natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It explains that the losses from shipbuilding contracts incurred before 31 December 1995 amounted to about EUR 230,08 million (DEM 450 million) (calculated without taking into account the Wettbewerbshilfe received).
Selles selgitati, et enne 31. detsembrit 1995 teenitud kahjum laevaehituslepingutelt oli kokku 230,08 miljonit eurot (450 miljonit Saksa marka) (arvestamata saadud konkurentsitoetuse summasid).
According to the German authorities, at the time of drafting the report the calculation of final losses was not yet possible since some of the vessels had not yet been delivered and financial risks originating from charter guarantees were still pending.
Saksamaa võimude väidetel ei olnud lõpliku kahjumi arvutamine aruande koostamise ajal veel võimalik, kuna mõned alused polnud veel üle antud ja prahtimisgarantiidest tulenevad finantsriskid olid endiselt üleval.
It was only on 18 June 1999 that the Commission received, following its own request of 16 June 1999, the full annual reports of KWW certified by the auditors for 1992 to 1997 and the provisional accounts for 1998.
Alles 18. juunil 1999 sai komisjon vastuseks oma 16. juuni 1999. aasta taotlusele audiitorite kinnitatud KWW täielikud igaaastased aruanded perioodi kohta 1992–1997 ja esialgse aruande 1998. aasta kohta.
On 30 June 1999, Germany sent to the Commission a letter from KWW’s auditor (dated 25 April 1997) on the actual use of the restructuring aid as per end of 1996.
juunil 1999 saatis Saksamaa komisjonile KWW audiitori kirja (25. aprilli 1997 kuupäevaga) restruktureerimisabi tegeliku kasutamise kohta 1996. aasta lõpu seisuga.
The report shows that the actual losses for the relevant shipbuilding contracts, without deducting Wettbewerbshilfe, amounted to about EUR 178 million (DEM 348,095 million) until 31 December 1995.
See aruanne näitab, et asjakohastelt laevaehituslepingutelt saadud tegelik kahjum, konkurentsitoetuse summasid maha arvestamata, oli kuni 31. detsembrini 1995 kokku 178 miljonit eurot (348,095 miljonit Saksa marka).
Additional losses of about EUR 23,1 million (DEM 45,121 million) were encountered in 1996 so that the total actual losses until 31 December 1996 amounted to EUR 201,05 million (DEM 393,216 million).
aastal saadi täiendavat kahjumit 23,1 miljonit eurot (45,121 miljonit Saksa marka), nii et tegelik kahjum kuni 31. detsembrini 1996 oli 201,05 miljonit eurot (393,216 miljonit Saksa marka).
As it appeared that the actual losses were lower than the losses envisaged (EUR 262 million (DEM 512,5 million) including Wettbewerbshilfe of EUR 31,9 million (DEM 62,5 million)), the Commission requested Germany by letter dated 23 June 1999 to explain the transfer of EUR 204,5 million (DEM 400 million) from KWW to its mother company.
Kuna aruandest nähtus, et tegelik kahjum oli väiksem kui varem arvestatud [262 miljonit eurot (512,5 miljonit Saksa marka) koos 31,9 miljoni euro (62,5 miljoni Saksa marga)] konkurentsitoetusega, palus komisjon Saksamaalt 23. juuni 1999. aasta kirjas selgitust 204,5 miljoni euro (400 miljoni saksa marga) ülekandmise kohta KWWlt emaettevõttele.
According to its reply, by letter dated 30 June 1999, Germany did not recover the difference from KWW.
juuni 1999. aasta vastuse kohaselt ei nõudnud Saksamaa vahesummat KWWlt tagasi.
Germany further explained that the amount for loss cover was granted and approved as a lump sum so that any difference could be kept by KWW.
Saksamaa selgitas, et kahjumi katteks anti ja kiideti heaks abi kindlas summas, nii et mis tahes vahe võis KWW endale jätta.
Opening of procedure
Menetluse algatamine
In its decision to open the formal investigation procedure the Commission noted that KWW had received EUR 262 million (DEM 512,5 million) operating aid for loss compensation (including the compensation for Wettbewerbshilfe of EUR 32 million (DEM 62,5 million) while the actual losses amounted only to EUR 201,05 million (DEM 393,216 million).
