natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Except for the supply of electricity on the regulated market (recitals 25-26) Hidroelectrica exercises its electricity supplying activities in open markets with non-captive buyers, in competition with other private or publicly owned suppliers.
Toto správanie, teda nedodržanie zmluvnej ceny, ktorá údajne predstavovala pomoc, hrozby prerušením dodávky a obhajovanie zvýšenia ceny na súde, nie je správanie typické pre poskytovateľa pomoci, ale skôr pre spoločnosť snažiacu sa maximalizovať príjmy, ktorá bráni svoje obchodné záujmy a nezaujímajú ju neobchodné ciele sledované podľa pokynov od štátu.
In particular, a significant volume of electricity well above the total amount of Hidroelectrica's supplies under all the contracts under investigation was traded through bilateral bespoke long-term contracts on the Romanian market, where many other suppliers compete (recitals 30 and 38).
Čo sa týka spoločnosti Luxten-Lighting, neexistuje žiadny zjavný dôvod pre verejnú politiku, ako napríklad nízke ceny pre koncových používateľov, ktorý by odôvodňoval predaj obchodníkovi, ktorý môže predávať jedine maloobchodne za vyššie ceny, ako keby spoločnosť Hidroelectrica sama maloobchodne predala rovnakú elektrickú energiu.
Hidroelectrica's contracts under scrutiny and, in particular, the three bespoke long-term contracts with Luxten-Lighting, Electrocarbon and Elsid, maintained after 1 January 2007, are, therefore, not abnormal or extraordinary, which would suggest a particular interest of the State in maintaining them.
Spoločnosť Alro napríklad predtým, ako jej od roku 2005 začala spoločnosť Hidroelectrica maloobchodne dodávať elektrickú energiu, nakupovala elektrickú energiu od obchodníka Energy Holding, ktorý ju nakupoval veľkoobchodne od spoločnosti Hidroelectrica.
Furthermore, the contracts with Electrocarbon and Elsid were maintained and renegotiated by Hidroelectrica's receiver after insolvency proceedings were begun in 2012, which provides an indication that these contracts were still of interest to Hidroelectrica's temporary new management, well after Romania's accession to the European Union in 2007 and well after the contracts were concluded and were amended, in particular with regard to prices.
Spoločnosť Alro sa správala racionálne, keď začala odoberať elektrickú energiu priamo od spoločnosti Hidroelectrica, a teda ušetrila obchodné rozpätie, ak jej dodávateľ nepridával hodnotu veľkoobchodnej dodávke od spoločnosti Hidroelectrica.
Likewise, Hidroelectrica requested increased prices above contract levels and gave notice to Electrocarbon and Elsid of the interruption of supplies in order to prompt them to accept further price increases in 2010 (recital 22), thus behaving like a revenue-maximising seller and not like a grantor of aid.
V rovnakom duchu je pomerne nepravdepodobné, že by Rumunský štát nabádal spoločnosť Hidroelectrica, aby zachovala zmluvu so spoločnosťou Luxten-Lighting v rokoch 2008 a 2009, lebo ak by spoločnosť Luxten-Lighting nepridala hodnotu svojmu maloobchodnému predaju priemyselným používateľom alebo iným kupujúcim, títo by získali nižšie ceny, ak by uzavreli zmluvu priamo so spoločnosťou Hidroelectrica.
This is not to say that the Romanian State is not in the position of being involved with the commercial contracts of State-owned electricity suppliers in the interests of specific and major industrial buyers.
Spoločnosť Luxten-Lighting navyše jednostranne vypovedala svoju zmluvu so spoločnosťou Hidroelectrica v novembri 2011, teda ešte predtým, ako Komisia začala konanie – toto správanie nezodpovedá správaniu príjemcu štátnej pomoci.
For instance, before Romania's accession to the EU, an Internal Note dated 2 February 2006, signed by the State Secretary of the Economy and Trade Ministry and approved by the Prime Minister, proposed the implementation of special preferential treatment for the ten largest energy-intensive users in Romania (including aluminium or steel producers supplied by Hidroelectrica or Nuclearelectrica).
