natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Formålet var at yde et lån til GfW til indkøb af druemost fra vinproducenter og vinhandlere.
The objective was to grant a loan to GfW to purchase must from winegrowing enterprises and merchants.
Det blev aftalt at stille sikrede aktiver som sikkerhed.
Secured assets were agreed as collateral.
Vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne (Weinbaugetriebe und Kommissionäre) fik ligeledes forskellige former for ejendomsforbehold (Eigentumsvorbehalt) i disse aktiver i form af et enkelt, udvidet eller forlænget ejendomsforbehold.
These assets were also subject to varying degrees of retention of title (Eigentumsvorbehalt) by the winegrowing enterprises and merchants (Weinbaugetriebe und Kommissionäre) in the form of simple, extended or prolonged retention of title.
Der blev givet afkald på krav, da GfW fik økonomiske problemer på grund af et kraftigt fald i markedspriserne.
The waiver of claims took place when GfW got into financial difficulty due to a slump in market prices.
Offentligt organ
Public body
WAK er et offentligretligt organ i delstaten Rheinland-Pfalz med hjemsted i Mainz.
WAK is a public-law corporation of the federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate registered in Mainz.
Fonden opererer i vinsektoren på samme måde som en bank.
It operates in the winegrowing sector in a similar manner as a bank.
WAK's normale forretningsområde er ydelse af lån til jordfordeling (Flurbereinigung).
WAK’s customary trade is the granting of loans for land reparcelling (Flurbereinigung).
WAK finansieres gennem bidrag, gebyrer og tilskud (§ 8, stk. 1, i den tyske vinlov Weinbergsaufbaugesetz).
WAK is financed from contributions, fees, loans and grants (Article 8(1) of the Weinbergsaufbaugesetz [winegrowing enterprise development act]).
Støttemodtageren var GfW, der fik et lån fra WAK på vilkår, der ikke var i overensstemmelse med markedsvilkårene.
Beneficiary of the measure was GfW, which was granted a loan by WAK on terms which were not in conformity with market conditions.
GfW var et helejet datterselskab af Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Pfalz Süd (sammenslutning af landbrugere og vinproducenter i det sydlige Rheinland-Pfalz).
GfW was a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Pfalz Süd (southern Rhineland-Palatinate farmers’ and winegrowing enterprises’ association).
Selskabet blev stiftet i 1984 med henblik på markedsføring af vin, og forretningsområdet var produktion og markedsføring af mousserende vin, druesaft, druegelé, druebrændevin og brandy.
It was founded in 1984 for the purpose of marketing wine and its trade was the production and marketing of sparkling wine, grape juice, grape jelly, grape spirit and brandy.
GfW leverede desuden tjenesteydelser til vinproducenter i forbindelse med destillationsforanstaltninger (Destillationsmaßnahmen).
GfW also provided services for winegrowing enterprises in connection with distillation measures (Destillationsmaßnahmen).
Disse destillationsforanstaltninger omfattede foranstaltningerne under den fælles markedsordning [6] og statsstøttet destillation, der normalt blev gennemført på grundlag af rådsafgørelser [7].
These distillation measures involved the measures covered by the common market organisation [6] and state-funded distillation normally carried out on the basis of Council decisions [7].
I denne forbindelse rådgav GfW små vinproducenter og organiserede transporten af vin til destillerierne.
In connection to this GfW advised small wine producers and organised the transport of wine to the distilleries.
Andre mulige støttemodtagere er de vinproducenter og vinhandlere, som GfW i kraft af lånet var i stand til at købe mest druemost af, og som ikke gav afkald på nogen af deres fordringer på GfW i modsætning til WAK, da GfW fik økonomiske problemer.
Other possible beneficiaries are the winegrowing enterprises and merchants from whom, as a result of the loan, GfW was placed in a position to buy must and who did not waive any of their claims on GfW when WAK decided to do so at the time GfW got into financial difficulty.
Baggrund for støtten
Background of the aid
I 1999 købte GfW 44 mio. l druemost finansieret via et lån på 15302696,25 EUR fra WAK og egne midler.
In 1999, using a loan of EUR 15302696,25 from WAK and its own resources, GfW purchased 44 million litres of must.
60 % af denne druemost målte mindst 60 oechslegrader og i gennemsnit 81 oechslegrader.
60 % of this must had a minimum of 60 degree Oechsle and an average of 81 degree Oechsle.
40 % af druemosten var druemost til almindelig bordvin med mindst 44 oechslegrader, som blev købt for at drage fordel af de fordelagtige betingelser for forebyggende destillation.
