natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I analysen blev der draget den konklusion, at det var i kreditorernes interesse at fortsætte driften NCHZ og afhænde virksomheden som en going concern.
the company had to have more than 500 employees, or in a significant way supply energy, gas, heat or products of the refinery industry to the public, other industries and nationwide transportation, or operate waterworks, a public wastewater treatment plant, a public sewer or a public water supply;
Sammen med kurators analyse blev der fremlagt en redegørelse fra NCHZ's ledelse om mulighederne for en omstrukturering, hvori der også blev peget på salg af NCHZ som en going concern som den bedste løsning for kreditorerne.
the company had to be declared as being of strategic importance by the Slovak Government.
På basis af disse rapporter indvilligede samtlige kreditorer i kreditorudvalget og de sikrede kreditorer den 26. januar 2011 i, at virksomheden blev drevet videre.
NCHZ was the only company to benefit from the Act.
Denne beslutning blev stadfæstet og dermed gjort bindende for kurator ved kendelse afsagt af retten i Trenčín den 23. februar 2011.
The Act was adopted on 5 November 2009 and took effect on 1 December 2009.
Efter kreditorernes og rettens godkendelse heraf blev virksomheden drevet videre uden afbrydelser, indtil den i juli 2012 blev afhændet til Via Chem Slovakia som en going concern.
On 2 December 2009 the Slovak Government proclaimed NCHZ a strategic company by decision No 534/2009.
Kommissionens åbningsafgørelse
In deciding that NCHZ was of strategic importance, the Slovak Government pointed to the fact that the company's bankruptcy could lead to a loss of more than 1700 direct jobs, and endanger a further 5000 jobs with NCHZ's suppliers in Slovakia.
I åbningsafgørelsen af 2. juli 2013 anførte Kommissionen, at NCHZ ikke havde betalt alle socialsikringsbidrag og heller ikke indfriet sine andre forpligtelser over for andre statslige enheder under konkursbehandlingen.
It also stated that stopping production at NCHZ would negatively affect the performance and competitiveness of the chemical industry in Slovakia and thus significantly worsen the position of the whole Slovak economy [9].
Denne uindfriede gæld kunne have været undgået eller i det mindste begrænset væsentligt, hvis driften af NCHZ ikke var blevet videreført under konkursbehandlingen.
Operation under the decision of the creditors' committee
Der var også meget, der tydede på, at kreditorernes beslutning om at fortsætte driften af NCHZ efter lovens udløb kunne tilregnes staten og gav virksomheden en uberettiget og selektiv økonomisk fordel.
After the Act expired on 31 December 2010, the bankruptcy administrator, who was bound by the instructions of the creditors' committee, decided to continue the operations of NCHZ in line with the provisions of the Slovak Bankruptcy Act.
Det var således Kommissionens foreløbige vurdering, at NCHZ fik en fordel i forhold til sine konkurrenter, som virksomheden ikke kunne have fået under normale markedsbetingelser, som følge af at den i et betragteligt tidsrum fik lov til at fortsætte sin drift og aktiviteter på markedet uden at skulle betale socialsikringsbidrag og andre offentlige forpligtelser.
Under the Slovak Bankruptcy Act, the creditors of all unsecured receivables registered in the bankruptcy proceedings must elect a creditors' committee in order to exercise their rights in the course of the bankruptcy.
Kommissionen nærede desuden tvivl om, hvorvidt det udbud, som NCHZ blev solgt ved, var et ubetinget udbud, eftersom nogle af de bydende havde mulighed for at forhøje deres bud på et senere tidspunkt, efter at alle bud var blevet indgivet.
The committee has the power to issue instructions to the bankruptcy administrator in the circumstances explicitly provided for in the Slovak Bankruptcy Act, including where the costs of the operation of the bankrupt business exceed the revenue from its operations and its continued operation thus leads to a further accumulation of liabilities.
Kommissionen havde derfor sin tvivl om, hvorvidt den pris, som vinderen af udbuddet betalte for virksomhedens aktiver, svarede til en markedspris, der sikrede de størst mulige indtægter til fyldestgørelse af kreditorerne, herunder staten.
In such a situation the administrator must seek instructions regarding the extent to which the continued operation of the company is to be pursued (Article 88 of the Slovak Bankruptcy Act).
Der var derudover stærke indikationer på, at den økonomiske kontinuitet mellem NCHZ og den nye enhed ikke var blevet afbrudt.
Such instructions have to be voted on by the creditors' committee together with the secured creditors and then approved and made binding by a bankruptcy court.
