natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
BT tilføjer, at Cour de Cassation ganske vist endnu ikke vedtaget en principiel holdning til, hvor bindende et ensidigt tilsagn generelt er, men dog tager stilling hertil fra sag til sag.
Bouygues Telecom adds that, even if the French Court of Cassation has not yet adopted a position in principle on the general value of a unilateral commitment as a source of obligation, it does recognise the value thereof on a case-by-case basis.
BT har som led i udarbejdelsen af sine bemærkninger indkaldt en ekspert, som præciserer, at forvaltningsdomstolens faste retspraksis tilsiger, at vurderingen af, om der foreligger tilsagn fra en offentlig myndighed, ikke afhænger af tilsagnenes form, men af deres specifikke karakteristika.
In preparing its comments, Bouygues Telecom called on the services of an expert who stated that it followed from a long line of judgments by the French administrative courts that the existence of a commitment entered into by an administrative authority must be assessed in the light, not of the commitment's form, but of its intrinsic characteristics.
BT's ekspert bemærker, at denne retspraksis netop gør sig gældende over for erklæringer: forvaltningsdomstolen vurderer således, at løfter, selv om de ikke ledsages af bestemte retsakter, udgør tilsagn, fordi de tilkendegiver administrationsmyndighedens hensigter.
The expert remarked that that case law was expressly applied in the specific case of declarations: the administrative courts thus considered that, even where they were not accompanied by any specific legal act, the promises constituted commitments as they were the embodiment of the administrative authority's will.
Det er således nok, at administrationens adfærd bevirker en overbevisning om, at den har tænkt sig at handle på en bestemt måde, til at der foreligger et statsligt tilsagn.
For there to be a commitment on the part of the State, it was sufficient for the authority to have behaved in such a way as to convince others that it would act in a certain manner.
Det har således ingen større betydning, om det foreligger skriftligt eller mundtligt eller blot kan udledes af administrationens adfærd — forvaltningsdomstolen stiller kun som betingelse, at det pågældende løfte er klart og præcist eller giver et tilstrækkeligt stærkt incitament.
It mattered little, therefore, whether the commitment was written or verbal or whether it could simply be deduced from the authority's conduct, the only condition laid down by the administrative courts being that the promise in question must be firm and precise or sufficiently persuasive.
BT's ekspert præciserer, at økonomi- og finansministerens tilkendegivelser i dette tilfælde opfylder alle kriterier for at kunne karakteriseres som statslige tilsagn.
Bouygues Telecom's expert stated that, in the present case, the declarations by the Minister for Economic Affairs and Finance satisfied all the criteria for being characterised as a commitment by the State.
Ministeren viser i samtlige sine tilkendegivelser vilje til at yde FT ubetinget støtte — på en række vilkår, som tilmed angives udtrykkeligt: styrkelse af egenkapitalen, indførelse af foranstaltninger for at sikre selskabet mod enhver form for finansieringsvanskeligheder, og overførsel af hele statens aktieandel til ERAP.
In each of his declarations, the Minister manifested his wish to lend France Télécom his unconditional support — in accordance with procedures which, moreover, were expressly specified: the strengthening of the Company's capital base, the taking of measures enabling the Company to avoid any financing problems, and the recourse to ERAP, to which would be transferred the State's entire shareholding.
Eftersom disse tilkendegivelser er klare og præcise og ikke omfatter nogen forbehold, fremstår de som statslige tilsagn.
Inasmuch as those declarations were firm and precise and made without reservations, they could be construed as constituting commitments by the State.
Og da ministeren tilmed sørgede for at offentliggøre sine tilkendegivelser, kan de ikke opfattes blot som hensigtserklæringer.
Furthermore, because the Minister had had his declarations published, they could not be mere declarations of intent.
BT's ekspert lægger vægt på, at når disse løfter fremstår som statslige tilsagn, er de pr. definition juridisk bindende og forpligter, uanset om de er lovlige eller ej, således staten over for FT samt selskabets kreditorer og medarbejdere.
Bouygues Telecom's expert stressed that, since those promises could be construed as constituting commitments by the State, they had by their very nature legal value and were of such a character as to render the State liable, whether they were legal or not, vis-à-vis France Télécom, its creditors and its employees.
BT bemærker, at den franske regerings tilkendegivelser fra og med den 12. juli 2002 er »administrative afgørelser« med bindende virkning for staten, som staten kan holdes ansvarlig for ved forvaltningsdomstolene.