Na základe všetkých týchto úvah nemožno stanoviť, že zmluvy so spoločnosťou Luxten-Lighting v rokoch 2008 – 2009 a spoločnosťami Electrocarbon a Elsid v rokoch 2007 – 2010 sú pripísateľné Rumunsku.
As regards the contract with Arcelor-Mittal, in particular, Hidroelectrica's board of directors' decision No 13/2009 dated 16 December 2009 empowered Hidroelectrica's chief executive officer ‘to negotiate the ongoing sale-of-electricity contract in the best conditions for Hidroelectrica’.
Keďže v troch zmluvách so spoločnosťou Luxten-Lighting v rokoch 2008 – 2009 a spoločnosťami Electrocarbon a Elsid v rokoch 2007 – 2010 nie je prítomný základný prvok existencie štátnej pomoci, teda pripísateľnosť Rumunsku, nie je nutné analyzovať, či sú splnené ďalšie kumulatívne podmienky uplatnenia tohto ustanovenia, napríklad potenciálny vplyv na hospodársku súťaž a obchod medzi členskými štátmi.
The board of directors did this by approving the main terms of the contracts of 2009 and 2010 with ArcelorMittal.
Vzhľadom na uvedené skutočnosti teda tri skúmané zmluvy so spoločnosťou Luxten-Lighting v rokoch 2008 – 2009 a spoločnosťami Electrocarbon a Elsid v rokoch 2007 – 2010 nepredstavujú štátnu pomoc v zmysle článku 107 ods. 1 ZFEÚ.
Addendum No 17 in 2009 to the contract with Alro (inserting the LME formula in the calculation of the contract price) was also approved by Hidroelectrica's board of directors.
ZÁVER
Likewise, a memorandum of 3 February 2011 from the two General Managers of Nuclearelectrica and CE Hunedoara, which, like Hidroelectrica, are State-owned, requested the approval of the Ministry of Economy and Trade for the conclusion of a wholesale sale of electricity contract between Nuclearelectrica as a seller and CE Hunedoara as a purchaser.
Zmluvy, ktorých sa týka toto rozhodnutie, nepredstavujú štátnu pomoc v zmysle článku 107 ods. 1 ZFEÚ,
This transaction needed a derogation from the provisions of Order 445/2009 requiring that any wholesale electricity transaction involving a State-owned enterprise should take place only on OPCOM.
PRIJALA TOTO ROZHODNUTIE:
This derogation was requested in view of the fact that the electricity acquired would serve ‘the electricity needs of a number of industrial consumers of national importance in 2011’.
Článok 1
This memorandum was fully endorsed by the Minister of Economy and Trade.
Zmluvy uzavreté medzi spoločnosťou Hidroelectrica a spoločnosťami ArcelorMittal, Alpiq RomEnergie, Alpiq RomIndustries, EFT, Electrica, Electromagnetica, Energy Holding, EURO-PEC, Luxten-Lighting, Electrocarbon a Elsid ani zmluva so spoločnosťou Alro nepredstavujú štátnu pomoc v zmysle článku 107 ods. 1 Zmluvy o fungovaní Európskej únie.
It follows that there is some indirect evidence that does not allow it to be completely ruled out that the Romanian State would have been involved in concluding, or making major amendments to, Hidroelectrica's contracts with big energy-intensive industrial buyers.
Článok 2
Moreover, the Commission has concluded that other purchase contracts into which Hidroelectrica entered with two other State-owned companies, Electrocentrale Deva and Termoelectrica, in 2008 and 2009, were imputable to the Romanian State.
Toto rozhodnutie je určené Rumunsku.
That conclusion was based mainly on direct evidence of the other two State-owned companies having sought approval of the contracts from the Minister responsible also for the State-owned Hidroelectrica as a means of (cross) financing their current operations and that of the State-owned mines which supplied them with coal, for social and other non-commercial reasons [61].
