natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In this regard, the Commission notes that there are several indications that the state was actively involved in the shareholders' decision to inject additional capital in the beneficiary.
Sloveenia märkused ei lükka ümber eespool esitatud märkusi, mis näitavad avaliku sektori asutuste seotust meetme võtmisega või nende seotuse ebatõenäosust.
Although Slovenia has dismissed media reports pointing out the State's role in having to save Elan as ‘hearsay’ or ‘a result of an excessive simplification’, such reports demonstrate the public perception of the governments industrial policy approach at the time.
Väide, et valitsus ei olnud rekapitaliseerimisotsusega seotud, on paljasõnaline.
As further explained below, the perception that the Slovenian government pursued an active industrial policy approach at the time in question is indeed supported by the OECD's review of corporate governance in Slovenia, which also highlights that an action plan for corporate governance reform in Slovenia was only adopted by the government. nearly one year after measure 2 was put into place, namely in mid-2009 [19].
Asjaolu, et OECD ülevaates ei mainita konkreetselt DSUd, Zavarovalnica Triglavi ega Triglav Naložbet ning et selles räägitakse keskse koordineerimise puudumisest, ei muuda OECD ülevaates kujutatud üldpilti, mille kohaselt sekkus Sloveenia valitsus aktiivselt majandusse ja tegutses tööstuspoliitiliste eesmärkide saavutamise nimel.
Thus, in June 2008 when Elan's precarious situation was apparent to the outside world the media reported about the potential State support to Elan.
OECD ülevaates ja Sloveenia valitsuse dokumendis konkreetselt nimetamata äriühingute — Zavarovalnica Triglavi ja Triglav Naložbe — puhul on riigi valitsevat mõju käsitlev täpsem teave esitatud allpool.
A German sports magazine wrote on 6 June 2008 that according to rumours the government intended to inject EUR 5,7 million into Elan to compensate for the past bad winter season [20].
Samal ajal tuleb meeles pidada, et kõnealused äriühingud olid vähemusaktsionärid, kellele kuulus vaid 25 % Elani aktsiatest.
Also the Slovenian media discussed Elan's situation, pointing out the significance of State support to save jobs.
Lõppkokkuvõttes ei puutu teise, „strateegiliseks investeeringuks” peetud raskustes ettevõtte pankrottiminek käesoleva juhtumi hindamise puhul asjasse.
For instance the biggest commercial (independent) television PopTV reported on their website on 26 June 2008 that the management and the supervisory board of Elan were looking for the solution to the company's financial difficulties to come from the State, pointing out that if the State didn't help with a financial injection, more than 700 jobs were in danger [21].
Seda silmas pidades sedastatakse, et KADi 2008. aastal Elanisse tehtud kapitalisüst hõlmab riigi ressursse ja on seostatav Sloveeniaga.
As discussed in more detail below, the public authorities' involvement or the unlikelihood of their not being involved is most obvious in the case of Elan's biggest shareholder KAD (that controlled 57,61 % of Elan's shares at the time of the capital injection) and of DSU (then accounting for 17,34 % of Elan's shares).
Nagu on kirjeldatud eespool põhjenduses (12), juhib KAD PPSi ja tal on selles valitsev mõju.
In the context of an analysis of a possible privatisation of Elan (at the time known as Skimar d.o.o.), […] concluded that two of its owners, KAD and DSU, were 100 % government controlled and that consequently there was a probability that their decision to sell would be politically as well as economically motivated.
Õigupoolest hõlmas KADi nõukogu 134. koosolekul 10. juulil 2008. aastal kapitalisüstile antud nõusolek ka nõusolekut suurendada kapitali PPSi nimel [28].
The Commission verifies on the level of each shareholder whether it was controlled by the State and whether the funds used for the capital injection can be considered state resources.
Sama kehtib KADi nõukogu 135. koosolekul augustis 2008 vastu võetud otsuse kohta.
In addition, the Commission determines whether the decision to inject capital into Elan is imputable to the State.
Seepärast sedastatakse, et KAD-PPSi 2008. aastal Elanisse tehtud kapitalisüst hõlmab riigi ressursse ja on seostatav Sloveeniaga.
