natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In light of the above, the Commission takes the view that no private lender would have agreed to grant EUR 100 million and EUR 75 million respectively to [the parent company of the Duferco Group at the time] and to SIF under the conditions agreed to by FSIH.
Komisia sa preto domnieva, že spoločnosť SIF nespĺňala podmienky oprávnenosti stanovené v oznámení z roku 2009 a že pomoc nemôže byť považovaná za zlučiteľnú s vnútorným trhom.
FSIH therefore conferred an economic advantage on the two beneficiaries of the loans by not acting as a private lender, which places the beneficiaries in a more favourable situation than their competitors.
Napokon usmernenia Spoločenstva o štátnej pomoci na záchranu a reštrukturalizáciu firiem v ťažkostiach [62] platné do 30. júla 2014 potvrdzujú v bode 18 vylúčenie oceliarstva zo svojej pôsobnosti.
Estimate of the amount of aid
Na základe uvedených skutočností Komisia dospela k záveru, že šesť skúmaných opatrení pomoci je nezlučiteľných s vnútorným trhom.
The amount of aid results from the difference between the rates actually applied (1,99 %) and the rates under application of the 2008 Reference Rate Communication, i.e. 3,502 % (12-month Euribor + 220 basis points) for [the parent company of the Duferco Group at the time] and 4,302 % (12-month Euribor + 400 basis points) for SIF, applied to the period from the day the loans were granted to the day they were repaid early.
VYMÁHANIE POMOCI NEZLUČITEĽNEJ S VNÚTORNÝM TRHOM
Thus, the loan to [the parent company of the Duferco Group at the time] was signed on 4 September 2009 for an amount of EUR 30 million, a duration of six years in principle and effective rate of 2,04 % at the time of disbursement.
Podľa ustanovení ZFEÚ a ustálenej judikatúry Súdneho dvora EÚ má Komisia právomoc rozhodnúť, že príslušný štát musí zrušiť alebo upraviť pomoc, ak dospela k záveru, že táto pomoc je nezlučiteľná s vnútorným trhom [63].
The amount was then increased by EUR 70 million with an effective rate of 1,99 % at the time of disbursement.
Súdny dvor zároveň opakovane rozhodol, že povinnosť zrušiť pomoc nezlučiteľnú s vnútorným trhom, ktorú Komisia uložila svojím rozhodnutím členskému štátu, slúži na obnovenie predtým existujúcej situácie [64].
The early repayment was made in July 2011.
Súdny dvor v tejto súvislosti rozhodol, že sa tento cieľ dosiahne vtedy, keď príjemca vráti sumy, ktoré mu boli poskytnuté ako neoprávnenú pomoc, čím príde o výhodu, ktorú mal na trhu oproti svojim konkurentom, a keď sa obnoví situácia, ktorá predchádzala vyplateniu pomoci [65].
The amount of the loan to SIF was EUR 75 million, released in tranches of EUR 20 million (September 2009) and EUR 55 million (December 2009) with an effective interest rate of 1,99 % for both tranches.
Podľa článku 16 ods. 1 nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 2015/1589 [66]: „Keď sa prijmú záporné rozhodnutia v prípadoch neoprávnenej pomoci, Komisia rozhodne, že dotknutý členský štát prijme všetky potrebné opatrenia, aby vymohol pomoc od príjemcu […]“.
Early repayment was agreed by tranches of principal and interest to be paid in June 2011, then in 2012 and 2013.
V dôsledku toho, keďže sa predmetné opatrenia uskutočňovali v rozpore s článkom 108 ZFEÚ a musia sa považovať za nezlučiteľnú a neoprávnenú pomoc, je potrebné ich zrušiť s cieľom obnoviť situáciu, ktorá existovala na trhu pred ich poskytnutím.
On the basis of a simplified discounting calculation, by way of illustration, the amount of aid is therefore approximately EUR 2,08 million for the loan to [the parent company of the Duferco Group at the time] and EUR 10,41 million for the loan to SIF [51].