Ametliku uurimismenetluse algatamise otsuses märkis komisjon, et KWW oli saanud 262 miljonit eurot (512,5 miljonit Saksa marka) tegevusabi kahjumi katmiseks [sh 32 miljonit eurot (62,5 miljonit saksa marka) abi konkurentsitoetuse kujul], samal ajal kui tegelik kahjum oli ainult 201,05 miljonit eurot (393,216 miljonit Saksa marka).
The Commission also noted that in all of its decisions granting the aid it was clearly stated that the Commission shall use its investigating and monitoring powers to ensure that the yards only receive the aid necessary for their restructuring.
Komisjon märkis ka, et kõigis abi lubavates otsustes oli selgelt öeldud, et komisjon kasutab oma uurimis- ja järelevalvevolitusi tagamaks, et Ida-Saksamaa tehased saavad ainult restruktureerimiseks vajalikku abi.
Consequently, since according to the Commission decisions approving the aid the yards shall only receive the aid necessary for their restructuring, and the Commission had committed itself to monitor the compliance of this provision, only the compensation of actual losses can be considered as being compatible with the Commission decisions granting the aid.
Et vastavalt komisjoni otsustele, millega abi heaks kiideti, pidid tehased saama ainult restruktureerimiseks vajalikku abi, ja komisjon oli võtnud kohustuse selle sätte järgimist kontrollida, saab komisjoni abi heakskiitvate otsustega kooskõlas olevaks lugeda vaid summat, mis katab tegeliku kahjumi.
Therefore, the Commission raised doubts whether the operating aid of the amount of about EUR 61 million (DEM 119,284 million) was compatible with the common market.
Seega seadis komisjon kahtluse alla 61 miljoni euro (119,284 miljoni Saksa marga) suuruse tegevusabi kokkusobivuse ühisturuga.
The Commission received comments dated 9 June 2000 and 13 June 2000 from the Association of Danish Shipbuilders (Foreningen av Jernskibs- og Maskinbyggerier i Danmark — Skibsvaerftsforeningen).
ja 13. juuni 2000. aasta kirjades sai komisjon märkused Taani Laevaehitajate Assotsiatsioonilt (Foreningen av Jernskibs- og Maskinbyggerier i Danmark - Skibsvaerftsforeningen).
Comments from the Association of Danish Shipbuilders
Taani Laevaehitajate Assotsiatsiooni märkused
The Association of Danish Shipbuilders recalls the importance for the Commission to constantly monitor the compliance with existing rules.
Taani Laevaehitajate Assotsiatsioon märgib, et on oluline, et komisjon jälgib pidevalt kehtivate reeglite järgimist.
Since 1992, several yards needed to be closed or to reduce their workforce in Denmark and the number of jobs in this sector has decreased by half.
Alates 1992. aastast on tulnud Taanis sulgeda mitmed laevatehased või vähendada sealsete töötajate arvu; töökohtade arv selles harus on vähenenud poole võrra.
The subcontractors and suppliers of the yards have lost a significant number of jobs.
Tehaste alltöövõtjad ja tarnijad on vähendanud märkimisväärselt töötajate arvu.
Limiting the negative effects of the aid on the other Member States’ shipbuilding industry is therefore as equally important as before.
Seega on sama tähtis kui varem piirata abi negatiivset mõju teiste liikmesriikide tehastele.
For this reason it is impossible to set less strict requirements at this point in time on the assessment of the aid and its conditions, than in the period from 1992 to 1994.
Sel põhjusel ei tohi esitada abi ja selle tingimuste hindamisele praegu leebemaid nõudeid kui aastatel 1992–1994.
The preparatory documents of Directive 92/68/EEC show that a very detailed analysis of the need for aid, as established by the Commission, was presented to the Council.
Nagu direktiivi 92/68/EMÜ ettevalmistavatest dokumentidest on näha, esitati nõukogule komisjoni poolt väga üksikasjalikult koostatud analüüs abi vajalikkuse kohta.