Bouygues Telecom maintains that the declarations made by the French Government on and after 12 July 2002 are ‘administrative acts’ binding on the State which are of such a character as to render the State answerable before the administrative courts.
Forvaltningsdomstolen sætter derfor ind over for enhver adfærd fra administrationens side via administrative afgørelser, uanset disses form og uanset om de er bebyrdende eller ej, som enten har følger for den nationale lovgivning eller for sagsøger personligt.
The latter thus have to judge any conduct of the authorities through the resulting administrative acts, whatever their form, whether they cause damage or not, and the effects of which stem either from a modification of the regulatory set-up or from an effect on the personal situation of the plaintiff.
BT fremlagde den 26. maj 2004 en anden undersøgelse for Kommissionen, som også konkluderede, at statens tilkendegivelser afspejlede et formelt, klart og uigenkaldeligt tilsagn fra staten, som den i påkommende tilfælde kunne holdes juridisk ansvarlig for i kraft af sit bindende ansvar for tilsagnet, hvis den havde misligholdt sine forpligtelser over for FT.
Bouygues Telecom also submitted to the Commission on 26 May 2004 another study which also comes to the conclusion that the declarations by the State constitute the expression of a formal, precise and irrevocable commitment by the State — legally sanctionable, where appropriate, via the incurment of the liability of the State should it be at fault in failing to respect its commitments towards France Télécom.
BT præciserer, at der ikke kan herske nogen tvivl om, at de pågældende tilkendegivelser ikke var »psykologisk opbakning« — som de franske myndigheder har hævdet — men derimod en garanti med juridisk bindende virkning for udstederen.
Bouygues Telecom states that there is therefore no doubt that the measures at issue constitute, not psychological support as the French authorities have maintained, but a guarantee legally binding on their author.
Endelig påpeger BT i denne forbindelse, at de statslige tilkendegivelsers fælles karakter af garantier bekræftes af et cirkulære fra økonomi- og finansministeriet af 22. juli 2003, hvori der udtrykkeligt henvises til, at der foreligger implicitte garantier.
Bouygues Telecom states lastly on this point that the binding nature of the declarations made by the State by way of the guarantee is confirmed by a circular of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance dated 22 July 2003 which expressly refers to the existence of implicit guarantees.
For så vidt angår aktionærlånet og styrkelsen af egenkapitalen fastholder BT, at både kreditbevilling på 9 mia. EUR til FT, statens uigenkaldelige tilsagn om at deltage i en fremtidig kapitaltilførsel i samme procentvise omfang som statens eksisterende aktieandel i FT og senere selve kapitaltilførslen var statsgarantier, der blev ført ud i livet finansieret af statsmidler.
With regard to the shareholder loan and the operation to strengthen the Company's capital base, Bouygues Telecom maintains that, firstly, the opening of a EUR 9 billion credit line for the benefit of France Télécom and, secondly, the irrevocable commitment by the State to participate in any future capital increase in proportion to its shareholding in the Company followed by the recapitalisation operation as such, are the implementation of the state guarantee and are financed by state resources.
I den forbindelse tilføjer BT, at det ikke ændrer noget på midlernes oprindelse som statsmidler, at de franske myndigheder ydede kreditbevillingen på 9 mia. EUR til FT via ERAP.
In this connection, Bouygues Telecom adds that the recourse to ERAP in the granting, by the French authorities, of a EUR 9 billion credit line for the benefit of France Télécom in no way alters the state origin of the funds.
BT fremfører, at FT dermed fik ikke blot en gunstig lånesats, fordi ERAP er en offentligretlig industri- og handelsvirksomhed, men også en udtrykkelig garanti fra staten for et beløb på 10 mia. EUR. De undersøgte foranstaltninger blev således finansieret med midler, som stammede fra staten, også selv om kreditbevillingen i sidste ende ikke blev udnyttet.
It points out that the recourse to ERAP means that France Télécom benefited, firstly, from an advantageous interest rate owing to its status as an industrial and commercial public establishment and, secondly, from the express guarantee provided by the State for an amount of EUR 10 billion. As a result, the measures at issue are financed by state resources, even if the credit line has ultimately not been used.
BT fastholder i sine tillægsbemærkninger af 11. april 2003, at den kapitaltilførsel, der blev iværksat den 24. marts 2003, i betragtning af selskabets finansielle situation ikke ville have kunnet lade sig gøre, hvis ikke der først var blevet gennemført andre støtteforanstaltninger.
