Common use of Conclusion Clause in Contracts

Conclusion. Based on the information submitted by the Icelandic authorities, the Authority cannot exclude the possibility that the 2007 amendments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act constitute aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Furthermore, the Authority has doubts that these measures can be regarded as complying with Article 61(2)(b) or 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, possibly in combination with the require- ments laid down in the Shipbuilding Guidelines or the Regional Aid Guidelines or by way of direct application. The Authority thus doubts that the above measures are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. Consequently, and in accordance Article 4(4) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, the Autho- rity is obliged to open the procedure provided for in Article 1 (2) of Part I of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agree- ment. The decision to open proceedings is without prejudice to the final decision of the Authority, which may conclude that the measures in question do not constitute aid or are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The Authority notes that were the measures to be identified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, any breach of the standstill operation leads to the classification of the aid as unlawful within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement. Unlawful aid which is not compatible with the EEA State aid provisions is subject to recovery. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, invites the Icelandic authorities to submit their comments on this Decision within one month of the date of receipt thereof. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority invites the Icelandic authorities within one month of receipt of this decision, to provide all documents, information and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of the above measures, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: The EFTA Surveillance Authority finds that as far as breakwater constructions, marking of approach channels, depth, protective installations and dredging are concerned, no State aid is involved as regards support for these projects under Article 24(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the 2003 Harbour Act. The damage compensation clause in 26(3), subparagraph 3, of the 2003 Harbour Act therefore does not involve any State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, in so far as it relates to these projects. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement against Iceland regarding the 2007 amendments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act, namely in relation to support for pilot vessels and quay installations. The Icelandic authorities are invited, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, to submit their comments on the opening of the formal investi- gation procedure within one month from the notification of this Decision. xxxxxx and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of the aid measure. This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Iceland. Only the English version is authentic. Done at Brussels, 12 December 2007. The Icelandic authorities are invited to provide within one month from notification of this Decision, all documents, infor-

Conclusion. Based on the information submitted by the Icelandic authoritiesNorwegian authori- ties, the Authority cannot exclude the possibility that the 2007 amendments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act measure(s) under scrutiny constitute aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Furthermore, the Authority has doubts that these measures can be regarded as complying with Article 61(2)(b) or 61(3)(c61(3) of the EEA Agreement, possibly in combination with the require- ments laid down in the Shipbuilding Guidelines or the Regional Aid Guidelines or by way of direct application. The Authority thus doubts that the above measures are compatible with the functioning functio- ning of the EEA Agreement. Consequently, and in accordance with Article 4(4) of 10 in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, the Autho- rity is obliged to open the procedure provided for in Article 1 (2) of in Part I of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agree- ment. The decision to open proceedings is without prejudice to the final decision of the Authority, which may conclude that the measures in question do not constitute aid or are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The Authority notes that were the measures to be identified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, any breach of the standstill operation leads to the classification of the aid as unlawful within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement. Unlawful aid which is not compatible with the EEA State aid provisions is subject to recovery. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, invites requests the Icelandic Norwegian authorities to submit their comments on this Decision within one month of the date of receipt thereofof this Decision. In light of the foregoing considerationsconsideration, the Authority invites the Icelandic authorities requires that, within one month of receipt of this decision, to the Norwe- gian authorities provide all documents, information and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of both the above measuressale of the air base and the renting out of the air base to LILAS. It requests the Norwegian authorities to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately. The Authority would like to remind the Norwegian authorities that, according to the provisions of Protocol 3 to the Surveil- lance and Court Agreement, any incompatible aid unlawfully put at the disposal of the beneficiaries will have to be recovered, unless this recovery would be contrary to a general principle of EEA law, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: The EFTA Surveillance Authority finds that as far as breakwater constructions, marking of approach channels, depth, protective installations and dredging are concerned, no State aid is involved as regards support for these projects under Article 24(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the 2003 Harbour Act. The damage compensation clause in 26(3), subparagraph 3, of the 2003 Harbour Act therefore does not involve any State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, in so far as it relates to these projects. