natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, that bridge value was based on the two prior value assessments.
Siiski tugines see koondväärtus eelnevale kahele esialgse väärtuse hindamisele.
The first Agdestein report was based on individual assessment of the buildings and is in fact the only contemporary assessment thereof.
Esimene Agdesteini aruanne tugines hoonete individuaalsele hindamisele ning on tegelikult nende ainus ajakohane hindamine.
Since this assessment was the basis for the bridge value which again formed the basis for the actual price paid by the municipality, the Authority considers that the first Agdestein report provides the individual values necessary to accurately establish the primary cost of the 29 buildings in question.
Kuna see hindamine oli alus koondväärtusele, mis omakorda oli alus tegelikule hinnale, mille vald maksis, tegi järelevalveamet järelduse, et esimene Agdesteini aruanne annab individuaalsed väärtused, mida on tarvis kõnealuse 29 hoone algkulu täpseks kindlaksmääramiseks.
The sales contract in question comprises the following 29 buildings at the Inner Camp [25]: Nos 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, (31,) 33, 92 and 16.
Kõnealune ostu-müügileping hõlmab siselaagri järgmist 29 hoonet [25]: nr 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, (31,) 33, 92 ja 16.
The investor values as assessed in the first Agdestein report of these buildings are the following:
Nimetatud hoonete väärtus investori jaoks, nagu on hinnatud esimeses Agdesteini aruandes, on järgmine:
Guard/arrest stall: NOK
Valvuriputka:
Welfare House, including offices, cafeteria, cinema, chapel etc. NOK
Hoolekandemaja, sh bürood, kohvik, kino, kabel jne
Administration and office Building NOK
Haldus- ja büroohoone
Drill Building NOK
Rividrilli hoone
Garage
Garaaž
Administration and office building NOK
Haldus- ja büroohoone
Hospital Building NOK
Hospitalihoone
Kitchen and canteen building for soldiers personnel NOK
Köögi- ja sööklahoone sõduritele
Kitchen and canteen building for officers NOK
Köögi- ja sööklahoone ohvitseridele
Barrack
Barakk
Barrack, No 12-13 are assessed together NOK
Barakk, nr 12–13 hinnatakse koos
Barrack,
Barakk
Barrack, No 14-15 are assessed together NOK
Barakk, nr 14–15 hinnatakse koos
Garage, NOK
Garaaž
Garage,
Garaaž
Service garage,
Remondigaraaž
Gas/petrol station
Gaasi-/bensiinitankla
Garage, No 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27 are assessed together NOK
Garaažid, nr 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26 ja 27 hinnatakse koos
Regiment building with education room
Rügemendihoone koos õpperuumiga
Post office, No 29 and 92 are assessed together NOK
Sidejaoskond, nr 29 ja 92 hinnatakse koos
School building, NOK
Õppehoone
(Store shed),
(Kuur)
KO-building, school building NOK
KO-hoone, õppehoone
Fire/heating house NOK
Katlamaja
Sum
Norra krooni
NOK
Summa:
The report did not separately assess the value of the individual buildings No 6 and No 8 (garages).
Aruandes ei hinnatud eraldi üksikute hoonete nr 6 ja 8 (garaažid) väärtust.
Instead, they were assessed together with building No 45 (combined administration building with storage rooms, offices and workshop, not included in the contract with Haslemoen AS) at a total of NOK 1,9 million.
Selle asemel hinnati neid koos hoonega nr 45 (kombineeritud haldushoone koos laoruumide, büroode ja töökodadega, mis ei sisaldu ostu-müügilepingus ettevõttega Haslemoen AS) koguväärtuses 1,9 miljonit Norra krooni.
Building No 23 and No 24 (garage and gas station) were, in the same manner, assessed together with building No 34 (the camp office building, which was not included in the contract with Haslemoen AS) at a total value of NOK 800000.
Hooneid nr 23 ja 24 (garaaž ja gaasitankla) hinnati samamoodi koos hoonega nr 34 (laagri büroohoone, mis ei sisaldunud ostu-müügilepingus ettevõttega Haslemoen AS), mille koguväärtuseks on 800000 Norra krooni.