As for other yards, the aid was subdivided into old liabilities, fresh capital and loss compensation.
Teiste tehaste puhul jagunes abi vanade kohustuste, uue kapitali ja kahjumikatte vahel.
Although the Council established a ceiling for the different aid amounts in total, it did not establish aid amounts for each of the yards.
Kuigi nõukogu kehtestas ülempiirid erinevate abi kogusummade jaoks, ei kehtestatud abisummasid tehaste lõikes.
There were no doubts on the amounts for old liabilities and fresh capital.
Vanade kohustuste ja uue kapitali summade suhtes ei olnud kahtlusi.
However, regarding loss compensation, an amount was discussed, which the Commission should fix within a certain framework.
Kuid kahjumikatte puhul arutati summat, mille komisjon peaks teatud raamistikus fikseerima.
When establishing this amount the Commission naturally needed to make sure that the aid could only be used for the proposed purpose.
Selle summa kehtestamise juures pidi komisjon loomulikult tagama, et abi saaks kasutada ainult ettenähtud eesmärgil.
The Commission had also to make sure, using subsequent monitoring, that the amounts had indeed only been used for these purposes.
Samuti pidi komisjon tagama hiljem kontrollides, et summasid oli tõepoolest kasutatud sihtotstarbeliselt.
The Council laid down these conditions for the aid in June and July 1992 with the participation of Germany.
Nõukogu kehtestas kõnealused reeglid abi kohta Saksamaa osavõtul 1992. aasta juunis ja juulis.
Therefore Germany cannot refer to other agreements with possibly different contents that it had subsequently made with the buyer of the yard.
Seetõttu ei saa Saksamaa viidata teistele, tehase ostjaga sõlmitud kokkulepetele, mis võisid olla erineva sisuga.
Spillover reports were requested to avoid that third parties benefit from the aid.
Tagamaks, et kolmandad isikud ei saaks abist kasu, nõuti spill-over-aruandeid.
If the aid in question had been granted independent from the beneficiary’s cost, the spillover reports would have been unnecessary to prevent the transfer of excess aid to the current owners of the enterprise benefiting from State aid.
Kui kõnealune abi oleks antud olenemata abisaaja kuludest, ei oleks spill-over-aruanded riigiabi saaja omanikele abisummade ülejäägi ülekandmise vältimiseks vajalikud olnud.
The EUR 262 million (DEM 512,5 million) of aid granted for loss compensation was in fact not used for this purpose in its totality.
Kahjumikatteks antud 262 miljonit eurot (512,5 miljonit Saksa marka) ei kasutatud tegelikult täies ulatuses sihtotstarbeliselt.
This is the logical consequence of the fact that the losses were in fact lower than this amount.
See järeldub loogiliselt asjaolust, et tegelik kahjum oli sellest summast väiksem.
Therefore the aid must have been used for another purpose.
Seega pidi abi kasutatama muul eesmärgil.
Even if the Commission has not explained what has happened to these amounts, the granting of a loan to the mother company implies that the aid has, in any case, partly benefited the mother company.
Isegi kui komisjon ei ole veel selgitanud, mis nendest summadest sai, viitab emaettevõttele laenu andmine sellele, et emaettevõte on igal juhul abist osaliselt kasu saanud.
According to the conditions set by the Council, the Commission should have prevented this.
Nõukogu seatud tingimuste järgi oleks komisjon pidanud seda vältima.
The amount, which was not used for loss compensation and which was not authorised to be transferred to the mother company, has to be considered as an injection of fresh capital, which means that a greater amount than that accepted by the Council for this particular purpose was in fact used for it.
Seda summat, mida ei kasutatud kahjumikatteks, ja mille ülekandmist emaettevõttele polnud heaks kiidetud, tuleb käsitleda uue omakapitali toetusena, mis tähendab, et sel eesmärgil kasutati rohkem raha kui nõukogu oli lubanud.
The use of the aid contravenes not only the conditions set out by the Commission but also Directive 92/68/EEC.
Abi kasutamine on vastuolus mitte ainult komisjoni kehtestatud tingimustega, vaid ka direktiiviga 92/68/EMÜ.