40 % of the must was ordinary table wine must with a minimum of 44 degree Oechsle which was bought to take advantage of the beneficial conditions of preventive distillation.
Der blev betalt en gennemsnitspris på 0,38 EUR/l for den indkøbte druemost.
An average price of EUR 0,38 per litre was paid for all the must purchased.
Ingen færdig vin blev indkøbt.
No finished wine was purchased.
Ved købet fik vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne enkelt, udvidet eller forlænget ejendomsforbehold (einfache, erweiterte, verlängerte Eigentumsvorbehalte) i de solgte varer.
The purchase was carried out on the basis of simple, extended or prolonged retention of title (einfache, erweiterte, verlängerte Eigentumsvorbehalte) by the winegrowing enterprises and merchants.
Det blev samtidig aftalt at give WAK sikkerhed i disse sikrede aktiver.
At the same time these secured assets were agreed as collateral for WAK.
Ifølge oplysningerne fra Tyskland var det GfW's forretningsplan at drage fordel af destillationsordningerne i overensstemmelse med forordning (EØF) nr. 822/87 for 40 % af druemostens vedkommende og at forarbejde de resterende 60 % af druemosten til råvin til fremstilling af mousserende vin, der skulle videresælges til producenter af mousserende vin.
According to the information submitted by Germany, GfW’s business plan was to take advantage of the distillation opportunities in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 for 40 % of the must and process 60 % of the must into raw wine for the production of sparkling wine and to sell it to sparkling wine producers.
GfW planlagde desuden at lagre 20 % af råvinen i en periode fra ni måneder til et år for at drage fordel af EU-støtte til lagring af vin i overensstemmelse med forordning (EØF) nr. 822/87, før den blev solgt på markedet for råvin til fremstilling af mousserende vin.
In addition, GfW were planning to stock 20 % of the raw wine for nine months to one year in order to take advantage of EU subsidies for stocking of wine in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, before it would be sold on the market for raw wine for the production of sparkling wine.
Den 11. november 1999 modtog vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne et forskud på 80 % af købesummen.
On 11 November 1999 the winegrowing enterprises and merchants received a down payment of 80 % of the purchase price.
Der blev betalt et forskud på 0,31 EUR/l i gennemsnit.
A down payment of EUR 0,31 per litre was paid on average.
I 1999 leverede GfW 40 % af sit lager til forebyggende destillation.
In 1999, GfW sent 40 % of its stocks to preventive distillation.
I lyset af prisfaldet på markedet for råvin i slutningen af 1999 besluttede GfW ikke at sælge råvin i 1999, men at afvente en genopretning af markedet i 2000.
In view of the fall in prices on the market for raw wine at the end of 1999 GfW decided not to sell any of the raw wine that year but to wait for the market to recover in 2000.
Som følge af den relativt store høst og det faldende salg af mousserende vin svækkedes markedet for hvidvin yderligere i 2000 (gennemsnitsprisen faldt i nogle tilfælde med hele 0,20 EUR/l).
In 2000, due to the comparatively large harvests and falling sales of sparkling wine the market in white wine slumped even further (average prices falling in some instances by as much as EUR 0,20).
Store mængder af den vin, der stadig var på lager, måtte således leveres til destillation i anden runde.
Much of the cask wine still in storage had to be sent for another round of distillation.
Som følge af en ændring af den fælles markedsordning for vin, der blev vedtaget i 1999 og trådte i kraft den 1. august 2000, blev forebyggende destillation i overensstemmelse med forordning (EØF) nr. 822/87 erstattet af destillation med henblik på at forsyne markedet for konsumalkohol i overensstemmelse med forordning (EF) nr. 1493/1999.
As a result of an amendment of the common organisation of the market in wine adopted in 1999 and entered into force on 1 August 2000, preventive distillation in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 was replaced by distillation to supply the potable alcohol market in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999.
Vilkårene var betydeligt ringere, og der kunne kun opnås ca. halvdelen af den tidligere pris på 0,50-0,55 EUR/l for forebyggende destillation.
The terms were considerably poorer, and only around half the previous price of EUR 0,50-0,55 per litre for preventive distillation could be achieved.
Som følge af det kraftige prisfald i 2000 viste det sig umuligt for GfW at opnå den forventede indtjening både på vinmarkedet og ved destillation til forsyning af markedet for konsumalkohol.
Following on the slump in prices in 2000 it proved impossible for GfW to achieve the expected profits neither on the wine market nor in distillation to supply the potable alcohol market.
Det var således nødvendigt at reducere den bogførte værdi af GfW's lagre betydeligt, og som følge heraf blev GfW's passiver større end aktiverne.