V tomto konkrétnom prípade bola pomoc poskytnutá týmto podnikom: DII (opatrenie 1), [spoločnosť, ktorá v tom čase ovládala DPH] (opatrenie 2), DSIH (opatrenie 3), [spoločnosť, ktorá bola na čele skupiny Duferco v tom čase], ktorá sa stala spoločnosťou […], (opatrenie 4), SIF (opatrenie 5) a DLP (opatrenie 6), ktoré boli všetky dcérskymi spoločnosťami skupiny Duferco v rôznych krajinách.
Measure 6
Tieto spoločnosti alebo ich právni nástupcovia musia vrátiť neoprávnene prijatú pomoc.
A transaction is deemed to have complied with the market economy investor principle if it can be proven that was made pari passu between public and private investors.
Vrátenie pomoci musí zahŕňať obdobie, počas ktorého bola príjemcom poskytnutá výhoda, teda od okamihu sprístupnenia pomoci každému príjemcovi do skutočného vrátenia pomoci vzhľadom na kritériá na určenie hospodárskej výhody a na zásady výpočtu uvedené v oddieloch 7.1.4.1 až 7.1.4.5.
Belgium argues that FSIH's stake in the capital is pari passu with that of DII because the invested amounts are practically identical, DLP did not belong to the Duferco Group at the time of FSIH's investment and the purpose of these investments was to buy shares belonging to SIF and not to the Duferco Group.
Pri uplatňovaní povinnosti lojálnej spolupráce, ktorá prináleží Belgicku v rámci konania o vymáhaní pomoci, výška pomoci poskytnutej [spoločnosti, ktorá bola na čele skupiny Duferco v tom čase], ktorá sa stala spoločnosťou […], a spoločnosti SIF sa bude musieť presnejšie stanoviť počas konania na základe skutočností, ktoré budú predložené Belgickom, a najmä s ohľadom na pomoc vo forme pôžičiek, na skutočné termíny platieb alebo splátok, ako aj na akúkoľvek iné relevantné okolnosti, ktoré Belgicko uvedie.
[…] confirms these observations and adds that DII did not possess any financial document other than those presented by Belgium with a view to examining the business case for the investments.
Vo všetkých prípadoch sumy, ktoré sa majú vymáhať, zahŕňajú úroky až do dátumu skutočného vrátenia pomoci.
The Commission takes the view that, like DSIH (Measure 3), DLP is merely a vehicle used by the interested parties, FSIH and DII, to give a pari passu appearance to Duferco's takeover of assets that already belonged to it in part.
ZÁVER
DLP was set up in March 2011 by FSIH and DII as an ad hoc vehicle to accommodate Duferco's Belgian assets.
Komisia konštatuje, že Belgicko neoprávnene vykonalo dotknuté opatrenia pomoci v rozpore s článkom 108 ods. 3 ZFEÚ.
This concerns mainly assets resulting from the dismantling of SIF (of which Duferco held 50 % at the time) and the assets held jointly with FSIH through DSIH.
Komisia sa domnieva, že všetky skúmané opatrenia predstavujú štátnu pomoc nezlučiteľnú s vnútorným trhom,
Although the shell company DLP was formally set up outside the Duferco Group, the Commission takes the view that the simultaneity and the series of transfers of stakes between the different subsidiaries of the Duferco Group between June and July 2011 [52] show that DLP had depended on Duferco since it was established.
PRIJALA TOTO ROZHODNUTIE:
Moreover, and more fundamentally, the Commission notes that the asset situation of the Duferco Group and the underlying risks hardly changed at all following the measure under investigation.
Článok 1
Duferco holds through DLP (i) 50,3 % of the steel assets it already held previously at 50 % through SIF and (ii) 50,3 % of the diversification assets it already held previously at 50 % through DSIH.
