeljena
The Norwegian authorities argue that the new Airport Guidelines [10] should be referred to when reviewing the terms of the lease agreement.
Norveški organi trdijo, da bi se bilo treba pri pregledu pogojev zakupne pogodbe sklicevati na nove smernice o letališčih [10].
Indeed, even though they had not been adopted at the time the lease agreement was entered into, the Norwegian authorities argue that the new Airport Guidelines ‘add to rather than replace’ the prior guidelines and should therefore be referred to.
Čeprav v času sklepanja zakupne pogodbe nove smernice o letališčih še niso bile sprejete, norveški organi trdijo, da nove smernice „dopolnjujejo, in ne nadomeščajo“ prejšnjih smernic in se je zato treba nanje sklicevati.
The Norwegian authorities argue that LILAS was entrusted with a public service obligation amounting to the ‘operation of the infrastructure, comprising the maintenance and management of airport infrastructure’.
Norveški organi trdijo, da je bila podjetju LILAS poverjena obveznost javne službe, ki je enakovredna „obratovanju infrastruktur, ki vključuje vzdrževanje in upravljanje letališke infrastrukture“.
They then refer to the new Airport Guidelines which provide: ‘such funding does not constitute state aid if it is compensation for public services allocated for management of the airport in accordance with the conditions established in the Altmark judgment.
Nato se sklicujejo na nove smernice o letališčih, ki določajo: „Ta financiranja ne predstavljajo državnih pomoči, če so nadomestila za izvajanje javne službe, dodeljena za upravljanje letališča v skladu s pogoji, določenimi s sodno prakso Altmark.
(…) such aid may be declared compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement only on the basis of Articles 61(3) (a) or (c), under certain conditions, in disadvantaged regions, or on the basis of Article 59(2) if it meets certain conditions which ensure that it is necessary for the operation of a service of general economic interest and does not affect trade to an extent contrary to the interests of Contracting Parties’.
(…) so takšne pomoči lahko razglašene za združljive z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP samo na podlagi člena 61(3)(a) ali (c), pod določenimi pogoji in v prikrajšanih regijah, ali na podlagi člena 59(2), v kolikor izpolnjujejo določene pogoje, ki zagotavljajo, da so nujno potrebne za izvajanje storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena in da vpliv na razvoj trgovine ni v nasprotju z interesom Skupnosti“.
The Municipality of Farsund, in which the air base is located, is eligible for regional aid.
Občina Farsund, v kateri je letalsko oporišče, je upravičena do regionalne pomoči.
The Norwegian authorities therefore conclude that any aid granted to LILAS corresponded to a compensation which did not exceed what was necessary to cover the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations entrusted to it.
Zato norveški organi ugotavljajo, da je kakršnakoli pomoč, dodeljena podjetju LILAS, ustrezala nadomestilu, ki ni presegalo zneska, potrebnega za pokrivanje stroškov, ki nastanejo zaradi izpolnjevanja obveznosti javne službe, ki ji je bila poverjena.
COMMENTS REGARDING THE SALES AGREEMENT
PRIPOMBE GLEDE PRODAJNE POGODBE
No aid or advantage was granted to Lista Flypark AS in conjunction with the sale
Podjetju Lista Flypark AS v povezavi s prodajo ni bila dodeljena nobena pomoč ali ugodnost
The Norwegian authorities argue that even though the conditions set out in Section 2.2 of the State Aid Guidelines on State aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities were not strictly complied with, ‘most potential purchasers were adequately informed of the NDEA’s efforts to sell the air base’.
Norveški organi trdijo, da čeprav pogoji, določeni v oddelku 2.2 Smernic o državni pomoči o elementih državne pomoči pri prodaji zemljišč in objektov s strani javnih oblasti, niso bili dosledno izpolnjeni, je bila „večina morebitnih kupcev ustrezno obveščena o prizadevanjih NDEA, da proda letalsko oporišče“.
Indeed, as indicated above in Section 2.3.1, many steps were taken in order to find a purchaser.
Kot je navedeno v oddelku 2.3.1 zgoraj, je bilo sprejetih veliko ukrepov, da se najde kupec.
The Norwegian authorities furthermore stressed that the sales price accurately reflected the value of the property and the legal obligations related to it.
Norveški organi so nadalje poudarili, da je prodajna cena natančno izražala vrednost nepremičnine in z njo povezanih pravnih obveznosti.
They refer to the fact that the actual purchase price did not only correspond to the price of the estate but also to other components such as the 50 % profit sharing from resale and the 30 % split of possible net income at Lista Flypark AS (see above Section 2.3.2).
Sklicujejo se na dejstvo, da dejanska nakupna cena ni samo ustrezala ceni nepremičnine, ampak tudi drugim sestavinam, kot je 50-odstotna delitev dobička od nadaljnje prodaje in 30-odstotna razdelitev možnega čistega dobička v podjetju Lista Flypark AS (glej oddelek 2.3.2 zgoraj).
The Norwegian authorities reiterated the points referred to above under Section 3.1.2.
Norveški organi so ponovili točke, navedene zgoraj v oddelku 3.1.2.
The Norwegian authorities referred to their explanations concerning the lease agreement entered into with LILAS.
Norveški organi so se sklicevali na svoje obrazložitve o zakupni pogodbi, ki je bila sklenjena s podjetjem LILAS.
By letter dated 15 November 2007 (Event No 452517), the law firm representing Lista Lufthavn AS submitted comments to the Authority’s decision to open a formal investigation [11].