V Bruseli 12. júna 2015
However, the considerations that may render plausible (or not exclude the possibility of) the Romanian State's being involved in a number of Hidroelectrica's contracts with big industrial buyers of national importance for the Romanian economy and with other State-owned sellers cannot be extrapolated from in such a way that all Hidroelectrica's commercial contracts and, in particular, those with Elsid, Electrocarbon and electricity traders are considered to be imputable to the Romanian State.
Za Komisiu
Unlike Electrocentrale Deva and Termoelectrica, Elsid, Electrocarbon and the electricity traders were privately-owned and none of them can be held to be a big industrial buyer of national importance for the Romanian economy.
členka Komisie
In particular, the evidence available in the investigation does not point at any specific interest or involvement on the part of the Romanian State in prompting Hidroelectrica to conclude or, after Romania's accession, to maintain the contracts with Elsid, Electrocarbon and the electricity traders.
Rozhodnutie Komisie C(2012) 2516 final z 25. apríla 2012 vo veci SA.33623 (Ú. v. EÚ C 189, 29.6.2012, s. 3).
Moreover, as regards Elsid, Electrocarbon and Luxten-Lighting, which were specifically singled out in the previous Section 7.1, several facts make it implausible that the decision to maintain the contracts and amend the prices of the contracts with Luxten-Lighting for 2008-2009 and with Electrocarbon and Elsid for 2007-2010 could be attributed to the Romanian authorities.
Rozhodnutie Komisie C(2012) 2517 final z 25. apríla 2012 vo veci SA.33624 (Ú. v. EÚ C 268, 5.9.2012, s. 21).
In particular, the actual prices under the three contracts were constantly increased each year.
Rozhodnutie Komisie C(2012) 2542 final z 25. apríla 2012 vo veci SA.33451 (Ú. v. EÚ C 395, 20.12.2012, s. 5).
Between 2007 and 2010, the prices charged to Elsid, Electrocarbon and Luxten-Lighting increased by 44,5 %, 44,5 % and 41,4 %, respectively.
Rozhodnutie Komisie C(2012) 2556 final z 25. apríla 2012 vo veci SA.33581 (Ú. v. EÚ C 395, 20.12.2012, s. 34).
Price increases reduce the absolute value of the aid granted.
Ú. v. EÚ L 115, 9.5.2008, s. 92.
These contract changes which reduce the putative amount of the alleged State aid, were always triggered by, and for the benefit of, Hidroelectrica.
Vec SA.33623 (Ú. v. EÚ C 189, 29.6.2012, p.
A strategy aimed at reducing the amount of aid granted to the beneficiaries seems to contradict the purpose of granting aid or, at least, to be too sophisticated to be plausible.
3), vec SA.33624 (Ú. v. EÚ C 268, 5.9.2012, p.
Moreover, contrary to Alro and ArcelorMittal, Elsid, Electrocarbon and Luxten-Lighting cannot be deemed to be industrial consumers of national importance: by way of illustration, their annual consumption purchases from Hidroelectrica amounted to less than one tenth of those of Alro (Annex I).
21), vec SA.33451 (Ú. v. EÚ C 395, 20.12.2012, s. 5) a vec SA.33581 (Ú. v. EÚ C 395, 20.12.2012, s. 34).
It is therefore unlikely that decisions reducing the amount of aid by considerably increasing the contract prices can be imputed not to a commercial decision of Hidroelectrica but to a decision of the Romanian State aimed at providing aid to the alleged beneficiaries.
Vrátane predbežných poznámok, ktoré predložili spoločnosti Luxten-Lighting a Euro-Pec pred uverejnením výzvy na predloženie pripomienok k rozhodnutiu o začatí konania: spoločnosť Luxten-Lighting 14. augusta 2012 a spoločnosť Euro-Pec 13. augusta 2012.
The fact that it is unlikely that the State would be involved in subtly reducing the amount of aid is also apparent with respect to the contracts with Electrocarbon and Elsid.