The question is therefore whether some of the value put on these collectively assessed buildings should be allocated to the buildings acquired by Haslemoen AS, namely the four garages No 6, 8, 23 and 24.
Küsimus seisneb seega selles, kas osa väärtusest, mis on määratud hoonetele kollektiivse hindamise käigus, tuleks eraldada hoonetele, mille ostis ettevõte Haslemoen AS, ehk neljale garaažile (nr 6, 8, 23 ja 24).
This issue was raised in the Authority’s opening decision referred to above, in which the Authority applied the most favourable scenario by disregarding these buildings.
See küsimus tõstatati järelevalveameti otsuses menetluse algatamise kohta, millele osutati eespool, milles järelevalveamet kohaldas kõige soodsamat stsenaariumi ja ei võtnud nimetatud hooneid arvesse.
While the Authority has not been presented with any documentation to the effect that the four mentioned garages were worthless, it assumes that they were of limited value since the first Agdestein report chose to include whatever value they had in the estimates for other buildings.
Kuigi järelevalveametile ei ole esitatud mingeid tõendeid selle kohta, et nimetatud neli garaaži on väärtusetud, eeldab järelevalveamet, et nende väärtus oli väike, kuna esimeses Agdesteini aruandes otsustati nende väärtus, olenemata selle suurusest, lisada teiste hoonete hindamisse.
Thus, in the absence of any contemporary documentation to the opposite and on the assumption that the value in any case appeared to be low the Authority will not add any specific value for these four buildings in the assessment of the relevant part of the Inner Camp.
Seega, võttes arvesse, et puuduvad ajakohased dokumendid, mis tõestaks vastupidist, ning eeldusel, et väärtus on igal juhul väike, ei lisa järelevalveamet nendele neljale hoonele kindlat väärtust siselaagri asjakohaste osade hindamisel.
The total value of the 29 buildings in question, as assessed in the first Agdestein report, reaches the sum of NOK 23840000.
Kõnealuse 29 hoone koguväärtus, nagu hinnati esimeses Agdesteini aruandes, on kuni 23840000 Norra krooni.
As mentioned above, the municipality was granted the so called 30 % rebate [26] on the Inner Camp value in the first Agdestein report.
Nagu eespool märgitud, anti vallale niinimetatud 30 % suurune mahahindlus [26] siselaagri väärtusest esimeses Agdesteini aruandes.
Since the Authority under the circumstances of the present case finds that it was justified to grant a similar rebate to Haslemoen AS, the adjusted value of the 29 buildings as established by this report is 23840000 - 25,64 % =
Kuna järelevalveamet leiab selle juhtumi tingimusi arvesse võttes, et sarnase allahindluse andmine ettevõttele Haslemoen AS oli õigustatud, on 29 hoone kohandatud väärtus kõnealuse aruande kohaselt 23840000 - 25,64 % =
NOK 17727424.
17727424 Norra krooni.
Applying the bridge value method, the primary cost for the municipality for the 29 buildings in question was NOK 8863712.
Koondväärtuse meetodi kohaldamisel oli algkulu vallale kõnealuse 29 hoone soetamisel 8863712 Norra krooni.
Given that the Authority has accepted that the state sold Haslemoen Leir to Våler municipality at market value, it accepts that a sum of NOK 8863712 was the municipality’s primary cost for the buildings and that this was the necessary indication of the market value.
Võttes arvesse, et järelevalveamet nõustus, et riik müüs Haslemoen Leiri Våleri vallale turuväärtusega, nõustub ta, et 8863712 Norra krooni oli valla algkulu hoonete soetamisel ning see oli vajalik viide turuväärtusele.
On that basis it concludes that the sale to Haslemoen AS at NOK 4 million contained state aid amounting to NOK 8863712 - NOK 4000000 =
Selle alusel järeldab järelevalveamet, et müük ettevõttele Haslemoen AS 4 miljoni Norra krooni eest sisaldas riigiabi kuni 8863712 Norra krooni – 4000000 Norra krooni =
NOK 4863712.