Tieto opatrenia neoprávnene zavedené Belgickom v rozpore s článkom 108 ods. 3 Zmluvy o fungovaní Európskej únie predstavujú štátnu pomoc nezlučiteľnú s vnútorným trhom:
Conversely, the asset situation of FSIH evolved significantly following the measure under investigation.
predaj podielu v spoločnosti Duferco US Investment Corporation v prospech spoločnosti Duferco Industrial Investment za sumu vo výške 11581700 EUR;
FSIH acquired 49,7 % of substantial steel-industry assets located in La Louvière and Trebos which had not previously belonged to it.
predaj podielu v spoločnosti Duferco Participations Holding Limited v prospech [spoločnosti, ktorá v tom čase ovládala DPH] za sumu vo výške 20362464 EUR;
In terms of financial commitments, this situation for the Duferco Group can be reflected as follows:
majetková účasť v spoločnosti Duferco Salvage Investments Holding v jej prospech za sumu [65 – 72 miliónov] EUR;
EUR […] million paid out to buy out certain steel-industry assets from SIF via DLP,
pôžička v prospech [spoločnosti, ktorá bola na čele skupiny Duferco v tom čase] v zásade vo výške 2082723 EUR, pokiaľ bola úroková miera uplatnená na pôžičku nižšia ako 3,502 %;
EUR […] million received for the sale of the same assets by SIF, which was then a 50 % subsidiary of Duferco,
pôžička v prospech spoločnosti Steel Invest & Finance v zásade vo výške 10413639 EUR, pokiaľ bola úroková miera uplatnená na pôžičku nižšia ako 4,302 %;
EUR […] million of debt towards DSIH through DLP for the purchase of Duferco Diversification,
majetková účasť v spoločnosti Duferco Long Products v jej prospech vo výške 100000000 EUR.
EUR […] million in claims on DLP through DSIH for the sale of Duferco Diversification.
Článok 2
The net financial contribution of the Duferco Group for its acquisition of a 50,3 % stake in the capital of DLP was EUR […] million.
Belgicko je povinné vymôcť od priamych príjemcov alebo ich právnych nástupcov nezlučiteľnú pomoc poskytnutú podľa článku 1.
This amount is out of proportion with the EUR 99,7 million [53] agreed by FSIH to become a 49,7 % shareholder in DLP.
Sumy, ktoré sa majú vrátiť, musia zahŕňať úroky plynúce odo dňa, keď boli poskytnuté príjemcom, až do ich skutočného vrátenia.
Under these conditions it cannot be argued that this investment was pari passu.
Úroky sa vypočítajú na zostavenom základe v súlade s kapitolou V nariadenia Komisie (ES) č. 794/2004 [67].
The Commission sets out the reasons, beyond the non-pari passu nature of the transaction, why it concluded that the transaction did not comply with the market economy investor principle.
Článok 3
These reasons relate to how FSIH evaluated its stake in the capital of DLP.
Vrátenie pomoci uvedenej v článku 1 sa uskutoční okamžite a účinne.
Before going into the detail of these evaluations, the Commission refutes an objection made by […].
Belgicko zabezpečí, aby sa toto rozhodnutie vykonalo do štyroch mesiacov od dátumu jeho oznámenia.
According to […], the fact that FSIH did not have access to other documents than DII (private investor) at the time is enough to prove the prudent nature of FSIH's investment.
Článok 4
For the reasons explained in recital 329, the transaction under investigation was financially almost neutral for the Duferco Group.
Do dvoch mesiacov od oznámenia tohto rozhodnutia Belgicko predloží Komisii tieto informácie:
Therefore the Group did not have any incentive to produce detailed studies and reports: the price of the assets bought by DLP had only a small impact on its cash flow.
celkovú výšku (istinu a úroky), ktorú má každý príjemca vrátiť;
This was not the case for FSIH, which had to pay 49,7 % of the price set for these assets.
podrobný opis opatrení, ktoré sa už prijali a ktoré sa plánujú prijať na dosiahnutie súladu s týmto rozhodnutím;
Consequently, it was for FSIH and not Duferco to make every possible effort to evaluate the assets at their fair value.
dokumenty preukazujúce, že sa príjemcom nariadilo vrátenie pomoci.
The fact that Duferco did not have access to documents other than those produced by Belgium does not, in any case, prove that FSIH behaved as a private investor in a market economy.
Belgicko bude informovať Komisiu o pokroku dosiahnutom v súvislosti s vnútroštátnymi opatreniami, ktoré sa prijali na vykonanie tohto rozhodnutia, až do úplného vrátenia pomoci uvedenej v článku 1.
With regard to the content of these evaluations, the Commission points out that four items had to be valued: (i) the shares in DLLPL; (ii) the shares in Duferco Trebos; (iii) the stocks bought from Duferco La Louvière Sales; and (iv) the project justifying an investment of EUR [30-40] million in DLLPL.