In its additional comments of 11 April 2003, Bouygues Telecom maintains that, in view of the Company's financial situation, the recapitalisation operation carried out on 24 March 2003 was possible only because of the prior intervention of the other aid measures.
Derfor udgør kapitaltilførslen i sig selv statsstøtte, fordi den er en direkte udløber af en forudgående statsstøtte.
Consequently, the recapitalisation constitutes per se state aid as it stems directly from prior state aid.
Hvad angår fordelskriteriet påpeger BT, at garantiens incitamentsvirkning tidsmæssigt følger efter ratingbureauernes nedsættelse af FT's rating, og at den havde til formål at øge tilliden til selskabet på markedet.
As regards the condition relating to the advantage, Bouygues Telecom points out that the occurrence giving rise to the guarantee took place subsequently to the reduction in France Télécom's credit rating by the rating agencies with a view to restoring the market's confidence.
Her præciserer BT, at garantien bevirkede, at FT igen fik adgang til finansieringsmarkederne.
Again on this point, Bouygues Telecom states that the guarantee had the effect of enabling France Télécom to gain renewed access to the financial markets.
Garantien bedrede således prognosen for FT's rating og gav selskabet mulighed for at undgå at blive indplaceret som »junk bonds«.
Thus, the guarantee improved the prospects attaching to France Télécom's credit rating and enabled it to avoid junk-bond classification.
BT bemærker endvidere, at FT's børskurs gik kraftigt op.
Bouygues Telecom observes next that the stock-exchange price of France Télécom's shares improved considerably.
Desuden blev obligationsmarkedets spreads indsnævret efter juni 2002, og FT kunne så få styr på sin gældsætning og sikre likviditetsdækningen.
In addition, the spreads on the bond market narrowed after the month of June 2002 and France Télécom was able to stagger its debt maturities and face up to the liquidity wall.
BT understreger, at garantien gav FT ikke blot adgang til finansieringsmarkederne, men også mulighed for at udstede nye obligationer til en kurs, som ikke afspejlede FT's reelle finansieringssituation.
Bouygues Telecom stresses that, not only did the guarantee make possible France Télécom's very recourse to the financial market, but it also enabled the bond issues to be made at a rate which did not reflect France Télécom's true financial situation.
BT gør i sine bemærkninger af 11. april 2003 klart, at bebudelsen og gennemførelsen af denne opbakning fra staten medførte en støtte i form af fordele i forbindelse med aktionærlånet og kapitaltilførslen.
Bouygues Telecom states more precisely, in its comments of 11 April 2003, that the announcement and implementation of the state support gave rise to aid at the origin of advantages linked to the shareholder loan and the recapitalisation.
Disse fordele bevirkede f.eks., at selskabet kunne sikre likviditetsdækningen, dvs. øge finansieringsmidlernes omfang for at afvikle forfalden gæld, og at det fik en potentiel og reel mulighed for at omlægge likviditeten og sænke omkostningerne.
These advantages had the effect inter alia of moving the liquidity wall further away, that is to say, of increasing the amount of financing available for meeting debt repayments and of permitting an actual and potential postponement of payments and actual and potential cost savings.
BT konkluderer vedrørende dette forhold, at den fordel, FT fik, beløber sig til over 40 mia. EUR (3 mia. EUR fra den franske stats støtte til FT og 36,7 mia. EUR fra statens deltagelse i kapitaltilførslen til FT), og at dette beløb tilmed ikke afspejler, i hvor høj grad FT hermed blev i stand til at undgå finansieringsproblemer, eftersom likviditetsdækningen blev øget med næsten 43 mia. EUR.
Concluding on this point, Bouygues Telecom maintains that the advantage gained by France Télécom amounts to more than EUR 40 billion (EUR 3 billion in respect of all the support measures taken by the French State on France Télécom's behalf and EUR 36,7 billion in respect of the State's participation in the Company's recapitalisation), which amount takes no account of the considerable latitude granted to France Télécom as a result of the removal of all financial concerns, the liquidity wall being shifted by almost EUR 43 billion.
BT præciserede i sine tillægsbemærkninger af 7. januar 2004 også, at den fordel, som FT fik ved statens uigenkaldelige tilsagn om støtte, kan værdiansættes til over 30 mia. EUR, mens fordelen ved kapitaltilførslen kan ansættes til over 50 mia. EUR.
