Search results (1064 cards)

Advanced search

Translated Summaries

In The Journal of Regulation the summaries’ translation are done by the Editors and not by the authors

ENGLISH

On December 20, 2011, the European Commission adopted a decision based on the Almark ruling that expounds upon the four conditions necessary so that compensation paid by a State to any state-owned or private company entrusted with the operation of a public service not require prior notification of the European Commission, despite the general prohibition on State Aids. Each state has a wide margin of discretion in the definition of services that could be classified as being services of general economic interest. A communication and de minimis regulation will complete this decision.

FRENCH

Par une décision du 20 décembre 2011, la Commission Européenne, s’appuyant sur l’arrêt Almark , développe les 4 conditions pour que les compensations versées par un Etat à une entreprise, qu’elle soit publique ou privée, pour qu’elle assure un service public, ne donne pourtant pas lieu à notification à la Commission européenne, malgré la prohibition des aides d’Etat. Les Etats sont légitimes à définir les activités qui relèvent de l’intérêt économique général. Une communication et un règlement de minimis  complèteront cette décision.

SPANISH

El 20 de diciembre del 2010, la Comisión Europea adoptó una decisión basada en la decisión Almark que trata de las cuatro condiciones necesarias para que una compensación pagada por el Estado a cualquier empresa pública o privada no requiera de una notificación previa a la Comisión Europea, a pesar de la prohibición general sobre Asistencias Estatales. Cada estado tiene un gran margen de discreción en la definición de servicios que podrían ser clasificados como servicios de interés económico general. Una comunicación y regulación de minimis completará la decisión.

ITALIAN

Il 20 dicembre 2011, la Commissione europea, sulla base della decisione Almark, ha identificato le quattro condizioni in presenza delle quali gli aiuti dati dallo Stato ad un’azienda, pubblica o privata, per far assicurare un servizio pubblico, non sarà necessario fare una notifica alla Commissione, nonostante il divieto di procedere con degli aiuti di Stato. Ogni Stato avrà un ampio margine di manovra nella definizione dei servizi che possono essere qualificati come servizi di interesse generale. Una comunicazione ed un regolamento de minimis completeranno questa decisione.

ARABIC

في قرار مؤرّخ يوم 20 ديسمبر2011’ اللّجنة الأوروبية* تعتمد على قرار الحكم ألمارك* لوضع أربع شروط للتّعويضات التّي تدفعها الدّولة للشركة سواء كانت عامة أو خاصة’ لأنّه يوفّر خدمة عمومية’ ومع ذلك’ لا يؤدّي في الإخطار إلى اللّجنة الأوروبية على الرّغم من حظر المعاونة الدّولية. الدّول غير المشروعة يحدّدون الأنشطة الّتي تندرج في إطار الاقتصادية العامة. اتصال و تنظيم سوف يستكملني الحد الأدنى للقرار.  
  
*La Commission Européenne
*arrêt Almark

..................

Other translations forthcoming.

February 17, 2015, as the previous "Contrat de Régulation Économique" (Economie Regulatory Contract), the firm Aéroport de Paris (ADP)  has made available on its site to all "for consultation" the draft  "Contrat de Régulation Economique ("Economic Regulatory Contract)  for the period 2016 -2020.

Published in the wake of the meeting of the Board of ADP, the text is presented as a tool "for the Paris place", especially for air transport.

This shows that the document is primarily intended for investors and financial markets, the document being placed on the company website in the section for the "investors".

This illustrates the evolution from the traditional "contrats de plan" (plan contracts). But then, who are the parties to these types of contract?

Indeed, the very term "Regulatory contract"  is new in public Law. It appears as a sort of  modernization of "plan contract." The Conseil d'État (French State Council) finally admitted the contractual nature of these planning contracts. In these contracts, are parties were the State and the company in charge of a public service.

Because here the contract is an instrument of "economic regulation" the open public consultation draft rather expresses a global conception of  ADP, the company which manages the Paris airports,  for the future of the development of critical infrastructure that is the airport as the heart of global development of air transport.

The enterprise manager of the airport in the heart of the contract (rather than the State) in setting objectives for the coming four years is the letter and spirit of the French law of 20 April 2005 about Airports, which put the apparatus of this "Contrat de Régulation Economique" in place.

In this, the infrastructure manager is set by law as a "regulator of second degree", as can be a financial market enterprise. The company that manages and develops the Paris airports undoubtedly belongs to the category of " critical firms", as well it manages the future of the sector and helps to keep France a place in the world.

More, A.D.P. behaves like a Regulator, since it is carrying out the "public consultation", the consultation paper prepared by it,  being placed on its site and developing its ambitions for the sector and for France. But A.D.P. also expressed as a financial and economic actor, emphasizing the competitive environment,  demanding in passing more stability and clarity in the regulation in which it moves ...

That is why the consultation mechanism provided by the law must be more complex. Indeed, ADP can not be judge and jury. Therefore if the project raises observations, they must be formuled not to ADP but to the Ministries of Aviation and Economy, within a month. They shall communicate theiir content to ADP . Then the Commission consultative aéroportaire (French Airport Consultative Committee) will be consulted. At the end of this process, the "Contrat de Régulation Economique" will be signed.

Seing the end of the process, it remains in line with the plan contracts, since it remains the Economic Regulatory Contract is signed between the State and the essential infrastructure manager. But the consultation process shows firstly investors are the first recipients of the statements made by a privatized company presenting its draft primarily in terms of competitive context and international development and secondly the airlines that use daily services of the airports are also directly involved by theses questions of tarification.

Airlines protest against the increase in the money that will be asked. This will be imposed, since it is tarification and princing public policy. We are in unilateral rules. But it is indeed a "price" they feel to pay, they also heard a speech referring to competition in what the mechanism is presented as a "contract".

But then, does it take to admit that these "contracts for economic regulation" are not between two parties that are the state and the regulator of second degree that is the infrastructure manager but must be three, the State, the infrastructure manager and "stakeholders" that are mainly airlines?

This practical difficulty is much to the fact that the qualification of "contract" is difficult to justify in proceeding in which prevail unilateral mechanisms.