Na požiadanie Komisie bezodkladne poskytne všetky informácie o opatreniach, ktoré sa už prijali a ktoré sa plánujú prijať na dosiahnutie súladu s týmto rozhodnutím.
The Commission takes the view that the Galtier report of May 2011, submitted by Belgium, does not constitute a thorough valuation exercise for DLLPL.
Takisto poskytne podrobné informácie o sumách pomoci a úrokoch, ktoré už príjemcovia vrátili.
It merely refers to an estimate of the fair value of tangible assets at the La Louvière site and does not deal with any liabilities or any business plan.
Článok 5
However, the expert Galtier had informed the Commission, through Belgium, that it had based its estimate on a business plan in due form.
Toto rozhodnutie je určené Belgickému kráľovstvu.
The summary version of this business plan, provided by Belgium [54], is a short document that does not contain any date or refer to any assumptions.
V Bruseli 20. januára 2016
The Commission did not receive the full version of the business plan, if it ever existed.
Za Komisiu
Belgium also put forward the same argument concerning the purchase price of the shares in Duferco Trebos, i.e. that the document ‘Value in use of the tangible and intangible assets of Trebos’ of May 2011 is actually a combination of studies and reports that includes a two-page preliminary business plan drawn up by Duferco [55].
členka Komisie
The completion date of this document is not specified.
Od 1. decembra 2009 sa články 87 a 88 Zmluvy o ES stali článkami 107 a 108 Zmluvy o fungovaní Európskej únie (ďalej len „ZFEÚ“).
The objective of the 2011 report was to evaluate the assets' value in use and to identify the value of customers in the business assets.
Obidva súbory ustanovení sú v podstate totožné.
The accounts were not checked and the company was not audited.
Na účely tohto rozhodnutia sa prípadnými odkazmi na články 107 a 108 ZFEÚ rozumejú odkazy na články 87 a 88 Zmluvy o ES.
No overall valuation of Duferco Trebos as a whole was provided.
Zmluvou o fungovaní Európskej únie sa takisto zaviedli niektoré zmeny v terminológii, ako napríklad nahradenie slova „Spoločenstvo“ slovom „Únia“, spojenia „spoločný trh“ spojením „vnútorný trh“ a spojenia „Súd prvého stupňa“ slovom „Všeobecný súd“.
Regarding these two acquisitions, Belgium also acknowledges that ‘the parties did not deem it necessary to produce a business plan in due form.
V tomto rozhodnutí sa používa terminológia ZFEÚ.
FSIH knew perfectly well what it was acquiring.’
Ú. v. EÚ C 120, 23.4.2014, s. 51.
The Commission considers knowledge of a company to be useful but insufficient for an investor whose decision to invest depends on expected future profitability.
Ďalej Komisia odkazuje na „Belgicko“ namiesto „Valónsky región“ (ak kontext nevyžaduje inak), keďže korešpondencia sa začala posielať členskému štátu, ktorý je adresátom tohto rozhodnutia.
With regard to the evaluation of the stocks of Duferco La Louvière Sales, a company controlled by SIF, Belgium provided a document that it believes supports the market value of the stocks being higher than their book value, which was adopted to set the sale price.
Pozri poznámku pod čiarou č. 2.
Again, the Commission notes that the completion date of this document is not indicated.
Rozhodnutie Komisie z 25. novembra 1997 vo veci N 680/97, Belgicko – Finančný podiel Valónskeho regiónu v podniku „Duferco Belgium SA“.
Lastly, with regard to the investment of EUR [30-40] million in DLLPL, the Commission had, in its opening decision, asked Belgium to produce all the studies and business plans concerning this investment.
Rozhodnutie Komisie z 26. mája 1999 vo veci N246/99, Belgicko – Finančná účasť belgických verejných orgánov v prospech podniku HUGB (ESUO).
Belgium confirmed that, ultimately, a single business plan had justified the investment of EUR [30-40] million; the other plans referred to had become irrelevant as they concerned other projects that were not adopted.
Ú. v. ES C 95, 19.4.2002, s. 2.