As a result, the book value of GfW’s stocks had to be reduced significantly and as a result, GfW’s liabilities exceeded its assets.
På baggrund af ovennævnte forretningsmæssige problemer blev der udarbejdet et midlertidigt regnskab for året frem til den 31. oktober 2000, som blev gennemgået af en revisor.
In view of the commercial problems described above, an interim statement of account was drawn up for the year until 31 October 2000 and examined by an auditor.
Pr. 31. oktober 2000 oversteg GfW's passiver (15670155 EUR) værdien af selskabets aktiver (9886856 EUR) med 5783299 EUR, jf. nedenstående oversigt over GfW's gældsposter.
On 31 October 2000 GfW’s liabilities (EUR 15670155) exceeded its current assets (EUR 9886856) with EUR 5783299 and GfW had the liabilities as expressed in the table below.
Ifølge en rapport udarbejdet af Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Falk & Co. GmbH stod GfW over for en umiddelbar insolvensbehandling, da passiverne oversteg aktiverne (Überschuldung), hvis der ikke blev gjort noget for at forhindre dette.
According to a report prepared by Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Falk & Co. GmbH, GfW would very soon be facing insolvency proceedings due to its liabilities exceeding its assets (Überschuldung) if nothing was done to avoid this.
Gældsposter
Liabilities to
Vinproducenter og vinhandlere
Winegrowing enterprises and merchants
Ifølge § 19 i den tyske lov om insolvens (Insolvenzordnung — InsO) skal der indledes insolvensbehandling, når passiverne overstiger et selskabs aktiver.
According to §19 of the German insolvency law (Insolvenzordnung) liabilities exceeding the assets of a company is cause for opening the insolvency proceedings.
I henhold til § 64 i den tyske lov om selskaber med begrænset ansvar GmbHG (tidligere udgave) sammenholdt med § 19 i InsO var GfW's direktion således forpligtet til at indgive en begæring om indledning af insolvensbehandling senest tre uger efter konstateringen af, at der forelå ubalance, dvs. at passiverne oversteg aktiverne (Überschuldung).
Because of this, the Executive board of GfW was under the obligation in accordance with § 64 GmbHG a.F. i. V. m. § 19 InsO, to within three weeks of entering into the state of its liabilities exceeding its assets (Überschuldung) to apply for the opening of the insolvency proceedings.
I lyset af den umiddelbart forestående insolvens anmodede GfW en række kreditorer (WAK, vinproducenterne og omkring 130 vinhandlere involveret i det i betragtning 18 omhandlede køb) om at give afkald på en del af deres fordringer, således at selskabet kunne fortsætte driften.
As a result of the impending insolvency, GfW asked some creditors (WAK, the winegrowing enterprises and around 130 merchants involved in the purchase described in recital 18) to waive part of their outstanding claims to enable the company to continue trading.
Vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne skulle give afkald på 90 % af deres krav, hvilket indebar, at de kun ville modtage yderligere 2 % af den aftalte købspris.
In the case of the winegrowing enterprises and merchants, the waiver was to cover 90 % of their outstanding claims, meaning they would only receive an additional 2 % of the agreed purchase price.
Det resterende underskud skulle inddækkes ved WAK's efterstilling af og afkald på krav.
The remaining deficit was to be eliminated by the necessary subordination of claims and waiver of claims by WAK.
Som hovedkreditor (se tabel 1) med en ringere sikkerhed havde WAK en stor interesse i at forhindre den umiddelbart forestående insolvens.
As principle creditor (see table 1) with a weaker security position, WAK had a considerable interest in avoiding the impending insolvency.
Fonden forsøgte derfor at få vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne til at gå med til at give afkald på en del af deres fordringer.
It therefore tried to convince the winegrowing enterprises and merchants to agree to waive a part of their claims.
WAK undertegnede desuden en skriftlig aftale med GfW dateret den 4. december 2000, hvor WAK indvilligede i at lade en del af fondens krav — svarende til GfW's underskud — efterstille de andre kreditorers krav.
WAK also signed a written agreement with GfW, dated 4 December 2000, where it agrees to subordinate a part of its outstanding claims — corresponding to GfW’s deficit — in favour of the other creditors.
Det endelige beløb for efterstillingen af krav skulle først fastlægges, når vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne havde fremsendt deres erklæringer om afkald på krav, for at minimere det efterstillede beløb.
The final amount of the subordination of claims was only to be specified once the waiver of claims declarations of the winegrowing enterprises and merchants had been received, so as to minimise the amount subordinated.
Parterne aftalte ligeledes, at WAK ville give afkald på krav svarende til det efterstillede beløb, hvis det skulle vise sig nødvendigt på et senere tidspunkt for at undgå en insolvensbehandling.