Det ville indebære, at enhver uforenelig statsstøtte til NCHZ ville kunne tilbagesøges hos virksomhedens nye ejer.
In the case of NCHZ's bankruptcy proceedings the committee consisted of five entities, four of which were privately owned [10].
Kommissionen besluttede derfor at indlede proceduren efter artikel 108, stk. 2, i traktaten om Den Europæiske Unions funktionsmåde.
The public member of the committee was the National Property Fund (Fond národného majetku).
Der indgik bemærkninger til åbningsafgørelsen fra to tredjeparter, nemlig klageren og en anden interesseret part, der ønskede at forblive anonym.
Four of these secured creditors were state-owned/public undertakings: the National Property Fund, the Environmental Fund (Environmentálny fond), the Slovak Guarantee and Development Bank (Slovenská záručná a rozvojová banka, a.s.) and the Town of Nováky.
Begge tredjeparter tilsluttede sig Kommissionens sagsfremstilling og ræsonnement i åbningsafgørelsen.
As required under the Slovak Bankruptcy Act the administrator informed both the unsecured and secured creditors (at their joint meeting on 26 January 2011) that the costs of operating the NCHZ business were higher than the revenue from operation.
De to tredjeparter fremhævede den tydelige tidsmæssige sammenhæng mellem NCHZ's økonomiske vanskeligheder og indførelsen af loven om virksomheder af strategisk betydning, der blev vedtaget efter en hasteprocedure.
The administrator also provided the creditors with an economic analysis dated 23 December 2010, identifying several possible scenarios and comparing costs and revenue from the point of view of NCHZ's creditors.
Desuden gik der kun en dag efter lovens ikrafttrædelse, før den slovakiske regering traf afgørelsen om at erklære NCHZ en strategisk vigtig virksomhed i lovens forstand.
The analysis concluded that it was in the interests of the creditors to continue the operation of NCHZ and to sell the business as a going concern.
Begge tredjeparter gjorde gældende, at staten kunne have undgået den forventelige risiko for en ophobning af uindfriet gæld til det offentlige ved at undlade at give NCHZ denne status som strategisk vigtig virksomhed.
The administrator's analysis was supplemented by an NCHZ management presentation entitled ‘NCHZ Nováky — Restructuring Feasibility Study’, which also argued that the best solution for the creditors would be to sell NCHZ off as a company in operation.
Desuden kunne NCHZ have haft fordel af sin status som en virksomhed, der i henhold til loven ikke kan forlade markedet, men forbliver en pålidelig forretningspartner, mens andre virksomheder, der befandt sig i samme situation som NCHZ, dvs. under konkursbehandling, sandsynligvis ville opleve en forværring af deres forretningsrelationer med leverandører og kunder på grund af risikoen for deres exit fra markedet.
Taking account of these studies, all creditors in the creditors' committee and all the secured creditors agreed on 26 January 2011 with continuing the operation of the company.
Med hensyn til videreførelsen af driften af NCHZ efter kreditorudvalgets beslutning fremførte den ene af tredjeparterne, at det statsejede medlem af kreditorudvalget kunne og burde have søgt at nå frem til en anden løsning — ved at overbevise de andre medlemmer af udvalget eller i det mindste stemme imod den fortsatte drift af NCHZ.
That decision was approved and thus made binding for the administrator by the Trenčín Court in a ruling of 23 February 2011.
Det samme gælder staten som en af de sikrede kreditorer, der ifølge de interesserede parter havde ret til at nedlægge veto mod beslutningen om videreførelse af driften.
Following the approval by the creditors and by the Trenčín Court, the NCHZ business continued operation without any interruption until its sale as a going concern to Via Chem Slovakia in July 2012.
De interesserede parter finder, at denne undladelse af at gribe ind betød, at kreditorudvalgets og de sikrede kreditorers beslutning kunne tilregnes staten.
The Commission decision to open the formal investigation procedure
De interesserede tredjeparter hævdede også, at den tilladelse, retten i Trenčín gav til videreførelse af NCHZ's drift, under alle omstændigheder også kunne tilregnes staten.
The opening decision of 2 July 2013 found that NCHZ had not fully paid social security contributions for its employees or any other liabilities towards various state entities during the bankruptcy proceedings.
Begge de interesserede tredjeparter hævdede, at den fortsatte drift af NCHZ fordrejede konkurrencen, navnlig på calciumcarbidmarkedet, og at NCHZ i den periode førte en meget aggressiv prispolitik.
The amount of public debt for the period 2009-2011 totalled EUR 12,1 million.