In this context, the Commission pays particular attention to the composition of the supervisory board of each shareholder and whether the supervisory board had to agree to the capital injection into Elan in 2008.
Komisjon märgib, et DSU kuulus meetme võtmise ajal 100 % otse riigi omandisse.
The Commission then examines additional elements indicating an involvement by the public authorities in the adoption of the measure or the unlikelihood of their not being involved
DSU nõukogus on kolm liiget, kellest kaks nimetab ametisse aktsionär, st Sloveenia (vt põhjendus (13)).
The Commission notes that Slovenia held 100 % of the shares in KAD, the majority shareholder of Elan at the time of granting.
Kapitalisüstide tegemise ajal nimetas ka kolmanda liikme riik.
The Slovenian government appointed all the members of the assembly of KAD as well as the supervisory board (see recital (11)).
Põhikirja kohaselt võtab nõukogu otsuseid vastu häälteenamusega ja peab järelevalvet DSU äritegevuse juhtimise üle.
According to KAD's articles of association, the latter has to consent to the conclusion of a transaction whose value exceeds 1 % of the share capital of KAD.
Tegelikult vaatas DSU nõukogu Elanisse tehtava kapitalisüsti kava läbi ja kiitis selle heaks oma erakorralisel koosolekul 11. juulil 2008 ning muutis oma otsust osaliselt kahel erakorralisel koosolekul 26. augustil 2008 ja 8. septembril 2008 [29].
The capital injection under assessment was qualified as such a transaction, and in fact, KAD's supervisory board discussed and agreed to the capital injection into Elan in its 134th meeting on 10 July 2008 and its 135th meeting in August 2008 [23].
Kuivõrd DSU kuulub Sloveeniale, võib eeldada, et Sloveenial on äriühingus valitsev mõju ning et põhimõtteliselt võib DSU vahendid lugeda riigi ressurssideks.
As Slovenia owns KAD, it can be assumed that it is in a position to control the company and that in principle, KAD's resources can be considered state resources.
Erinevalt Sloveenia arvamusest ei muuda kõnealust järeldust ka asjaolu, et kapitalisüsti jaoks kasutati dividendidest, intressidest ja muudest DSU tuludest saadud vahendeid, nagu on selgitatud põhjenduses (104).
Contrary to Slovenia's view, the fact that the funds used for the capital injection stem from dividends, interests and other revenues of KAD, does not change this conclusion.
Meetme 2 riigiga seostatavuse puhul tuleb arvesse võtta, et kõik kolm meetme võtmise ajal nõukogusse kuulunud liiget nimetas ametisse Sloveenia, DSU ainuaktsionär, ning et tegelikult oli tehingu jaoks vajalik nõukogu nõusolek.
Using dividends, interests or other revenues, which could instead have been paid to the State as controlling shareholder of the company, is a decrease of state resources and can therefore be considered the use of state resources [24].
Seoses teiste üldiste asjaoludega, mis viitavad avaliku sektori asutuste seotusele meetme võimaldamisega või nende seotuse ebatõenäosusele, leiab komisjon, et DSU ei oleks kapitali suurendanud ilma avaliku sektori asutuste mõjuta tema otsustusprotsessile.
Concerning the imputability of Measure 2, the Commission considers that KAD would not have injected the capital in the absence of the public authorities' influence on its decision making.
Seda silmas pidades sedastatakse, et DSU 2008. aastal Elanisse tehtud kapitalisüst hõlmab riigi ressursse ja on seostatav Sloveeniaga.
The strong State influence cannot only be derived from the fact that Slovenia was the sole shareholder of KAD at the time, that all members of KAD's supervisory board were appointed by Slovenia, and that the supervisory board actually had to agree to the transaction.
Zavarovalnica Triglav ei kuulu otse Sloveeniale.
An additional indicator of the State's close involvement in KAD's decision-making is the fact that representatives of the Slovenian government take part in all assembly and supervisory board meetings (see recital (45)).