Všetci členovia predstavenstva spoločnosti Hidroelectrica okrem generálneho riaditeľa spoločnosti Hidroelectrica a zástupcu investičného fondu Fondul Proprietatea (2010) zastávajú aj ďalšie funkcie na rôznych ministerstvách a boli vymenovaní prostredníctvom nariadení ministerstva hospodárstva a obchodu, a to takto: i) v rokoch 2005 – 2006: osobný poradca v kancelárii ministra hospodárstva a obchodu, vedúci kancelárie ministerstva pre malé a stredné podniky, osobný poradca v kancelárii ministra na ministerstve verejných financií a osobný poradca na generálnom sekretariáte vlády boli členmi predstavenstva spoločnosti Hidroelectrica, ii) v rokoch 2007 – 2008: situácia neznáma, iii) v roku 2009: štátny tajomník na ministerstve hospodárstva a obchodu bol zároveň predsedom predstavenstva spoločnosti Hidroelectrica (2009), kým ďalší štátny tajomník na ministerstve verejných financií a dvaja generálni riaditelia na ministerstve hospodárstva a obchodu boli zároveň členmi predstavenstva spoločnosti Hidroelectrica, iv) v roku 2010: traja osobní poradcovia na ministerstve hospodárstva a obchodu, štátny tajomník na ministerstve financií a generálny riaditeľ na ministerstve hospodárstva a obchodu boli členmi predstavenstva spoločnosti Hidroelectrica.
In particular, it is implausible that Hidroelectrica was acting under instructions from the State when requesting price increases above the contract prices in 2010, threatening to discontinue the electricity supply and arguing the matter in court (recital 22), for the requested price increases had the effect of reducing the putative amount of aid, and discontinued supplies could have jeopardised the productive activities of the buyers.
Pozri Medzinárodná agentúra pre energiu: „Projected costs of generating electricity“ (Odhadované náklady na výrobu elektrickej energie), vydanie z roku 2010, oddiel 4.2 „Country by country data on electricity generating costs“ (Údaje o nákladoch na výrobu elektrickej energie podľa krajín), s. 89.
This behaviour of not adhering to a contract price that purportedly provides aid, threatening to interrupt supplies and defending price increases in court is not behaviour typical of a grantor of aid, but is, rather, that of a revenue-maximising company defending its commercial interests and not concerned with following non-commercial goals, possibly under instructions received from the State.
Rozhodnutie Súdu v Bukurešti č. 22456/3/2012 z 26. júna 2012.
As regards Luxten-Lighting, there is no obvious reason of public policy, such as low end-user prices, behind sales to a trader which can only sell retail at higher prices than if Hidroelectrica had sold the same electricity retail on its own.
Rozhodnutie Súdu v Bukurešti č. 6482 z 26. júna 2013.
For instance, before being supplied retail by Hidroelectrica as from 2005, Alro purchased electricity from a trader, Energy Holding, that bought electricity wholesale from Hidroelectrica.
Dostupné len v rumunčine na http://www.euroinsol.eu/uploads/Raport%2059%20Hidro%20v11.pdf.
It was rational behaviour for Alro to be supplied directly by Hidroelectrica, thus saving a trading margin, if its supplier was not adding value to Hidroelectrica's wholesale supply.
Spoločnosť Electrica uzavrela so spoločnosťou Hidroelectrica dve krátkodobé zmluvy.
In the same vein, it is rather implausible that the Romanian State should have prompted Hidroelectrica to maintain the contract with Luxten-Lighting in 2008 and 2009, for, if Luxten-Lighting did not add value to its retail sales to industrial users or other buyers, the latter would have obtained lower prices by contracting directly with Hidroelectrica.
Zmluva so spoločnosťou AlpiqRomEnergie, dve zmluvy so spoločnosťou Electrica a dve zmluvy so spoločnosťou ArcelorMittal.
Furthermore, Luxten-Lighting unilaterally terminated its contract with Hidroelectrica in November 2011, before the Commission opened proceedings; this behaviour is not consistent with that of a beneficiary of State aid.