Finally, the Association of Danish Shipbuilders concludes that according to the information available, KWW had received a greater amount of aid than that corresponding to its actual losses.
Taani Laevaehitajate Assotsiatsioon märgib kokkuvõttes, et saadaoleva teabe põhjal sai KWW abi suurema summa ulatuses kui tema tegelik kahjum.
Apparently, neither the Council nor the Commission at any stage accepted that operating aid for loss compensation could be higher than the actual losses.
Ei nõukogu ega komisjon ole ühelgi hetkel kiitnud heaks kahjumikatteks tegelikust kahjumist suuremat abi.
In addition, the Association of Danish Shipbuilders takes the view that, if the Commission approves subsidies within the limits established by the Council of Ministers in such a way that beneficiaries are guaranteed a given sum under given conditions, such approval cannot, provided that these conditions are fulfilled, be rescinded at a later stage, regardless of whether the Commission changes its views on the earlier interpretation.
Lisaks avaldab Taani Laevaehitajate Assotsiatsioon arvamust, et kui komisjon kiidab heaks ministrite nõukogu kehtestatud piiresse jäävad subsiidiumid selliselt, et abisaajatele tagatakse teatud tingimustel kindel summa, ei saa seda heakskiitu – juhul, kui seatud tingimusi täidetakse – hiljem tühistada isegi juhul, kui komisjon muudab oma seisukohta varasema tõlgenduse suhtes.
On the other hand, neither the Commission nor the Member States can legitimately approve aid, which goes beyond what is accepted by the Council of Ministers or laid down in the Treaty, even if the beneficiary has acted in good faith.
Teisest küljest aga ei saa ei komisjon ega liikmesriigid legitiimselt kiita heaks abi, mis läheb ministrite nõukogu lubatust või asutamislepingus sätestatust kaugemale, isegi kui abisaaja on käitunud heauskselt.
Comments from the Confederation of Danish Industry
Taani Tööstusliidu märkused
According to the Confederation of Danish Industry, it is a natural legal obligation of the Community to make sure that the Commission verifies the use of State aid that it has approved or will approve.
Taani Tööstusliit on seisukohal, et komisjoni heakskiidetud riigiabi kasutamise kontroll on ühenduse loomulik juriidiline kohustus.
Since the beginning of the 1990s the Danish shipbuilding industry has been confronted with several closures of yards and a significant decrease of jobs in this sector.
Alates 1990ndate aastate algusest on Taani laevaehitustööstuses suletud mitmed tehased ja märkimisväärse vähendatud töökohtade arvu selles harus.
The European shipbuilding and its subcontractors react in a sensitive way to market interventions, above all to State aid.
Euroopa laevaehitus ja selle alltöövõtjad on tundlikud sekkumiste suhtes turul, eelkõige riigiabi suhtes.
If KWW uses, in this particular case, the difference between its actual losses and the promised loss compensation for other purposes than directly to its restructuring, the amount of this difference will have the effect of an operating aid and thereby aggravate the already difficult competition conditions between the European yards.
Kui konkreetsel juhul KWW kasutab tegeliku kahjumi ja lubatud kahjumikatte erinevust muul eesmärgil kui otseselt restruktureerimiseks, on sellel vahesummal tegevusabi mõju ja seega halvendaks see veelgi niigi raskeid konkurentsitingimusi, mis valitsevad Euroopa tehaste vahel.
According to the Confederation of Danish Industry, it is against the general principles of Community law to allow the aid recipient to claim for loss compensation in case its losses remain below the maximum amount of the promised compensation.
Taani Tööstusliidu arvates on kahjumikatte taotlemine abisaaja poolt juhul, kui kahjum on maksimaalsest lubatud hüvitusest madalam, ühenduse seadusandlusega vastuolus.
However, the Confederation would not know whether such use had been authorised in a non-published protocol or similar paper when Directive 92/68/EEC was agreed.
Tööstusliit aga ei tea, kas niisugust tegevust võidi lubada avaldamata protokolliga või samaväärse dokumendiga nõukogu direktiiv 92/68/EMÜ vastuvõtmisel.