In its additional comments of 7 January 2004, Bouygues Telecom states that the advantage enjoyed by France Télécom as a result of the State's irrevocable commitment of support may be estimated at more than EUR 30 billion, while the advantage derived from the recapitalisation operation may be put at more than EUR 50 billion.
Angående det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip fremfører BT, at støtteforanstaltningerne ikke overholder princippet af følgende årsager:
As to the prudent private investor test, Bouygues Telecom argues that the support measures do not satisfy that test for the following reasons:
Ubegrænset, ubetinget tilsagn: BT minder om, at statens tilkendegivelser udgør et juridisk bindende, klart og ubetinget tilsagn, som en almindelig investor aldrig ville have afgivet uden mindste forbehold.
Unconditional, unlimited commitment: Bouygues Telecom takes the view that the State's declarations constitute a firm and unconditional legal commitment which an investor would never have undertaken without entering the slightest reservation.
Der var således tale om en ubegrænset garanti til en dybt forgældet virksomhed, som på kort sigt var yderst usolid.
It is therefore an unlimited guarantee granted to a company which is extraordinarily leveraged and fragile in the short term.
Efter BT's opfattelse opfylder foranstaltningen ikke de kriterier, som omhandles i Kommissionens meddelelse om anvendelsen af EF-traktatens artikel 87 og 88 angående statsstøtte i form af garantier (herefter »meddelelsen om statsstøtte i form af garantier«), især fordi FT havde finansielle vanskeligheder, da garantien blev givet, og fordi den ikke vedrører noget angivet tiltag eller giver anledning til nogen modydelse.
In Bouygues Telecom's opinion, the measure at issue does not fulfil the criteria mentioned in the Commission Notice on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to state aid in the form of guarantees(hereinafter called ‘the Notice on state aid in the form of guarantees’) in so far as, in particular, France Télécom was in financial difficulties at the time the guarantee was granted and in so far as the guarantee does not relate to any specific transaction and gives rise to no remuneration.
FT fik derved en række fordele, som selskabet ikke havde fået under normale markedsvilkår.
France Télécom has therefore secured advantages which it would not have secured under normal market conditions.
Vilkår for ydelse af aktionærlån: BT fremfører, at statens adfærd udelukkende var motiveret i hensynet til de offentlige finanser (især for at overholde Maastricht-kriterierne) og ikke svarede til, hvordan en fornuftig investor ville bære sig ad under normale markedsvilkår.
Terms governing the granting of the shareholder loan: Bouygues Telecom argues that the mechanism adopted by the State meets by and large a concern falling within the realm of public finances (compliance with the Maastricht criteria, notably), and is not in keeping with the principle of a prudent investor operating in a market economy.
Der er reelt ingen sikkerhed for, at det lån, som ERAP har givet på vegne af staten som led i kapitaltilførslen, bliver betalt tilbage.
Repayment of the loan subscribed by ERAP on behalf of the State with a view to participating in the recapitalisation is not assured.
Tilbagebetalingen af første rate skal således ske ved overdragelse af værdipapirer, hvilket kun indebærer et potentielt afkast, og derfor kan investeringen ikke kaldes »fornuftig«.
The method of repayment first and foremost envisaged is linked to the sale of shares, the profit on which is potential and cannot for that reason confer on the investment in question the nature of a ‘prudent’ transaction.
BT angiver, at den garanti på 10 mia. EUR, som den franske stat ydede til ERAP, gav ERAP mulighed for at samle de nødvendige midler til at bevilge kreditten på gunstige vilkår, dvs. en sats på 3,375 %.
Bouygues Telecom points out that the guarantee granted by the French State to ERAP to the tune of EUR 10 billion enabled ERAP to gather together the funds needed to grant the credit line on advantageous terms, i.e. at a rate of 3,375 %.
Enhver fornuftig privat investor ville ved et sådant lån have krævet en højere sats og specifikke sikkerhedsstillelser i selskabets aktiver.
Any prudent private investor would have carried out such a transaction at a higher cost for which he would have demanded specific guarantees linked to the company's assets.
Kapitaltilførsel: Sammenfattende fremfører BT vedrørende de franske myndigheders tilsagn om kapitaltilførslen til FT og selve kapitaltilførslen, at det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip ikke blev overholdt i denne sag, da staten forpligtede sig til at deltage i kapitaltilførslen til FT allerede den 12. juli 2002, altså før fremlæggelsen af ambitionsplanen for 2005, uden at kende FT's nøjagtige økonomi, som var stærkt nødlidende, og uden deltagelse af private investorer.