It was also agreed that WAK would, if it would prove necessary at a later stage to avoid insolvency proceedings, waive the same amount of claims as it had subordinated.
Af de 2700 vinproducenter og vinhandlere erklærede de 1700 sig indforstået med at give afkald på 90 % af deres resterende fordringer svarende til ca. 60 % af de udestående fordringer for gruppen som helhed.
1700 out of the 2700 winegrowing enterprises and merchants declared their willingness to waive 90 % of their remaining claims, corresponding to around 60 % of the outstanding claims of the group as a whole.
De resterende vinproducenter og vinhandlere afslog imidlertid udtrykkeligt tilbuddet eller svarede ikke på anmodningen.
However, the remaining winegrowing enterprises and merchants either specifically refused the offer or did not answer the request.
Det var tydeligt, at nogle af kreditorerne havde besluttet ikke at give afkald på deres krav på grund af deres større sikkerhed — nogle havde forlænget ejendomsforbehold og havde allerede modtaget 80 % af den aftalte pris.
It was clear that some of them decided not to waive their claims because of their stronger security position — some had prolonged retention of title and had already received down payment of 80 % of the agreed price.
Deres udbytte i tilfælde af en insolvensbehandling ville således blive større end de tilbudte 2 % af den aftalte købspris.
This meant that their returns in case of insolvency proceedings would be higher than the 2 % of the agreed purchase price which was on offer.
En række vinproducenter og vinhandlere havde desuden indgivet klager over GfW, og disse klager var blevet behandlet af retten, der havde stillet forslag til forligsaftaler.
In addition, a number of the winegrowing enterprises and merchants had handed in complaints against GfW and these complaints had been treated by the court who proposed settlements agreements.
Ifølge forligsaftalerne skulle GfW indfri 70 % af de resterende fordringer, og der skulle gives afkald på 30 %.
According to the settlement agreements GfW should pay 70 % of the remaining claims and 30 % should be waived.
Retten fastslog endvidere, at GfW skulle erlægge 80 % af retsgebyrerne.
The court also decided that GfW would have to carry 80 % of the court fees.
Andre retter foreslog lignende forligsaftaler, og i lyset heraf havde GfW ikke længere noget grundlag for at forvente, at de øvrige vinproducenter og vinhandlere ville gå med til at give afkald på 90 % af deres resterende fordringer.
Similar settlement agreements were proposed by other courts and, with this in mind, it was no longer possible for GfW to expect that the other winegrowing enterprises and merchants would agree to waiving 90 % of their remaining claims.
Flere vinproducenter og vinhandlere erklærede desuden nu, at de ville kræve 100 % tilbagebetaling af de resterende 20 %.
In addition, several winegrowing enterprises and merchants now declared that they would demand 100 % repayment of the remaining 20 %.
I henhold til § 305a i den tyske lov om insolvens kan der ikke ske en udenretlig tvistbilæggelse (außergerichtliche Einigung) for at undgå gældsafvikling, hvis blot én enkelt kreditor beslutter at lade tvangsfuldbyrdelsen udføre efter indledningen af forhandlingerne om den udenretlige tvistbilæggelse.
§ 305a of the German insolvency law states that an out of court settlement (außergerichtliche Einigung) to avoid settlement of debts fails when one single creditor decides to proceed to enforcement after the out of court settlement negotiations have started.
GfW kunne således ikke længere som oprindeligt påtænkt anmode vinproducenterne og vinhandlerne om at give afkald på deres krav.
Therefore, contrary to its original intention, GfW could no longer ask the winegrowing enterprises and merchants to waive any of their claims.
Det fremgik også af aftalen, at vinproducenternes og vinhandlernes resterende fordringer ville blive indfriet fuldt ud.
The agreement also stated that the winegrowing enterprises and merchants remaining claims would be settled in full.
Sikkerheden af WAK's ikkeefterstillede krav blev således garanteret, underskuddet blev inddækket, insolvensbehandlingen blev midlertidigt afværget, og GfW kunne fortsætte driften.
This way, the security of WAK’s non-subordinated claims was guaranteed, the deficit situation was remedied, insolvency proceedings were avoided for the time being and GfW could continue trading.
Hele provenuet blev anvendt til at tilbagebetale WAK.
All the proceeds were used to repay WAK.
Pr. 31. december 2005 var 9897154,65 EUR af lånet blevet tilbagebetalt, og der var blevet indbetalt 793994,99 EUR i renter.
By 31 December 2005 EUR 9897154,65 of the loan had been repaid and EUR 793994,99 in interest payments had been made.