Siiski märgib komisjon, et Sloveeniale kuulub kaudselt Zavarovalnica Triglavist kaks kolmandikku (vt põhjendus (14)).
The government's influence on the decision making of KAD (and of another state-controlled fund, the restitution fund SOD) for the purpose of pursuing industrial policy objectives is also highlighted in the OECD's review of Corporate Governance in Slovenia: ‘The two funds have provided the Government with a strong mechanism to influence the boards and management of privatised firms and, ultimately, to play an active role in determining ownership changes.
Selle enamusaktsionärid on pensioni- ja puudekindlustuse instituut ZIPS ja Sloveenia kahjukindlustusühing SOD.
In part this appears (at least initially) to have been motivated by a desire to manage the extent to which foreign firms gained control over important domestic firms and industries.
Mõlemad kuuluvad 100 % riigile.
The extent of direct and indirect ownership has allowed past governments to exercise a very significant, and sometimes opaque, role in influencing the operation of large sectors of Slovenia's commercial enterprises and in the market for corporate control [25].’
Ühegi aktsionäri osalus Zavarovalnica Triglavis ei ületa 1,8 %.
The Slovenian government's document ‘Structural Adjustments 2010 and 2011’ [26] further highlights the role that KAD and the state-controlled restitution fund SOD had played in serving Slovenia's industrial policy purposes, for instance in providing assistance to Elan.
Zavarovalnica Triglavi kaheksast nõukogu liikmest viis (sealhulgas äriühingu president ja asepresident) esindavad aktsionäre ja neid on ametisse nimetanud aktsionärid.
Under Heading 2.1.1.
Nagu kirjeldatud põhjenduses (14), on Zavarovalnica Triglavi enamusaktsionärid 100 % riigi omanduses olevad äriühingud.
‘Establishment of a public agency for governance of state-owned enterprises and the transformation of KAD and SOD’ the document states: ‘Restructuring means that KAD and SOD must be relieved of all strategic investments: … — bad investments that have become strategic because the state wishes to provide assistance to them in overcoming their difficulties (Mura, Elan).’
Seepärast on need viis nõukogu liiget ametisse nimetanud põhimõtteliselt riik ning nõukogu liikmed esindavad riigi huve.
The characterisation that KAD's investment in Elan had become strategic ‘because the state wishes to provide assistance’ to Elan is in sharp contrast with Slovenia's assertion that KAD was independent in its decision making (see recital (56)).
Komisjon märgib, et Elani aktsionäride koosolekul 28. augustil 2008 hääletas Zavarovalnica Triglavi juhatus kapitali suurendamise poolt, kuid tegi seda tingimusel, et tehingule annab heakskiidu nõukogu.
The government document goes on explaining that the transfer of bad strategic investments from the parastate directly to the state was a personnel-related task above all and that the PDP restructuring company, established by KAD and SOD, had been transferred directly to state ownership as the team could no longer be part of KAD and SOD [27].
Nõukogu nõustus kapitalisüstiga 4. septembril 2008 [31].
The Commission invited Slovenia to provide comments on the documents cited above.
Kuna Sloveeniale kuulus kaudselt kaks kolmandikku Zavarovalnica Triglavi aktsiatest, võib eeldada, et Sloveenial on äriühingus valitsev mõju ning et põhimõtteliselt võib Zavarovalnica Triglavi vahendid lugeda riigi ressurssideks.
Slovenia affirmed that there was no government decision regarding Elan's recapitalisation.
Tähelepanu tuleb pöörata asjaolule, et enamiku Zavarovalnica Triglavi nõukogu liikmetest, sealhulgas presidendi ja asepresidendi, nimetab ametisse riik ning et kapitalisüsti tegemiseks oli vajalik nõukogu nõusolek.
Slovenia pointed out that the OECD review, which describes how KAD and SOD have provided the government with a strong mechanism to influence the boards and management of privatised firms, did not mention DSU, Zavarovalnica Triglav and Triglav Naložbe and that the Slovenian government's document did not mention any direct or indirect state influence with respect to the assets held by Zavarovalnica Triglav or Triglav Naložbe.