Hvad angår salget af NCHZ fremførte den ene af parterne, at udbudsvilkårene gjorde udfaldet af udbuddet uvist, og at det var grunden til, at den pågældende part ikke havde deltaget i udbuddet, selv om den måske kunne have været interesseret i at overtage NCHZ.
In view of the financial difficulties of NCHZ in the lead-up to filing for bankruptcy, by allowing continued operation of NCHZ the State ran a real risk that NCHZ would accumulate public liabilities it would not then be in a position to honour.
Endelig pegede de interesserede parter på, at den måde, hvorpå Fortischem fremstod på markedet, i alt væsentligt var identisk med den tidligere NCHZ-virksomhed.
The non-paid debt could thus have been avoided or at least significantly reduced by discontinuing the operations of NCHZ during the bankruptcy proceedings.
Den eneste synlige ændring var ændringen af navn og ejer.
There were also strong indications that the creditors' decision to continue operating NCHZ after the expiry of the Act was attributable to the State and provided the company with an undue, selective, economic advantage.
BEMÆRKNINGER FRA SLOVAKIET
The Commission thus concluded on a preliminary basis that by being allowed to continue its operations and market activities without having to pay social security contributions and other public liabilities during a significant period of time, NCHZ had been awarded an advantage vis-à-vis its competitors that it would not have received under normal market conditions.
Økonomisk fordel for NCHZ
The Commission also doubted whether the tender through which NCHZ was sold was unconditional since some of the bidders had the possibility of raising their bids at a later stage, when all the bids had already been submitted.
Slovakiet fremførte, at selv om kreditorerne eller retten ikke traf nogen beslutning herom i den første tid, var det sandsynligt, at kreditorerne alligevel ville have besluttet at fortsætte driften af NCHZ, også selv om loven ikke havde fandtes.
The Commission therefore doubted whether the price paid for the company's assets by the successful bidder represented a market price that ensured maximisation of revenue to satisfy the creditors, including the State.
Slovakiet henviste til den indledende analyse og de redegørelser, kurator havde fremlagt i oktober 2009 (altså før lovens ikrafttrædelse), og hvori der blev peget på en fortsat drift som den bedste løsning.
Moreover, there were strong indications that the economic continuity between NCHZ and the new entity had not been interrupted.
Loven havde derfor ingen udslagsgivende virkning, idet NCHZ ville have fortsat sin drift — også uden loven — alene på grundlag af de almindelige konkursregler.
This would mean that any incompatible state aid granted to NCHZ could be recovered from the new owner of the company's business.
Efter lovens udløb i december 2010 anmodede kurator kreditorudvalget om anvisninger angående den fortsatte drift af virksomheden.
The Commission therefore decided to open the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Udvalget traf beslutning herom, og denne beslutning blev stadfæstet af retten i Trenčín [11].
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
Slovakiet fremlagde den økonomiske analyse, der havde dannet grundlag for kreditorudvalgets beslutning.
Two third parties commented on the opening decision: the complainant and another interested third party that wished to remain anonymous.
Virksomheden fortsatte sin drift, indtil den blev afhændet i 2012.
Both of these interested parties endorsed the facts and the reasoning set out by the Commission in the decision to open the formal investigation procedure.
Slovakiet fremlagde også en hypotetisk analyse, som kurator havde udarbejdet ved brug af samme metoder som i analysen i den anden periode (fortsat drift på grundlag af kreditorudvalgets og rettens afgørelser), og som viser, at hvis man i begyndelsen af den første periode (fortsat drift på grundlag af loven) havde overvejet en likvidation, ville udfaldet være blevet det samme.
The third parties stressed the evident temporal link between the economic difficulties of NCHZ and the introduction of the Strategic Companies Act, which was adopted in an accelerated legislative procedure.
Den løbende gæld ville da kun have været på 8,5 mio. EUR, men likvidationsprovenuet ville ikke have oversteget omkostningerne og den løbende gæld.
In addition, only one day after the entry into force of the Act, the Slovak Government adopted the decision declaring NCHZ a strategic company within the meaning of the Act.
Der var følgelig ikke tale om nogen økonomisk fordel for NCHZ og heller ikke om statsstøtte.
In addition, NCHZ had possibly benefited from the advantage of having the status of a firm unable to exit the market by law and thus remained a reliable business partner, whereas other companies in the same situation as NCHZ, i.e. in bankruptcy proceedings, would most likely have had deteriorating business relations with their suppliers and customers owing to the possibility of their market exit.