4863712 Norra krooni.
The municipality has also submitted that the Authority should take into consideration the price-reducing elements consisting of possible pollution in the ground and the obligation on Haslemoen AS to allow free use of the school building for one year.
Vald palus järelevalveametil võtta arvesse ka hinda vähendavaid elemente, näiteks maapinna võimalikku reostust ja ettevõtte Haslemoen AS kohustust võimaldada õppehoone tasuta kasutamist ühe aasta jooksul.
There has however not been submitted any particular contemporary or subsequently produced documentation concerning these alleged price reducing elements and the impact they allegedly have had on the price.
Siiski ei ole esitatud ühtki konkreetset ajakohast ega hiljem koostatud dokumenti, mis sisaldaks neid väidetavaid hinda vähendavaid elemente ja mõju, mida nad on hinnale väidetavalt avaldanud.
Pollution in the ground
Maapinna reostus
As regards pollution in the ground the Authority would agree that this could be a rather obvious possibility given that the camp was used for military purposes since the 1950s.
Maapinna reostusega seoses nõustub järelevalveamet, et see on üsna tõenäoliselt võimalik, võttes arvesse, et laagrit on alates 1950. aastatest kasutatud sõjalistel eesmärkidel.
The Authority has in this regard noted that the first Agdestein report specifically mentioned possible pollution in the ground in the Inner Camp related to fuel and oil tanks in the ground.
Järelevalveamet on sellega seoses märkinud, et esimeses Agdesteini aruandes nimetati konkreetsemalt siselaagri maapinna võimalikku reostust maa-aluste kütuse- ja naftapaakide tõttu.
This was however not taken into account in the value assessment.
Seda ei võetud väärtuse hindamisel siiski arvesse.
The Alhaug/Bakke value assessment, which estimate the value of the Inner Camp at NOK 0, mentioned both the possibility of pollution in the ground and possible asbestos in the buildings, without making an attempt at specifying possible costs related thereto.
Alhaug/Bakke koostatud väärtuse hindamises, mille kohaselt on siselaagri väärtus hinnanguliselt 0 Norra krooni, märgiti nii maapinna võimalikku reostust kui ka võimalikku asbesti sisaldumist hoonetes, püüdmata konkreetselt kindlaks määrata sellega seotud võimalikke kulusid.
However, the Authority recalls that the reports were used as a basis for the halfway settlement.
Sellegipoolest tuletab järelevalveamet meelde, et aruanded võeti aluseks kompromisslahenduse puhul.
Thus, any price reducing or negative element in the report must be assumed taken into account by the subsequent halfway settlement.
Seega tuleb eeldada, et hiljem koostatud kompromisslahenduses on arvesse võetud aruande mis tahes hinda alandavat või negatiivset elementi.
Indeed, the Authority sees no basis for any additional price reduction for any element or circumstance that was known between the parties to the first transaction.
Tõepoolest ei näe järelevalveamet põhjust täiendavaks hinnaalanduseks mis tahes elemendi või olukorra tõttu, mis oli esimese tehingu pooltele teada.
This is so since the effect of such measures must be assumed taken into account in the bridge value sales price.
Seda seetõttu, et tuleb eeldada, et selliste meetmete mõju on võetud arvesse koondväärtusega müügihinnas.
A resale at primary cost must be assumed to cover the same price reducing elements.
Oletatakse, et edasimüük algkulu eest hõlmab samasuguseid hinda vähendavaid elemente.
Finally, the contract between the state and the municipality explicitly referred to the possibility of pollution in the ground and made a reference to the polluter pays principle in the Norwegian Pollution act.
Lõpuks osutati riigi ja valla vahelises lepingus selgelt maapinna reostuse võimalusele ja osutati Norra reostusseaduses sisalduvale „saastaja maksab” põhimõttele.
The subsequent contract between the municipality and Haslemoen AS specifically referred to this obligation and that the seller, i.e. the Norwegian state remained liable for ground pollution linked to the military activity.
Hiljem sõlmitud leping valla ja ettevõtte Haslemoen AS vahel osutas konkreetselt sellele kohustusele ning sellele, et müüja ehk Norra riik vastutab maapinna reostuse eest, mis tuleneb sõjalisest tegevusest.