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement against Iceland Norway regarding the 2007 amendments to sale of Lista air base and the Harbour Act lease agree- ment between the Norwegian Defence Estates Agency and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act, namely in relation to support for pilot vessels and quay installationsLILAS. The Icelandic Norwegian authorities are invitedrequested, pursuant to Article 6(1) of in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court AgreementAgree- ment, to submit their comments on the opening of the formal investi- gation investigation procedure within one month from the notification of this Decision. xxxxxx and data needed for the assessment of the compatibility of the aid measure. The EC Commission shall be informed, in accordance with Protocol 27(d) of the EEA Agreement, by means of a copy of this Decision. Other EFTA States, EC Member States, and interested parties shall be informed by publishing this Decision in its authentic language version, accompanied by a meaningful summary in languages other than the authentic language version, in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement thereto, inviting them to submit comments within one month from the date of publication. This Decision is addressed to the Republic Kingdom of IcelandNorway. Only the English version is authentic. Done at Brussels, 12 December 6 June 2007. The Icelandic Norwegian authorities are invited required to provide within one month from notification of this Decision, all documents, infor-

Conclusion. Based on the information submitted by the Icelandic Norwegian authorities, the Authority cannot exclude the possibility preliminary concludes that the 2007 amendments additional payments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects Hurtigruten companies (reimbursement of the 2003 Harbour Act NOx tax/NOx Fund contribution, a general compensation payment of NOK 66 million in 2008 as well as the release in winter of one of the 11 ships allocated to the route) constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Furthermore, the The Authority has doubts that these measures can be regarded as complying comply with Article 61(2)(b59(2) or 61(3)(cArticle 61(3) of the EEA Agreement, possibly in combination conjunction with the require- ments requirements laid down in the Shipbuilding Guidelines or the Regional Authority’s State Aid Guidelines or by way of direct applicationon Maritime Transport and/or Guidelines on rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty. The Authority thus Authority, therefore, doubts that the above measures are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. Consequently, and in accordance Article 4(4) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement3, the Autho- rity Authority is obliged to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1 (21(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agree- ment3. The decision to open proceedings a formal investigation procedure is without prejudice to the final decision of the Authority, which may conclude that the measures in question do not constitute aid or are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The Authority notes that were the measures to be identified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, any breach of the standstill operation leads to the classification of the aid as unlawful within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement. Unlawful aid which is not compatible with the EEA State aid provisions is subject to recovery. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement3, invites the Icelandic Norwegian authorities to submit their comments on this Decision within one month of the date of receipt thereofof this Decision. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority invites the Icelandic authorities within one month of receipt of this decision, the Authority request the Norwegian authorities to provide all documents, information and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of the above measuresrevised Hurtigruten Agreement. The Authority requests the Norwegian authorities to forward a copy of this decision to the potential aid recipient of the aid immediately. The Authority must remind the Norwegian authorities that, according to Article 14 of Part II of Protocol 3, any incompatible aid unlawfully granted to the beneficiaries will have to be recovered, unless (exceptionally) this recovery would be contrary to a general principal of EEA law, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: The EFTA Surveillance Authority finds that as far as breakwater constructions, marking of approach channels, depth, protective installations and dredging are concerned, no State aid is involved as regards support for these projects under Article 24(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the 2003 Harbour Act. The damage compensation clause in 26(3), subparagraph 3, of the 2003 Harbour Act therefore does not involve any State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, in so far as it relates to these projects. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 is opened into the additional payments to Hurtigruten (reimbursement of the NOx tax/NOx Fund contribution, a general compensation payment of NOK 66 million in 2008 as well as the release in winter of one of the 11 ships allocated to the Surveillance and Court Agreement against Iceland regarding route) implemented by the 2007 amendments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act, namely in relation to support for pilot vessels and quay installationsNorwegian authorities. The Icelandic Norwegian authorities are invited, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement3, to submit their comments on the opening of the formal investi- gation investigation procedure within one month from the notification of this Decision. xxxxxx The Norwegian authorities are requested to provide within one month from notification of this decision, all documents, information and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of the aid measure. This Decision is addressed to the Republic Kingdom of IcelandNorway. Only the English language version of this decision is authentic. Done at Brussels, 12 December 2007. The Icelandic authorities are invited to provide within one month from notification of this Decision, all documents, infor-on 14 July 2010.