Belgium therefore provided the Commission with an undated, one-page plan with a table of EBITDA up to 2016 with no explanation or assumption to support the numbers presented.
Rozhodnutie Komisie č. 2496/96/ESUO z 18. decembra 1996, ktorým sa stanovujú pravidlá Spoločenstva pre štátnu pomoc oceliarskemu priemyslu (Ú. v. ES L 338, 28.12.1996, s. 42).
In the Commission's view, the other documents relied on by Belgium do not make up for this document's shortcomings.
Rozhodnutie Komisie č. 2005/137/ES z 15. októbra 2003 týkajúce sa finančného podielu valónskeho regiónu v podniku Carsid, a. s.
The document entitled ‘A plan for the future of the steel industry in La Louvière’ from February 2011 details the strategy of continuing activities involving long products and flat products.
(Ú. v. EÚ L 47, 18.2.2005, s. 28).
One page is devoted to the development of DLLPL over the previous five years.
Dôverné informácie.
The document ‘Long Products Marketing Plan 2011-2013’ is limited to a study of the relevant sector.
Duferco La Louvière Sales je spoločnosť ovládaná spoločnosťou SIF.
The Commission notes that DLP allowed FSIH to again support steel activity in Wallonia without any justification by an economic analysis in line with the market economy investor principle.
Ú. v. EÚ C 14, 19.1.2008, s. 2.
It follows from the above that the investment cannot be considered pari passu and in line with the market economy investor principle.
Ú. v. EÚ C 83, 7.4.2009, s. 1.
The amount of aid received by DLP is therefore the amount of the capital increase, i.e. EUR 100 million.
Rozsudok Súdneho dvora zo 16. mája 2002, Francúzsko/Komisia, C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, bod 24.
General conclusion on the economic advantage criterion
Rozsudok Súdu prvého stupňa zo 4. apríla 2001, Regione Friuli Venezia Giulia/Komisia, T-288/97, ECLI:EU:T:2001:115, bod 41.
After having analysed each measure individually, the Commission took the view that it was necessary to carry out a more general analysis of FSIH's investment strategy since it was set up.
Rozsudok Súdneho dvora zo 17. septembra 1980, Philip Morris Holland BV/Komisia, 730/79, ECLI:EU:C:1980:209, body 11 a 12.
It considers that these measures are inextricably linked to each other and that they work towards a single objective: to support and sustain the Duferco Group's activities in Wallonia, through indirect investments in the Group's offshore subsidiaries in order to circumvent the rules prohibiting aid to the steel sector in the EU.
Rozsudok Súdneho dvora z 11. júla 1996, SFEI a i./La Poste, C-39/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, bod 60.
The beneficiaries of FSIH's interventions were Duferco's parent company or subsidiaries of the group in the United States (Measure 1), […] (Measure 2), Ireland (Measure 3), […] (Measure 4) and […] (Measures 5 and 6) to finance projects that were carried out in Wallonia, in the Walloon subsidiaries of the group active in the steel sector, then in site decontamination, while the group gradually ceased its steel activities in Wallonia.
Rozsudok Súdneho dvora z 5. júna 2012, Komisia/EDF, C-124/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2012:318, bod 90.
This analysis is supported by the simultaneity of or short period of time between certain events.
Pripomienky […] z 23. júna 2014, bod 24.
Duferco has been operating in Belgium since 1997, when it took over Forges de Clabecq, which were in financial straits, with support from the Walloon Region and the backing of the Commission (investment of EUR 8,75 million and loan of EUR 13,75 million) [56].
Poznámka pod čiarou č. 2 pripomienok Belgicka k rozhodnutiu o začatí konania z 11. decembra 2013.
The Commission notes that this takeover followed the negative decision by the Commission regarding Forges de Clabecq [57]: the Belgian State's attempt to rescue the same steelworks was judged incompatible with the common market in December 1996.
Rozsudok Všeobecného súdu z 28. februára 2012, Land Burgenland/Komisia, T-268/08 a T-281/08, ECLI:EU:T:2012:90, bod 72.
The company was therefore declared bankrupt in January 1997.
Pripomienky Belgicka z 11. decembra 2013, bod 32.