Recapitalisation: In substance on the commitment by the French authorities to recapitalise France Télécom and the recapitalisation operation itself, Bouygues Telecom claims that the prudent private investor test is not satisfied in the present case as the State undertook to participate in France Télécom's recapitalisation on 12 July 2002, i.e. prior to the existence of the Ambition 2005 plan, without knowing France Télécom's exact economic situation, which had become much worse, and without the concomitant participation of private investors.
I den forbindelse understreger BT følgende forhold:
In this connection, Bouygues Telecom stresses the following points:
selskabets finansielle situation: BT understreger, at det tidligere monopolselskabs finansielle sundhed på det tidspunkt, hvor staten besluttede at investere, ville have forhindret selskabet i at indhente finansiering fra private investorer, hvis det ikke havde været for statens støtte (et underskud på 70 mia. EUR, en negativ egenkapital på 8 mia. EUR og gældsposter på 50 mia. EUR til forfald de følgende tre år).
The company's financial situation: Bouygues Telecom stresses that the historical operator's financial health at the time of the decision to invest prevented it from resorting to private investors without the State's support (EUR 70 billion of losses, EUR 8 billion of negative equity and debt maturities amounting to EUR 50 billion over the following three years).
Den plan, som Michel Bon på dette tidspunkt fremlagde, var tilsyneladende ikke markedssvarende og ville have medført, at ratingbureauerne havde nedsat FT's rating.
Moreover, the plan presented by Mr Bon at that time did not appear relevant in the eyes of the market and was followed by France Télécom's downgrading by the rating agencies.
Kapitaltilførslen til FT kan således ikke sammenlignes med nogen anden finansieringstransaktion i betragtning af den likviditetskrise, som selskabet led under.
Thus, the recapitalisation of France Télécom cannot be compared to any other financial transaction in view of the scale of the liquidity crisis faced by the Company.
Staten kunne følgelig ikke vurdere sin risiko via en sandsynlighedsberegning og havde derfor en ekstremt stor usikkerhed (dvs. en uberegnelig risiko) da den besluttede at garantere for FT: det var således ikke muligt at sætte tal på hverken risikoniveauet eller rentabiliteten.
As a result, the State was unable to assess its risk by making a probability calculation and was confronted with a radical uncertainty (that is to say, a non-probabilisable risk) when it decided to guarantee France Télécom: thus, both the level of risk and the return were not quantifiable.
Ifølge BT kunne investeringen under ingen omstændigheder kaldes velbegrundet.
At all events, the investment could not be characterised as reasonable.
En vurdering af FT's børsværdi og det afkast på investeringen, som en privat investor kunne forvente, viser, at investeringen ikke var fornuftig.
In particular, a projection of France Télécom's stock-exchange valuation and of the return on investment expected by a private investor shows that the investment is unreasonable.
Ud fra den metode, som Kommissionen har anvendt til at måle investeringens »fornuftsgrundlag«, ville det afkast, som en velinformeret investor havde krævet under hensyntagen navnlig til de risici, transaktionen indebar, som minimum have ligget mellem 30 og 40 %.
In accordance with the method used by the Commission to assess the prudent nature of an investment, the return on investment which a prudent investor would have demanded, bearing in mind in particular the risks connected with the transaction, may be estimated at at least 30-40 %.
Det er det tal, som Kommissionen satte som minimum i sagerne Alitalia og Iberia.
This rate is the minimum required by the Commission in the Alitalia and Iberia cases.
Efter de metoder, som BT anvender, dvs. fortjenesten pr. aktieenhed (Enterprise value eller Analysts target price 12 months), ville afkastet på investeringen i dette tilfælde kun være 16 %.
According, however, to the methods used by Bouygues Telecom, that is to say, EPS (Enterprise value or Analysts target price 12 months), the return on investment in the transaction at issue is only 16 %.
Staten kan i øvrigt ikke forvente noget afkast i form af udbytte, da FT har bebudet, at selskabet ikke udlodder noget.
Nor can the State count on a remuneration in terms of dividends as France Télécom has announced that it will not be distributing any.
På det mere generelle plan betoner BT, at det ikke er på sin plads at foretage en efterfølgende analyse af FT's positive resultater, når man skal vurdere, om det markedsøkonomiske investorprincip er overholdt.
Generally speaking, it is not appropriate to make an ex post analysis of France Télécom's positive results in the assessment of the prudent investor test.