For those reasons the Authority sees no basis for any further price reduction on ground of possible pollution.
Seepärast ei näe järelevalveasutus põhjust, miks peaks hinda võimaliku reostuse tõttu veelgi vähendama.
The use of the school building
Õppehoone kasutamine
As regards the right for the municipality to free use of the school building for one year, the Authority notes that this was a new obligation on the buyer in the sense that no such obligation was already imposed by the state on the municipality.
Valla õiguse kohta kasutada õppehoonet tasuta ühe aasta vältel märgib järelevalveamet, et see oli ostja jaoks uus kohustus, kuna riik ei olnud vallale sellist kohustust seadnud.
Thus it cannot be as such presumed to be covered by the bridge value price.
Seega ei saa eeldada, et see oli sellisel kujul hõlmatud koondväärtuse hinnas.
However, in the absence of any supporting documentation as to the economic impact of this obligation, i.e. the possible loss for Haslemoen AS in not being able to lease out that building for one year, the Authority cannot accept any price reducing effect as such.
Siiski, kuna puuduvad selle kohustuse majanduslikku mõju, st võimalikku kahju ettevõttele Haslemoen AS toetavad dokumendid, kuna ta ei saa õppehoonet ühe aasta jooksul välja üürida, ei saa järelevalveasutus nõustuda, et sel on hinda alandav mõju.
The obligation concerned just one of the buildings and it was already taken into account in the price that it would be difficult to lease out all the properties immediately as there was already a surplus of available lease objects in the area.
Kohustus oli seotud vaid ühe hoonega ning hinnas oli juba arvestatud sellega, et kogu kinnisvara kohene väljaüürimine oleks keeruline, kuna sellel territooriumil oli juba ülemäära palju rendiobjekte saadaval.
This was emphasised by both value assessments.
Seda rõhutati mõlemas väärtuse hindamises.
Moreover, the municipality would cover the share of fixed costs and heating for the building for the same period.
Lisaks kataks vald osa hoone püsi- ja küttekuludest samal perioodil.
Finally, the Authority refers to its assessment above in which it has accepted that the municipality gave the same quantity rebate to Haslemoen AS as it obtained itself for acquiring the whole Inner Camp.
Lõpuks osutab järelevalveamet oma eespool esitatud hindamisele, kus ta nõustus, et vald tegi sama suure allahindluse ettevõttele Haslemoen AS, nagu vald ise sai kogu siselaagri omandamise eest.
Moreover, the Authority did not add any specific value for the four garages sold to Haslemoen AS that were valued together with other buildings at the Inner Camp, which Haslemoen AS did not buy.
Peale selle ei lisanud järelevalveamet konkreetset väärtust nelja garaaži eest, mis müüdi ettevõttele Haslemoen AS ja mida hinnati koos teiste hoonetega siselaagris, mida ettevõte Haslemoen AS ei ostnud.
Thus, the Authority assumes that any possible loss from not being able to lease out the school for a year after the acquisitions should be considered neutralised by these for Haslemoen AS favourable considerations.
Seega oletab järelevalveamet, et võimaliku kahju, mis on tingitud sellest, et kooli ei saa välja üürida ühe aasta jooksul alates soetamisest, neutraliseerivad ettevõtet Haslemoen AS soosivad kaalutlused.
Conclusion on the market investor principle
Järeldused turumajandusliku investori põhimõtte kohta
In light of the above, the Authority concludes that the sale of the 29 buildings to Haslemoen AS was not carried out in accordance with the market investor principle.
Eelöeldut arvesse võttes järeldab järelevalveamet, et 29 hoone müük ettevõttele Haslemoen AS ei toimunud kooskõlas turumajandusliku investori põhimõttega.
The buildings were sold at a price below market value that entailed state aid of NOK 4863712.
Hooned müüdi hinnaga, mis on turuväärtusest väiksem ja mis sisaldas riigiabi 4863712 Norra krooni.
Consequently, in the following, the Authority will assess whether the sale of the buildings fulfils the additional criteria under Article 61(1) EEA.