Efter realisering af GfW's resterende aktiver (87079,79 EUR) blev WAK's resterende udestående fordringer på ca. 313000 EUR erklæret uerholdelige og afskrevet. Den del af lånet, der aldrig blev tilbagebetalt, beløb sig således til i alt 5318441,60 EUR (det oprindelige afkald på fordringer på 5005441,60 EUR samt de udestående fordringer efter likvidationen på 313000 EUR).
After winding-up GfW’s remaining assets (EUR 87079,79), WAK’s remaining outstanding claims of around EUR 313000 were declared irrecoverable and were written off. The part of the loan that was never repaid therefore totalled EUR 5318441,60 (the original waiver of claims of EUR 5005441,60 plus the outstanding claims after liquidation of EUR 313000).
Støttens form og intensitet
Nature and intensity of the aid
WAK's lån til GfW på 15302696,25 EUR blev udbetalt i flere trancher i 1999 med en løbetid på 12 til 18 måneder:
WAK’s EUR 15302696,25 loan to GfW was granted in several instalments in 1999 for a term of 12 to 18 months:
Anvendte rentesatser:
The interest rates charged was as follows:
kvartal 1999
4th quarter 1999
kvartal 2000
1st quarter 2000
kvartal af 2000
2nd quarter 2000
kvartal 2000
3rd quarter 2000
kvartal 2000
4th quarter 2000
Den 11. november 1999 modtog leverandørerne et forskud på 80 % af den aftalte købesum.
On 11 November 1999 the suppliers received a down payment of 80 % of the agreed price.
Som følge af det forlængede ejendomsforbehold, som en række af leverandørerne fik, og som ikke bortfaldt ved forarbejdning, blending eller blanding, blev en del af lageret desuden anvendt som sikkerhed for disse leverandørers resterende krav på 20 %.
In addition, as a result of the prolonged retention of title awarded some of the suppliers, which would not come to an end on processing, blending or mixing, part of the stock was used to secure these suppliers’ remaining claim of 20 %.
Det blev ligeledes aftalt at give WAK sikkerhed i lagrene.
The stocks were also agreed as collateral for WAK.
Som følge af ejendomsforbeholdet havde WAK imidlertid kun et sekundært krav i en del af lageret, så længe fordringerne med ejendomsforbehold ikke blev indfriet.
However, due to the retention of title WAK had only a secondary claim on part of the stock as long as the claims with prolonged retention of title were not settled.
GfW og selskabets kreditorer, herunder WAK som den største, var derfor mest sårbare over for prisudsving.
The larger share of the risk of fluctuations in prices consequently lay with GfW and its creditors of which WAK was the main one.
Rentebetalingen på WAK's lån til GfW var begrænset: fra den 11. november 1999 til den 31. december 1999 (3,28 %), fra den 1. januar 2000 til den 31. december 2000 (3,51 %-5,15 %) og fra den 1. januar 2001 til den 31. december 2001 (4,55 %-5,25 %).
On the loan granted by WAK to GfW only limited interest was paid: from 11 November 1999 to 31 December 1999 (at a rate of 3,28 %), from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2000 (3,51-5,15 %) and from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001 (4,55-5,25 %).
Der blev ikke opkrævet yderligere renter efter den 31. december 2001.
No further interest was claimed after 31 December 2001.
I lyset af den risiko, som WAK løb ved at låne penge til GfW, skulle fonden have opkrævet en stor risikopræmie ud over den almindelige rentesats.
Considering the risk that WAK took when lending the money to GfW, a substantial risk premium should have been charged on top of the regular interest rate.
Da en sådan risikopræmie ikke blev lagt oven i renten, forelå der et støtteelement på lånetidspunktet.
As there was no such risk premium added to the interest rate an aid element was present at the time of granting of the loan.
Dette støtteelement kan beregnes som forskellen mellem den anvendte rentesats og markedsrenten samt den risikopræmie, som skulle have været opkrævet.
This aid element can be calculated as the difference between the interest rate charged and the market interest rate plus the risk premium which should have been charged.
Ifølge Kommissionens meddelelse om metoden for fastsættelse af referencesatsen og kalkulationsrenten [8] som ændret ved Kommissionens meddelelse om en teknisk tilpasning af metoden for fastsættelse af referencesatsen og kalkulationsrenten [9], der var gældende i den pågældende periode, lå Tysklands basisreferencesats på mellem 5,23 % og 6,33 %.
According to the Commission notice on the method for setting the reference and discount rates [8] as amended by Commission notice on technical adaptation to the method for setting the reference and discount rates [9], applicable for the period in question, the base reference rate for Germany lay between 5,23 % and 6,33 %.