Inddrivelse af Slovakiets tilgodehavender i NCHZ under konkursbehandling
As regards the operation of NCHZ following the decision of the creditors' committee, one of the interested parties argues that the state–owned member of the creditor's committee could and should have tried to reach a different outcome — by convincing the other committee members or at least by voting against the continued operation of NCHZ.
Slovakiet gjorde gældende, at den største kreditor, socialsikringsselskabet Sociálna poisťovňa, i forbindelse med forvaltning og inddrivelse af sine tilgodehavender i NCHZ havde handlet i overensstemmelse med socialsikringsloven (lov nr. 461/2003, som senere ændret) og med den slovakiske konkurslov.
The same reasoning applies to the State as one of the secured creditors, which according to the interested parties had the right to veto the decision approving the continued operation of NCHZ.
Socialsikringsselskabet havde udtømt alle lovlige retsmidler.
The interested parties take the view that this failure to act meant that the decision of the creditors' committee and the secured creditors could be attributed to the State.
Det havde ikke accepteret, at fordringerne ikke blev betalt, men anmeldt kravet til kurator.
In any event, the interested parties also argued that the decision of the Trenčín Court to allow the maintenance of NCHZ's operation was also attributable to the State.
Socialsikringsselskabet havde ikke dokumentation for noget krav mod NCHZ, der var stiftet, før virksomheden blev erklæret konkurs, og som skulle anmeldes i konkursboet i henhold til konkurslovens § 28 [12].
Both of the interested parties alleged that the continued operation of NCHZ distorted competition, particularly in the calcium carbide market. and that NCHZ had a very aggressive pricing policy during that period.
Det kunne derfor ikke få sæde i kreditorudvalget, der traf beslutningen om den fortsatte drift af NCHZ.
As regards the sale of NCHZ, one of the interested parties claimed that the tender commitments made the outcome of the tender uncertain and that this was the reason why it had not participated in the tender, although the acquisition of NCHZ's business might have been interesting.
Den eneste måde, hvorpå selskabet kunne sikre sine fordringer, var derfor at anmelde dem under konkursbehandlingen som fordringer på konkursboet.
Finally, the interested parties stated that Fortischem's overall operation and presence on the market was basically identical with the former NCHZ business.
Og det var, hvad selskabet (via sin Prievidzi-filial) gjorde, i overensstemmelse med § 87 og 88 i den slovakiske konkurslov (se nærmere herom i tabel 2).
The only observable change was the change in name and owner.
Ifølge konkurslovens § 87, stk. 3, skal kurator fyldestgøre krav på konkursboet ved hjælp af provenuet af afhændelsen af aktiverne i dette bo senest på forfaldsdatoen.
COMMENTS FROM SLOVAKIA
I henhold til denne bestemmelse hæfter kurator for tab, som kreditorer med fordringer på boet påføres ved ikke at have opnået omgående fyldestgørelse, medmindre han kan bevise, at han har opfyldt sin diligenspligt.
Existence of an economic advantage to NCHZ
Den 24. august 2011 fandt der et møde sted mellem repræsentanter for socialsikringsselskabet og NCHZ i selskabets Prievidzi-filial.
Slovakia claimed that the administrator of the bankruptcy proceedings of NCHZ was obliged to continue the operation of the company on the basis of the Act until 31 December 2010.
På mødet meddelte kurator selskabets repræsentanter, at han ikke var i stand til at fyldestgøre krav i konkursboet, fordi han var nødt til prioritere den fortsatte drift af virksomheden, så den kunne blive solgt til den bedst mulige pris.
As regards the nature of that Act, Slovakia claimed that it constituted a general measure applicable to all companies fulfilling the conditions.
Ifølge konkurslovens § 47, stk. 1, bevirker afsigelsen af konkursdekret, at alle retslige eller ikkeretslige skridt med henblik på fyldestgørelse i de aktiver, der indgår i konkursmassen og tilhører den konkursramte, stilles i bero.
Slovakia argued that, even though no decision was taken by the creditors or the court during the first period, it was likely that in the absence of the Act the creditors would in any case have decided to continue NCHZ's operation.
De frister, der gælder herfor, udløber ikke i den periode, hvor disse skridt er stillet i bero.
Slovakia referred to the preliminary analysis and public statements by the administrator of October 2009 (i.e. before the entry into force of the Act) indicating a preference for the continued operation of NCHZ.
Ifølge konkurslovens § 47 kan socialsikringsselskabet ikke gøre et krav gældende ved en beslutning truffet i henhold til socialsikringsloven eller siden få et krav fyldestgjort gennem tvangsfuldbyrdelse (se konkurslovens § 48).