The Confederation of Danish Industry notes that the aid beneficiary takes the view that the Commission, in approving the restructuring aid, accepted the privatisation agreement in its entirety and thereby the principle that the use to which the restructuring aid was to be put was not subject to any conditions.
Taani Tööstusliit märgib, et abisaaja arvamuse kohaselt kiitis komisjon restruktureerimisabi lubavate otsustega täies mahus heaks ka erastamislepingu ja seega ka põhimõtte, mille kohaselt ei seatud restruktureerimisabi kasutamisele mingeid tingimusi.
Subsequently, the Confederation of Danish Industry says that aid approved by the Commission, in accordance with the mandate conferred on it by the Council and the Treaty, cannot be altered at a later stage once the Commission has already approved an aid measure, even if it changes its attitude later.
Seda arvestades märgib Taani Tööstusliit, et kui komisjon kiitis talle asutamislepinguga ja vastavalt nõukogu poolt antud volitustele abi heaks, ei saa seda hiljem muuta, isegi kui komisjon muudab oma seisukohta.
Such agreements are binding for the Commission.
Sellised kokkulepped on komisjonile siduvad.
However, even where they are in good faith, beneficiaries cannot derive any rights from the acceptance of an aid measure if the Commission or a Member State has infringed the rules laid down by the Council or enshrined in the Treaty.
Siiski ei saa abisaajatele, isegi kui nad on käitunud heauskselt, tuleneda abimeetmete lubamisest õigusi, kui komisjon või liikmesriik on nõukogu sätestatud või asutamislepinguga kehtestatud reegleid rikkunud.
Comments from KWW
KWW märkused
It is noted that the individual points raised by KWW in its comments are in majority identical to the points raised by Germany in its comments.
KWW märkused kattuvad suures osas Saksamaa märkustega.
The points are therefore only listed briefly below.
Seetõttu esitatakse need allpool vaid lühidalt.
KWW argues that there is no legally valid reason why the Commission would question the legality of the restructuring aid seven years after approving it.
KWW väidab, et ei ole juriidiliselt vettpidavat põhjust, miks komisjon peaks restruktureerimisabi seaduslikkuse seitse aastat pärast selle heakskiitmist kahtluse alla seadma.
In the privatisation agreement between Treuhandanstalt and Kvaerner, the loss compensation was agreed as a lump sum and these documents did not impose any obligation on Kvaerner to repay the difference in case the contract related losses would turn out to be lower than estimated.
Treuhandanstalti ja Kvaerneri vahel sõlmitud erastamislepingus lepiti kahjumi katmine kokku kindlas summas ja nende dokumentide kohaselt ei seatud Kvaernerile vahe tagasimaksmise kohustuse tingimust, kui tegelik lepingutega seotud kahjum peaks jääma oodatust väiksemaks.
The Commission was aware of the contents of these documents.
Komisjon oli nende dokumentide sisust teadlik.
Under these circumstances the Commission decided on the necessity of the aid in question and its decisions on approval of the aid do not contain any condition or clause on possible repayment of the difference between the estimated and real losses.
Selles olukorras otsustas komisjon kõnealuse abi vajalikkuse üle ja komisjoni abi heakskiitvates otsustes ei sisaldu ühtegi tingimust ega klauslit oodatud ja tegeliku kahjumi vahe võimaliku tagasimaksmise kohta.
KWW claims that the contested amount of EUR 60,988 million (DEM 119,284 million) is part of the total operating aid approved by the Commission in its decisions of 1993.
KWW väidab, et vaidlusalune 60,988 miljoni euro (119,284 miljoni Saksa marga) suurune summa on osa kogu komisjoni poolt 1993. aasta otsustega heakskiidetud tegevusabist.
Therefore it is existing aid of which the compatibility cannot be subsequently reassessed.
Seega on see olemasolev abi, mille nõuetele vastavust ei saa hiljem ümber hinnata.
The next point raised by KWW is that only part of the contested amounts is aid.
Järgmisena toob KWW välja, et ainult osa vaidlustatud summast on abi.
Only EUR 29,812 million (DEM 58,309 million) operating aid was paid in cash.