Seepärast hindab järelevalveamet järgnevalt seda, kas hoonete müük vastab täiendavatele kriteeriumidele EMP artikli 61 lõike 1 kohaselt.
State resources and selective advantage
Riigi ressursid ja valikuline eelis
In order to qualify as state aid, the measure must be granted by the state or through state resources.
Riigiabina liigitamiseks peab meetme andjaks olema riik või tuleb see anda riigi ressurssidest.
The concept embraces all levels of the state, including municipalities.
See põhimõte käsitleb kõiki riiklikke tasandeid, sh valdu.
As demonstrated above, state resources were involved because Våler Municipality sold the 29 buildings in the Inner Camp at a price substantially below the market price.
Nagu eespool näidatud, olid riigi ressursid asjaga seotud, kuna Våleri vald müüs siselaagri 29 hoonet hinna eest, mis on turuväärtusest oluliselt väiksem.
The transaction provided Haslemoen AS with a selective advantage as it was received on the basis of a contract according to which it was the only beneficiary.
Tehing andis ettevõttele Haslemoen AS valikulise eelise, kuna see saadi lepingu alusel, mille kohaselt ta oli ainus hüvitisesaaja.
Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Contracting Parties
Konkurentsi moonutamine ja mõju lepinguosalistevahelisele kaubavahetusele
It follows from settled case law [27] for the purpose of these provisions the mere fact that aid strengthens a firm’s position compared with that of other firms, which are competitors in intra-EEA trade, entails that intra-EEA trade is affected.
Väljakujunenud kohtupraktikast [27] selgub nimetatud sätetega seoses pelk asjaolu, et abi tugevdab ettevõtte positsiooni võrreldes teiste ettevõtetega, kes on konkurendid EMP-siseses kaubavahetuses, mille tõttu avaldab see mõju EMP-sisesele kaubavahetusele.
The Authority recalls that the buildings in questions were valued and bought on the basis of the investor value, i.e. the value based on future rental income.
Järelevalveamet tuletab meelde, et kõnealused hooned hinnati ja osteti vastavalt väärtusele investori joaks, st tulevase renditulu väärtuse alusel.
Investing in real property for the purposes of leasing out to businesses must as such be considered as an EEA wide economic activity, which in Norway takes place with market participants from many EEA States.
Kinnisvarasse investeerimine selle ettevõtetele väljaüürimise eesmärgil on EMP-sisene majandustegevus, mis toimub Norras paljudest EMP-riikidest pärit turuosalistega.
As for the specific aid recipient, according to the national company register in Norway [28], Haslemoen AS is involved in activities concerning hotels, motels and restaurants [29].
Seoses konkreetse abisaajaga: ettevõte Haslemoen AS tegutseb Norra riikliku äriregistri [28] andmetel hotellide, motellide ja restoranide valdkonnas [29].
It operates Haslemoen Hotell at the Inner Camp and rents out buildings for an asylum centre to the Norwegian state.
Ettevõte peab siselaagris hotelli Haslemoen Hotell ja üürib välja hooneid Norra riigile varjupaigakeskuse jaoks.
For all these activities Haslemoen AS must be considered to be in competition with similar undertakings in Norway and also in other EEA States.
Kõigi nimetatud valdkondade puhul tuleb ettevõtet Haslemoen AS pidada konkureerivaks teiste sarnaste ettevõtetega Norras ja samuti teistes EMP riikides.
The measure therefore has the effect of distorting competition and affecting trade between Contracting Parties.
Seetõttu on meetmel konkurentsi moonutav mõju ja see mõjutab lepinguosaliste vahelist kaubavahetust.
Conclusion on the presence of state aid
Järeldus riigiabi olemasolu kohta
In light of the findings above, the Authority concludes that state aid in the amount of NOK 4863713 was involved in the sale of the 29 buildings to Haslemoen AS.
Eespool nimetatud leide arvesse võttes järeldab järelevalveamet, et 29 hoone müük ettevõttele Haslemoen AS sisaldas riigiabi summas 4863713 Norra krooni.
Pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3, the EFTA Surveillance Authority shall be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant aid.