Seoses teiste eespool käsitletud üldiste asjaoludega, mis viitavad selgelt avaliku sektori asutuste seotusele meetme võtmisega või nende seotuse ebatõenäosusele, loetakse meede vahetult seostatavaks Sloveeniaga.
Furthermore, Slovenia draws attention to a passage in the OECD review mentioning that ‘the lack of central coordination has created difficulties for effective management of the Government's ownership interests’.
Triglav Naložbe ei kuulu otse Sloveeniale.
With regard to the Slovenian government's document referring to bad investments that had become strategic, Slovenia points out that Mura, the second example of such investments cited in the document besides Elan, had been left to bankruptcy procedures in October 2009.
Meetme võtmise ajal kuulus Zavarovalnica Triglavile 80 % Triglav Naložbe aktsiatest.
The comments provided by Slovenia do not disprove the arguments set out above indicating the involvement by the public authorities in the adoption of the measure or the unlikelihood of their not being involved.
Zavarovalnica Triglavist kuulub enamus omakorda Sloveeniale (vt põhjendus (14)).
The statement that the government was not involved in the recapitalisation decision is a mere affirmation.
Seepärast kuulub Sloveeniale kaudselt üle 51 % Triglav Naložbe aktsiatest.
The fact that the OECD review does not specifically mention DSU, Zavarovalnica Triglav and Triglav Naložbe and that it speaks of a lack of central coordination does not alter the overall picture painted in the OECD review, namely that the Slovenian government was actively intervening in the economy and pursuing industrial policy purposes.
Ühegi teise aktsionäri osalus äriühingus ei ületa 0,67 %.
With regard to the companies not specifically mentioned in the OECD review and in the Slovenian government's document, Zavarovalnica Triglav and Triglav Naložbe, details of the control exercised by the State are provided below.
Nõukogu kolm liiget esindavad aktsionäride huve ja neid valivad nõukogusse aktsionärid.
At the same time it has to be kept in mind that these companies were minority shareholders that held only 25 % of Elan shares.
Kuna Triglav Naložbe enamusaktsionär on kaudselt riik, siis tuleb arvesse võtta, et on riigi otsustada, kes nimetatakse nõukogusse Sloveenia huve esindama.
Finally, with regard to the government's document, the fact that another company in difficulties considered a ‘strategic investment’ went into bankruptcy is irrelevant for the assessment of the present case.
Kapitalisüsti tegemiseks Elanisse oli vajalik Triglav Naložbe nõukogu nõusolek ning nõukogu andis selle oma 7. erakorralisel koosolekul 3. septembril 2008 [32].
In the light of the above, it is concluded that KAD's capital injection in 2008 into Elan consists of state resources and is imputable to Slovenia.
Kuna Sloveeniale kuulus kaudselt enamus Triglav Naložbe aktsiatest, võib eeldada, et Sloveenial on äriühingus valitsev mõju ning et põhimõtteliselt võib Triglav Naložbe vahendid lugeda riigi ressurssideks.
As described in recital (12), KAD is managing PPS and controls its shareholdings.
Erinevalt Sloveenia arvamusest ei muuda kõnealust järeldust ka asjaolu, et kapitalisüsti jaoks kasutati laenust saadud vahendeid, nagu selgitatud põhjenduses (104).
Therefore, the participation of KAD-PPS in the capital injection should be considered in the same light as KAD's participation.
Pidades meeles, et kõik Triglav Naložbe nõukogu liikmed määrab ametisse riik ning et kapitalisüsti tegemiseks oli vajalik nõukogu nõusolek, loetakse seoses teiste eespool käsitletud üldiste tingimustega, mis viitavad selgelt avaliku sektori asutuste seotusele meetme võimaldamisega või nende seotuse ebatõenäosusele, meede seostatavaks Sloveeniaga.
In fact, the consent of the supervisory board of KAD to the capital injection in its 134th meeting on 10 July 2008 also included the consent to inject capital on the behalf of PPS [28].
Kokkuvõte
The same is true for the decision taken during the 135th meeting of KAD's supervisory board in August 2008.