Tegevusabina maksti välja vaid 29,812 miljonit eurot (58,309 miljonit Saksa marka).
The positions in the balance sheet also used to cover the restructuring costs cannot be considered as aid, since they were assets of the yard which were sold as a result of an open and unconditional bidding procedure.
Bilansikirjeid, mis kajastasid ka restruktureerimiskulusid, ei saa käsitleda abina, kuna nende puhul oli tegemist tehase varadega, mis müüdi avaliku ja tingimusteta pakkumismenetluse teel.
KWW argues that the Commission decisions approving the aid are the legal basis for the assessment of the case.
KWW väidab, et juhtumi hindamise õiguslikuks aluseks on komisjoni otsused, millega abi on heaks kiidetud.
It is the opinion of KWW that it has fully complied with the Commission decisions approving the aid, since:
KWW on arvamusel, et nende tegevus on olnud komisjoni otsustega täielikult kooskõlas, kuna:
the Commission approved the lump sum of aid being fully aware that the privatisation contract did not provide for any possible repayment obligations.
komisjon kiitis kindla abisumma heaks, olles täielikult teadlik, et erastamislepingus ei olnud ette nähtud mingeid võimalikke tagasimaksmise kohustusi.
The decisions do not mention a specific amount earmarked to cover losses;
Otsustes ei mainita konkreetseid kahjumi katmiseks määratud summasid;
the Commission decided on the necessity of the aid before releasing the tranches;
komisjon otsustas abi vajalikkuse üle enne osade väljamaksmist;
the Commission decided on the necessity of the aid without laying down in its decisions approving the aid any conditions, which would justify reassessment of the aid later;
komisjon otsustas abi vajalikkuse üle, sätestamata oma abi heakskiitvates otsustes mingeid tingimusi, mis õigustaksid abi hilisemat ümberhindamist;
the funds for restructuring were used pursuant to their objectives.
restruktureerimiseks ettenähtud summasid kasutati sihtotstarbeliselt.
Other restructuring costs than loss compensation, were higher than the estimated.
Muud restruktureerimiskulud kui kahjumi katmiskulud osutusid prognoositust suuremaks.
As regards point (a), KWW argues that the concept of the privatisation agreement was to make Kvaerner liable for any greater losses than those estimated.
Seoses punktiga a väidab KWW, et erastamislepingu sisu seisnes selles, et Kvaerner võtab enda kanda ka oodatust suurema kahjumi.
As a counterpart, the situation where the losses would be lower than estimated should benefit Kvaerner.
Vastutasuks aga, kui kahju osutub prognoositust väiksemaks, saab Kvaerner vahe endale jätta.
From Kvaerner’s point of view, compensation of all restructuring costs without any possibility of repayment was the essential condition for Kvaerner to take over the yard.
Kvaerneri seisukohast oli kogu restruktureerimiskulude hüvitamine ilma hilisema tagasimakse kohustuseta peamine tingimus tehase ülevõtmisel.
In case of possible repayment obligations, Kvaerner would never have taken over the yard.
Võimaliku tagasimakse kohustuse korral ei oleks Kvaerner tehast üldse üle võtnud.
This is illustrated by paragraph 12 of the privatisation agreement, in which it is stated that in case individual payments would be prohibited under EEC law, Kvaerner has the right to rescind the privatisation agreement.
Sellele osutab erastamislepingu artikkel 12, milles sätestatakse, et kui individuaalsed maksed on ühenduse õigusaktidega keelatud, on Kvaerneril õigus erastamisleping lõpetada.
According to KWW, the Commission was aware of the agreement between Kvaerner and Germany and the way the loss compensation was intended to be paid, namely as a lump sum.
KWW väitel oli komisjon Kvaerneri ja Saksamaa vahelisest kokkuleppest teadlik, samuti kahjumikatte väljamaksmise viisist, ehk just kindlas summas.
If the Commission objected to this approach, it should have opened a procedure and made a clear condition on a possible repayment in its decisions.
Kui komisjon ei oleks olnud sellise lähenemisega nõus, oleks ta pidanud algatama menetluse ja oma otsustes võimaliku tagasimaksmise tingimuse selgelt sätestama.