Conclusion. Based on the information submitted by the Icelandic authoritiesNorwegian authori- ties, the Authority cannot exclude has doubts as to whether the possibility that the 2007 amendments to the Harbour Act and certain aspects measures in favour of the 2003 Harbour Act constitute Mesta AS involve State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Furthermore, Agreement and whether the Authority has doubts that these measures can may be regarded considered as complying compatible with Article 61(2)(b61(2) or 61(3)(c(3) of the EEA Agreement, possibly in combination with the require- ments laid down in the Shipbuilding Guidelines or the Regional Aid Guidelines or by way of direct application. The Authority thus doubts that the above measures are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. Consequently, and in accordance Article 4(4) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, the Autho- rity is obliged to open the procedure provided for in Article 1 (2) of Part I of Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agree- ment. The decision to open proceedings is without prejudice to the final decision of the Authority, which may conclude that the measures in question do not constitute aid or are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The Authority notes that were the measures to be identified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, any breach of the standstill operation leads to the classification of the aid as unlawful within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement. Unlawful aid which is Agreement or do not compatible with the EEA involve State aid provisions is subject to recoveryat all. In light of the foregoing considerations, the Authority, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, invites requests the Icelandic Norwegian authorities to submit their comments on this Decision within one month of the date of receipt thereofof this Decision. In light of the foregoing considerationsconsideration, the Authority invites the Icelandic authorities requires that, within one month of receipt of this decision, to the Norwegian authorities provide all documents, information and data needed for assessment of the compatibility measures in favour of Mesta AS and requests the Norwegian authorities to forward a copy of this letter to the potential aid recipient of the above measuresaid imme- diately, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: The EFTA Surveillance Authority finds that as far as breakwater constructions, marking of approach channels, depth, protective installations and dredging are concerned, no State aid is involved as regards support for these projects under Article 24(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the 2003 Harbour Act. The damage compensation clause in 26(3), subparagraph 3, of the 2003 Harbour Act therefore does not involve any State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, in so far as it relates to these projects. The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement against Iceland Norway regarding the 2007 amendments restructuring and reorganisation measures in favour of Mesta AS, the contribution of assets and the transfer of transitional contracts to Mesta AS as well as the Harbour Act exemption of Mesta AS from paying document duty and certain aspects of the 2003 Harbour Act, namely in relation to support for pilot vessels and quay installationsregist- ration fee. The Icelandic Norwegian authorities are invitedrequested, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court AgreementAgree- ment, to submit their comments on the opening of the formal investi- gation investigation procedure within one month from the notification of this Decision. xxxxxx The Norwegian authorities are required to provide within one month from notification of this decision, all documents, infor- mation and data needed for assessment of the compatibility of the aid measure. The EC Commission shall be informed, in accordance with Protocol 27 (d) of the EEA Agreement, by means of a copy of this Decision. Other EFTA States, EC Member States, and interested parties shall be informed by the publishing of this Decision in its authentic language version, accompanied by a meaningful summary in languages other than the authentic language version, in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Communities and the EEA Supplement thereto, inviting them to submit comments within one month from the date of publica- tion. Done at Brussels, 18 July 2007. This Decision is addressed to the Republic Kingdom of Iceland. Only the English version is authentic. Done at Brussels, 12 December 2007. The Icelandic authorities are invited to provide within one month from notification of this Decision, all documents, infor-Norway.