Vastavalt protokolli nr 3 I osa artikli 1 lõikele 3 tuleb EFTA järelevalveametit teavitada piisava aja jooksul, et võimaldada järelevalveametil esitada märkuseid mis tahes abi andmise plaanide kohta.
The State concerned shall not put its proposed measures into effect until the procedure has resulted in a final decision.
Asjaomane riik ei tohi kavandatud meetmeid jõustada enne, kui menetluse käigus on jõutud lõplikule otsusele.
The Norwegian authorities did not notify to the Authority the sale of the 29 buildings by Våler Municipality to Haslemoen AS.
Norra ametiasutused ei teavitanud järelevalveametit 29 hoone müügist Våleri vallalt ettevõttele Haslemoen AS.
The Authority therefore concludes that the Norwegian authorities have not respected their obligations pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3.
Järelevalveamet teeb seetõttu järelduse, et Norra ametiasutused ei täitnud oma kohustust vastavalt protokolli nr 3 I osa artikli 1 lõikele 3.
The Norwegian authorities have not put forward any arguments that the state aid involved in the transaction could be considered as compatible state aid.
Norra ametiasutused ei ole esitanud väiteid selle kohta, et tehinguga hõlmatud riigiabi võiks pidada siseturuga kokkusobivaks riigiabiks.
Support measures caught by Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement are generally incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement, unless they qualify for a derogation under Article 61(2) or (3) of the EEA Agreement.
Abimeetmed, mis on sätestatud EMP lepingu artikli 61 lõikes 1 ei ole enamasti kokkusobivad EMP lepinguga, välja arvatud juhul, kui neid võib lugeda erandiks EMP lepingu artikli 61 lõigete 2 või 3 alusel.
The Authority therefore finds that the transaction under assessment cannot be justified under the state aid provisions of the EEA Agreement.
Seetõttu on järelevalveamet seisukohal, et hindamise aluseks olev tehing ei ole õigustatud EMP lepingu riigiabi sätete kohaselt.
As the aid at NOK 4863713 was granted to Haslemoen AS without being notified to the Authority, it constitutes unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Kuna ettevõttele Haslemoen AS anti 4863713 Norra krooni suurune abi, ilma et sellest oleks teavitatud järelevalveasutust, on tegu ebaseadusliku abiga järelevalve- ja kohtulepingu protokolli nr 3 II osa artikli 1 punkti f tähenduses.
It follows from Article 14 of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement that the Authority shall decide that unlawful aid which is incompatible with the state aid rules under the EEA Agreement must be recovered from the beneficiaries.
Järelevalve- ja kohtulepingu protokolli nr 3 II osa artiklis 14 on sätestatud, et järelevalveamet peab otsustama, kas ebaseaduslik abi, mis ei ole kokkusobiv riigiabi eeskirjadega EMP lepingu kohaselt, tuleb abisaajatelt tagasi nõuda.
The Authority is of the opinion that no general principles preclude repayment in the present case.
Järelevalveamet on seisukohal, et mitte ükski üldpõhimõte ei välista praegusel juhul tagasinõudmist.
According to settled case-law, abolishing unlawful aid by means of recovery is the logical consequence of a finding that the aid is not lawful.
Vastavalt väljakujunenud kohtupraktikale on ebeseadusliku abi kaotamine tagasinõudmise teel loogiline järeldus avastusele, et abi ei ole seaduslik.
Consequently, the recovery of state aid unlawfully granted, for the purpose of restoring the previously existing situation, cannot in principle be regarded as disproportionate to the objectives of the EEA Agreement in regard to state aid.
Seega ei saa ebaseaduslikult antud riigiabi tagasinõudmine eelnevalt kehtinud olukorra taastamise eesmärgil olla põhimõtteliselt ebaproportsionaalne EMP lepingu riigiabiga seotud eesmärkide suhtes.
By repaying the aid, the recipient forfeits the advantage which it had enjoyed over its competitors on the market, and the situation prior to payment of the aid is restored [30].
Sellest tulenevalt kaotab abisaaja abi tagastamisega eelise, mis tal oma konkurentide ees turul oli, ning abi andmisele eelnenud olukord on taastatud [30].