There followed a series of takeovers of Walloon steel sites by the Duferco Group, still with the financial support of the Walloon Region through SOGEPA, then FSIH from 2003.
Rozsudok Súdneho dvora z 5. júna 2012, Komisia/EDF, C-124/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2012:318, body 83 až 85.
In 1999, Duferco acquired Usines Gustave Boël in La Louvière from Hoogovens, with support from the Walloon Region (conversion of a claim of EUR 12,5 million into 25 % of the capital and a loan of EUR 25,3 million) [58].
Pripomienky […], bod 42, s. 12.
Then, following the announcement by the Chairman of the Usinor-Sacilor group in February 2001 that he intended to close down Cockerill Sambre's hot-rolling line in Charleroi, talks were entered into between Usinor-Cockerill Sambre, the Duferco Group and SOGEPA primarily with a view to setting up a joint venture to produce slabs using Cockerill Sambre's existing mill in Charleroi together with the plant owned by Duferco Clabecq.
Žiadosť o informácie z 29. novembra 2011, 29. júna 2012 a 27. januára 2015.
In 2002, Duferco took over the hot-phase site in Charleroi, which became Carsid, in cooperation with Usinor, again with support from the Walloon Region (SOGEPA's stake in Carsid's capital was EUR 20 million, reduced to EUR 9 million after the decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 6(5) of Decision No 2496/96/ECSC).
Odpoveď Belgicka zo 4. júna 2013.
The Commission notes that FSIH was created in March 2003, i.e. during the Commission's investigations following the adoption of the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure on 3 April 2002 on the financial participation by the Walloon Region in the company Carsid.
Odpoveď Belgicka z 28. septembra 2012.
This procedure was completed on 15 October 2003 [59] with a negative decision from the Commission on the grounds that an investment in a new company could not be considered pari passu where only the public shareholder bears a new risk, with the private shareholder only transferring a business activity or existing project to the new company.
Príloha 1 k odpovedi Belgicka z 28. septembra 2012, s. 24 a 6.
The Commission also notes that, in many cases, the interventions by the Walloon Region in Duferco's favour made it possible to delay adjustments that were socially difficult but economically necessary in the steel sector in Wallonia.
Táto hodnota zodpovedá aritmetickému priemeru odhadu ex post ukazovateľa EBITDA 2006 spoločnosťou KPMG a skutočne dosiahnutého ukazovateľa EBITDA v roku 2006.
This behaviour, motivated by regional and social considerations of safeguarding employment to the detriment of streamlining and modernising the steel industry, cannot be considered to be that of a private investor.
Príloha k odpovedi Belgicka z 25. septembra 2015, s. 2.
Furthermore, the Commission observes that the investment behaviour of FSIH does not correspond to that of a prudent market investor.
[…] x 49,9 % podielu FSIH.
In this case, FSIH's behaviour should be compared to the behaviour that an investment fund manager would adopt.
Výmenný kurz USD/EUR z 12. decembra 2006, teda 0,7550.
Taken as a whole, the investment policy followed by FSIH, as highlighted by this procedure, is not likely to be followed by such a market operator.
Príloha 4 k odpovedi Belgicka z 8. apríla 2015, s. 6 „Plánovaná transakcia“.
A non-speculative investment fund must diversify the risks in its investment portfolio in order to ensure its longevity.
Odpoveď Belgicka z 15. septembra 2015, s. 2.
While taking into account the desired performance and profit horizon, the diversification of assets in the portfolio geographically and by sector reduces the volatility of the assets and therefore the investment risk of the portfolio as a whole.
Príloha 4 k odpovedi Belgicka z 8. apríla 2015, s. 7 „Odôvodnenie ceny“
This diversification does not necessarily have to be extreme, but in this case FSIH concentrated all its investments in a single company.
Žiadosť o informácie z 15. septembra 2015.
Indeed, by investing exclusively in the Duferco Group, FSIH's exposure to risk was at its greatest since the return on investment for FSIH depended on the success or failure of a single company.
Výmenný kurz USD/EUR zo 14. júna 2006, teda 0,7959.
It follows, overall, that the investment behaviour of FSIH is an additional indication that its operations do not satisfy the market economy investor test.
Príloha 20 k odpovedi Belgicka z 5. januára 2012.