(181) The need for financing of recipient undertakings may not be taken into account in assessing whether a State measure may be regarded as compensation for discharging PSOs. Therefore, the Commission concludes that the fourth
Altmark
condition is not met, and, since the four conditions are cumulative, that the
Altmark
conditions are not fulfilled for a finding of no aid. Consequently, the Commission considers that the annual operating compensation for urban, suburban and regional bus services until 30 November 2009 and the financing of new buses confer a selective economic advantage on Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus, since they relieve those undertakings of expenses they would normally have to bear in the operation of their business, which they could have not obtained under normal market conditions.
9.1.2.2.
Financing of dedicated infrastructure
(182) The construction of any type of infrastructure that is meant to be exploited economically is an economic activity in itself, which means that the State aid rules apply to the way in which it is financed(37). Nevertheless, the Commission considers that public authorities may legitimately consider that the financing of infrastructure granted prior to the
Aéroports de Paris
judgment of 12 December 2000(38) did not entail State aid and that, accordingly, such measures did not need to be notified to the Commission. It follows that the Commission cannot put such financing measures definitely adopted before the
Aéroports de Paris
judgment (12 December 2000) into question on the basis of the State aid rules(39). Therefore the compensation granted to Dublin Bus in 2000 of EUR 4,6 million cannot be considered within the scope of State aid control.
(183) As regards the compensation granted after 2000, the question of the presence of aid in financing the construction of a commercially exploited may arise at three different levels: at the level of the users, at the level of the builder of the infrastructure and at the level of the manager of the infrastructure(40).
(184) In this case, while the owner of the infrastructure is CIÉ, the user and the manager of the infrastructure appear to be identical, as the infrastructure in question is managed and used exclusively by Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus, which are entirely owned by CIÉ. As Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus do not raise any income out of the managing of the infrastructure, for the purpose of this case they can therefore only be considered as users of the infrastructure. As regards the construction companies involved in the construction of the different infrastructure elements under assessment, the Commission has no indication that those companies might have received an advantage. As regards the user of the infrastructure, the Commission notes that the infrastructure in question is managed by Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus, and that use is exclusively confined to those undertakings.
(185) As a general rule, the Commission considers that the financing of infrastructure through State resources does not confer and advantage on its users provided that the infrastructure is open without discrimination to all in accordance with Union legislation, and does not favour one user in particular(41). In this case, that condition is not fulfilled, as the infrastructure in question, which is financed through State resources, exclusively benefits Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus.
(186) Ireland also claims that with regard to the financing of infrastructure, the conditions laid down in the
Altmark
judgment are met(42).
(187) With regard to the application of the fourth condition of the
Altmark
Feedback