Juba Elani aktsionäride nõukogu koosseis ja asjaolu, et 2008. aastal oli kapitalisüsti tegemiseks vajalik nõukogu nõusolek, osutavad, et kõnealune meede on seostatav riigiga [33].
Therefore, it is concluded that KAD-PPS capital injection into Elan in 2008 consists of state resources and is imputable to Slovenia.
Nagu eespool näidatud, on komisjonil pealegi veenvaid tõendeid riigi tiheda seotuse kohta KAD — Elani kõige olulisema aktsionäri, kellele kuulus kapitalisüsti tegemise ajal 57,61 % kapitalist — ja DSU otsustusprotsessiga.
The Commission notes that DSU was 100 % directly state owned at the time of granting.
Need tõendid tulenevad OECD aruandest, […] aruandest, Sloveenia valitsuse avaldatud dokumentidest ja pressiteadetest
Its supervisory council consists of three members, two of which are appointed by the shareholder, i.e. Slovenia (see recital (13)).
Lisaks viitab riigi osalusele aktsionäride otsuses Elani viie aktsionäri tegevuse paralleelsus, sest on ebatõenäoline, et viis era- ja sõltumatut ettevõtjat oleksid nõustunud paigutama kapitali raskustes olevasse äriühingusse ühel ajal ja samadel tingimustel.
At the time of the capital injections, also the third member had been appointed by the State.
Seda silmas pidades sedastatakse, et meede 2 hõlmab riigi ressursse ja on seostatav Sloveeniaga.
According to the Articles of Association, the supervisory council adopts decisions by a majority of votes and it is supervising the management of DSU's business.
Järelikult tuleb kogu Elani kontserni lugeda 2008. aasta kapitali suurendamisest kasu saanuks samadel põhjustel kui meetme 1 puhul (vt põhjendused (87)–(90)).
In fact, DSU's supervisory council studied and approved the capital injection into Elan at an extraordinary session on 11 July 2008 and partially amended its decision at two extraordinary sessions on 26 August 2008 and 8 September 2008 [29].
Nagu eespool kirjeldatud, püüaks turuinvestor teenida oma varalt maksimaalselt kasumit (vt põhjendus (91)).
As Slovenia owns DSU, it can be assumed that it is in a position to control the company and that in principle, DSU's resources can be considered state resources.
Sellega seoses märgib komisjon kõigepealt, et Elan oli meetme 2 võtmise ajal päästmise ja ümberkorraldamise suuniste tähendustes raskustes (vt põhjendus (74)).
Contrary to Slovenia's view, the fact that the funds used for the capital injection stem from dividends, interests and other revenues of DSU, does not change this conclusion, as explained in recital (104).
Lisaks ohustas Elanit Sloveenia väitel 2008. aasta alguses maksejõuetus ning tal oli [12,6–15 miljoni] euro ulatuses puudu likviidseid vahendeid.
Concerning the imputability of Measure 2, it has to be taken into account that all three members of the supervisory council at the time of granting were appointed by Slovenia, the sole shareholder of DSU, and that the supervisory council actually had to agree to the transaction.
Sloveenia väidab, et Elani aktsionärid tegid aktsiakapitali suurendamise otsuse Elani ja välisnõustaja koostatud mitme dokumendi alusel, mis näitab, et otsus oli põhjendatud.
As set out above, the influence of political considerations on DSU's decision making is acknowledged in […] valuation report of 22 December 2006 [30].
Ehkki Elan koostas tõepoolest kontserni pikaajalise kava 2008–2012, tuleb arvesse võtta, et kõnealune kava nägi ette edasise piisava tulu teenimiseks aktsiakapitali suurendamise 25 miljoni euro võrra ning Elani aktsionärid pidasid kõnealust pikaajalist kava sellises summas kapitalisüsti tegemiseks ebapiisavaks.
Also the fact that together with KAD in 2010 DSU transferred its Elan shares to the PDP holding company has to be seen in the light of the explanations provided above concerning the question of how the Slovenian government decided to deal with parastate investments that had become strategic because the state wished to provide assistance to them in overcoming their difficulties.