Odvetniška pisarna, ki zastopa podjetje Lista Lufthavn AS, je v dopisu z dne 15. novembra 2007 (dogodek št. 452517) predložila pripombe o odločbi Nadzornega organa, da sproži formalni postopek preiskave.
The comments were limited to the lease agreement and did not address the issue of the sale of the land.
Pripombe so bile omejene na zakupno pogodbo in niso obravnavale vprašanja prodaje zemljišča.
NO AID OR ADVANTAGE WAS GRANTED TO LILAS UNDER THE LEASE AGREEMENT
PODJETJU LILAS NA PODLAGI ZAKUPNE POGODBE NI BILA DODELJENA NOBENA POMOČ ALI UGODNOST
The de facto annual rent was not of NOK 10000 as NDEA received NOK 245405 from subleasing.
Dejanska letna najemnina ni bila 10000 NOK, ker je NDEA prejela 245405 NOK od podnajema.
Furthermore, LILAS — through the lease agreement — was entrusted with the public service obligation to operate and manage Lista air base.
Poleg tega je bila podjetju LILAS – preko zakupne pogodbe – poverjena obveznost javne službe, da upravlja in vodi letalsko oporišče Lista.
This general service obligation entailed significant limitations on LILAS’ possibility of exploiting the air base for other purposes.
Ta obveznost splošne službe je povzročila znatne omejitve možnosti podjetja LILAS, da letalsko oporišče izkorišča za druge namene.
In 2001, the total cost of such operations was of approximately NOK 5500000 per year.
Leta 2001 so bili celotni stroški takega poslovanja približno 5500000 NOK na leto.
In light of the significant costs, an annual cap of NOK 1500000 was included in the lease agreement on 9 May 2006.
Ob upoštevanju visokih stroškov je bila 9. maja 2006 v zakupno pogodbo vključena letna omejitev 1500000 NOK.
The LILAS agreement is strictly related to the lease of Lista air base for public service obligations of management and operation of the air base itself and not the operation of domestic scheduled flights and international air freight.
Sporazum s podjetjem LILAS se strogo nanaša na zakup letalskega oporišča Lista za obveznosti javne službe vodenja in upravljanja letalskega oporišča samega in ne na opravljanje domačih rednih letov in mednarodnega zračnega prevoza tovora.
In this respect any aid granted under the lease agreement would not affect trade within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
V tej zvezi kakršna koli pomoč, dodeljena na podlagi zakupne pogodbe, ne bi vplivala na trgovino v smislu člena 61(1) EGP.
ANY AID GRANTED TO LILAS WOULD BE LAWFUL AID
KAKRŠNA KOLI POMOČ, DODELJENA PODJETJU LILAS, BI BILA ZAKONITA POMOČ
Should the Authority conclude that aid had been granted to LILAS, it would in any event be compatible with the EEA Agreement on the basis of the Guidelines on financing of airports and start up aid to airlines departing from regional airports.
Če bi Nadzorni organ ugotovil, da je bila podjetju LILAS dodeljena pomoč, bi bila v vsakem primeru združljiva s Sporazumom EGP na podlagi Smernic o državni pomoči za financiranje letališč in zagonski državni pomoči letalskim družbam z odhodi z regionalnih letališč.
NO BASIS FOR A RECOVERY DECISION
NI PODLAGE ZA ODLOČBO O VRAČILU
The 10 year period was therefore not interrupted by an action of the Authority.
Desetletnega obdobja torej ni prekinilo ukrepanje Nadzornega organa.
Article 15 of Protocol 3 provides: ‘the powers of the EFTA Surveillance Authority to recover aid shall be subject to a limitation period of ten years’.
Člen 15 Protokola 3 določa: „da so pooblastila Nadzornega organa Efte v zvezi z vračilom pomoči veljavna največ deset let“.
THE LEASING OUT OF PART OF LISTA AIR BASE
ZAKUP DELA LETALSKEGA OPORIŠČA LISTA
The lease agreement with LAD was signed on 27 June 1996 and entered into effect on 1 July 1996.
Zakupna pogodba s podjetjem LAD je bila podpisana 27. junija 1996 in je začela veljati 1. julija 1996.
Article 15 of Protocol 3 provides:
Člen 15 Protokola 3 določa:
The powers of the EFTA Surveillance Authority to recover aid shall be subject to a limitation period of 10 years.
Pooblastila Nadzornega organa Efte v zvezi z vračilom pomoči so veljavna največ deset let.
The limitation period shall begin on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme.
Zastaralni rok začne teči na dan, ko se nezakonita pomoč dodeli upravičencu kot individualna pomoč ali pomoč iz sheme pomoči.
Any action taken by the EFTA Surveillance Authority or by the EFTA State, acting at the request of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, with regard to the unlawful aid shall interrupt the limitation period.
Kakršen koli ukrep glede nezakonite pomoči, ki ga sprejme Nadzorni organ Efte ali država Efte na zahtevo Nadzornega organa Efte, prekine zastaralni rok.
Each interruption shall start time running afresh.
Po vsaki prekinitvi pa začne rok znova teči.
The limitation period shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the EFTA Surveillance Authority is the subject of proceedings pending before the EFTA Court.
Zastaralni rok se začasno ustavi, dokler je odločba Nadzornega organa Efte predmet tekočih postopkov pred Sodiščem Efte.
Any aid with regard to which the limitation period has expired, shall be deemed to be existing aid.’
Kakršna koli pomoč, pri kateri je zastaralni rok iztekel, se šteje kot veljavna pomoč.“