The Act did not, therefore, have any material effect, since NCHZ would have continued operating — even without the Act being adopted — solely on the basis of the standard bankruptcy rules.
Tabel 2 nedenfor indeholder en oversigt over krav anmeldt af socialsikringsselskabet i perioden fra september 2009 til januar 2012.
Subsequently, after the Act expired in December 2010, the administrator requested instructions regarding the continued operation of the company from the creditors' committee.
Den 15. november 2011 indgav socialsikringsselskabets Prievidzi-filial imidlertid en klage mod personer med bemyndigelse til at handle på NCHZ's vegne til anklagemyndigheden i Prievidzi med påstand om, at de i perioden fra juni 2011 til september 2011 havde handlet strafbart ved ikke at have indbetalt socialsikringsbidrag i henhold til § 277 og 278 i lov nr. 300/2005 (straffeloven, som senest ændret).
The committee agreed and this decision was confirmed by the Trenčín Court [11].
Den 7. februar 2012 stillede politidirektoratet i Prievidzi straffesagen i bero, fordi der ikke fandtes tilstrækkeligt grundlag for strafferetlig forfølgning af de pågældende.
Slovakia submitted the economic analysis that had been prepared as the basis for the creditors' committee to take its decision.
Tabel 2
The company continued to operate until it was sold in 2012.
Krav anmeldt under konkursbehandlingen (i tusinder EUR) [13] af socialsikringsselskabet Sociálnou poisťovňou i perioden fra september 2009 til januar 2012
Slovakia also provided a hypothetical analysis by the administrator based on the methodology used for the analysis in the second period (continued operation based on the decision of creditors and the court), which shows that if liquidation had been considered at the beginning of the first period (continued operation on the basis of the Act), the outcome of the analysis would have been the same.
Beskrivelse af kravet
Despite a lower level of current liabilities totalling EUR 8,5 million, the proceeds from liquidation would not have been bigger than the costs and current liabilities.
Dato for anmeldelse til kurator
In view of the above, Slovakia argued that the behaviour of the State throughout the bankruptcy proceedings was in line with the market economy creditor principle.
Beløb i tusinder EUR
Therefore, it provided no economic advantage to NCHZ and did not constitute state aid.
Socialsikrings- og pensionsbidrag
Recovery of Slovakia's claims from NCHZ in bankruptcy
Garantiforsikring
Slovakia claimed that, when administering and recovering claims against NCHZ, the main creditor, the Social Insurance Company (Sociálna poisťovňa), had acted in line with Social Insurance Act No 461/2003, as amended, and in line with the Slovak Bankruptcy Act.
Krav i alt anmeldt indtil 31.1.2012
Sociálna poisťovňa exhausted all available remedies under the law.
Salget af NCHZ
It did not accept the non-payment of premiums and duly entered its claim with the administrator.
Med hensyn til salget af NCHZ gør Slovakiet gældende, at salget blev gennemført efter et åbent, gennemsigtigt og ubetinget udbud, hvor det højeste bud blev valgt.
The Social Insurance Company had no record of any claims against NCHZ arising before the declaration of bankruptcy that would have needed to be entered in the bankruptcy proceedings in accordance with Section 28 of the Slovak Bankruptcy Act [12].
Hvad angår salgets karakter fremførte Slovakiet, at der var tale om en særlig type aktivafhændelse, hvor alle aktiverne blev afhændet med tilhørende rettigheder og visse forpligtelser.
It could not therefore become a member of the creditors' bodies deciding on the continued operation of NCHZ.
Slovakiet gjorde videre gældende, at de betingelser, der var knyttet til det andet udbud, i den konkrete sag ikke kunne antages at ville påvirke mulighederne for at opnå den højst mulige pris, da ingen af de to bydende, der deltog i det andet udbud, ville påtage sig disse forpligtelser.
Therefore, the only available means for ensuring the payment of its claims was to register them in the ongoing bankruptcy proceedings as claims against the estate.
Desuden lå den pris, der i sidste instans blev opnået (2,2 mio. EUR), meget tæt op ad prisen ved det første udbud (2 mio. EUR), som blev annulleret.
So this is what the Social Insurance Company (through its Prievidza branch) did on an ongoing basis, in accordance with Sections 87 and 88 of the Slovak Bankruptcy Act (for details see Table 2).
Der var ikke knyttet nogen forpligtelser til det første udbud.
Under Section 87(3) of the Slovak Bankruptcy Act, claims against the estate are to be satisfied by the administrator from the proceeds of the liquidation of the assets of the estate in question by payment due date.