Augustis 2008 vastu võetud tervendamiskava hõlmas peamiselt prognoose ega sisaldanud teavet kapitali kavandatava suurendamise kohta.
In connection with the other over-arching circumstances speaking in favour of the public authorities' involvement in the adoption of the measure or the unlikelihood of their not being involved, the Commission considers that DSU would not have injected the capital in the absence of the public authorities' influence on its decision making.
Nii pikaajaline kava 2008–2012 kui ka tervendamiskava koostati Elanis ilma välisnõustajat kaasamata.
Therefore, it is concluded that the DSU capital injection in 2008 into Elan consists of state resources and is imputable to Slovenia.
Samuti esitas Sloveenia diskonteeritud rahavoogude meetodil koostatud Elani omakapitali väärtuse hinnangu.
Zavarovalnica Triglav is not directly owned by Slovenia.
[…] juunis 2008 koostatud omakapitali väärtuse hinnangu kohaselt oli Elani turuväärtus 31. detsembri 2007. aasta seisuga endiselt positiivne, ulatudes [35–40] miljoni euroni.
The Commission observes, however, that Slovenia indirectly owns two third of Zavarovalnica Triglav (see recital (14)).
Kuid nagu eespool kirjeldatud (vt põhjendused (70)–(74)), halvenes Elani olukord 2008. aasta jooksul järsult.
Its majority shareholders are ZIPZ, the Pension and Disability Insurance Institute and SOD, the Slovenian indemnity corporation.
Nende sündmuste taustal tuleb eespool osutatud omakapitali väärtuse hinnangut lugeda aegunuks 28. augusti 2008. aasta seisuga, mil Elani aktsionärid otsustasid kapitalisüsti kasuks, ning selle abil ei saa näidata, et Elani aktsionärid tegutsesid heaperemehelike turuinvestoritena — võttes eelkõige arvesse teise kapitalisüsti asjaolusid.
Both are 100 % state owned.
Nagu kirjeldatud põhjenduses (32), kehtestasid aktsionärid aktsiakapitali suurendamise tingimuseks, et pangad nõustuvad enne seda Elani olemasolevaid laene ajatama.
None of the other shareholders has a share higher than 1,8 % in Zavarovalnica Triglav.
Ehkki sellist kokkulepet ei õnnestunud enne aktsiakapital suurendamist saavutada, jätkasid Elani aktsionärid kapitalisüstiga, sest vastasel juhul oleks Elan pankrotti läinud.
Five of the eight members of the supervisory board of Zavarovalnica Triglav, including its president and vice-president, represent the shareholders and are appointed by them.
Kui pangad oleksid nõustunud laene ajatama enne kapitali suurendamist, oleks see näidanud, et nad usuvad Elani elujõulisuse taastumisse.
As described in recital (14), the majority shareholders of Zavarovalnica Triglav are 100 % state owned companies.
Kuid nii ei juhtunud ja vastupidi — üks pank taotles Elani olemasolevate võlgade sissenõudmiseks isegi kohtumäärust.
Therefore, it is in principle the State who appoints these five members of the supervisory board and the supervisory board members represent the State's interest.
Panga hoiakut võib pidada märgiks, et turul ei usutud enam Elani elujõulisuse taastumisse.
The Commission notes that it was the management board of Zavarovalnica Triglav which voted for the capital increase in Elan's general assembly on 28 August 2008, but it did so under the condition that the supervisory board would give its consent to the transaction.
Veelgi enam, tuleb arvesse võtta, et juba 2007. aastal olid aktsionärid paigutanud Elanisse 10,225 miljonit eurot, kuid tulemusteta.
In fact, the supervisory board agreed to the capital injection on 4 September 2008 [31].
Väärib märkimist, et kuigi 2007. aasta kapitalisüst tugines niinimetatud strateegilisel arengukaval, mille kohaselt oli Elan palunud esmalt 20,2 miljoni euro investeerimist, ei saa 2008. aastal tehtud teist kapitalisüsti summas 10 miljonit eurot lugeda algse strateegilise arengukava kohaselt investeeringu teiseks osaks.