Päť zmlúv s obchodníkmi s elektrickou energiou (Alpiq RomIndustries, Electromagnetica, Energy Holding, Euro-Pec, Luxten-Lighting).
On the basis of all the above considerations, it is not established that the contracts with Luxten-Lighting for 2008-2009 and for Electrocarbon and Elsid for 2007-2010 are imputable to Romania.
Zmluvy so spoločnosťami EFT (obchodník s elektrickou energiou) a Alro.
As the essential element of imputability to Romania for the existence of State aid is not present in the three contracts with Luxten-Lighting for 2008-2009 and with Electrocarbon and Elsid for 2007-2010, it is not necessary to analyse whether the other cumulative conditions for the application of this provision, such as the potential effect on competition and trade between Member States, are met.
Zmluvy so spoločnosťami Electrocarbon, Elsid a Alpiq RomEnergie (obchodník s elektrickou energiou).
In the light of the above, the three contracts under scrutiny, with Luxten-Lighting for 2008-2009 and with Electrocarbon and Elsid for 2007-2010, do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Zmluvy so spoločnosťami Electrocarbon a Elsid.
CONCLUSION
Dve zmluvy so spoločnosťou ArcelorMittal.
The contracts covered by the present Decision do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU,
Dve zmluvy so spoločnosťou Electrica.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Zmluvu so spoločnosťou Luxten-Lighting (obchodník s elektrickou energiou) vypovedala spoločnosť Luxten-Lighting oznámením z 15. novembra 2011 s účinnosťou od 1. januára 2012.
Article 1
Platnosť zmlúv so spoločnosťami Electrocarbon a Elsid sa skončila 13. marca 2013 a platnosť zmluvy so spoločnosťou Electromagnetica (obchodník s elektrickou energiou) sa skončila 30. apríla 2014.
The contracts concluded between Hidroelectrica and ArcelorMittal, Alpiq RomEnergie, Alpiq RomIndustries, EFT, Electrica, Electromagnetica, Energy Holding, Euro-Pec, Luxten-Lighting, Electrocarbon and Elsid, and the contract with Alro, do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Dodatok 1 k zmluve so spoločnosťou Electrocarbon obsahoval stanovenú cenu (s fixnou výškou – rovnaká cena) do 28. februára 2008, dodatok 2 k zmluve so spoločnosťou Elsid obsahoval stanovenú cenu do 31. decembra 2007.
Article 2
Dňa 1. júla 2004 sa strany dohodli na tabuľke so stanovenými ročnými fixnými cenami na obdobie 2006 – 2013 (t. j.: dodatok 4 k zmluve so spoločnosťou Electrocarbon a dodatok 5 k zmluve so spoločnosťou Elsid).
This Decision is addressed to Romania.
Ceny boli následne upravené 1. januára 2005, pričom sa stanovili na fixnú výšku do 31. decembra 2007 pre spoločnosť Elsid a do 28. februára 2008 pre spoločnosť Electrocarbon.
Done at Brussels, 12 June 2015.
Od roku 2006 sa zmluvné ceny pre spoločnosti Electrocarbon a Elsid každý rok znova upravovali.
For the Commission
Súd prvého stupňa: Súd v Olte – spis 2800/104/2010 (Electrocarbon) a Súd v Dambovite – spis 4102/120/2010 (Elsid).
Member of the Commission
Článok 10 ods. 2 každej z troch zmlúv.
Commission Decision C(2012) 2516 final of 25 April 2012 concerning case SA.33623 (OJ C 189, 29.6.2012, p. 3).
Článok 10 ods. 1 každej z troch zmlúv.
Commission Decision C(2012) 2517 final of 25 April 2012 concerning case SA.33624 (OJ C 268, 5.9.2012, p. 21).
Článok 55 ods. 1 zákona č. 123/2012 o elektrickej energii a plyne, neskôr zmenený zákonom č. 127/2014.
Commission Decision C(2012) 2542 final of 25 April 2012 concerning case SA.33451 (OJ C 395, 20.12.2012, p. 5).
Správa spoločnosti KPMG, príloha 3 k memorandu energetických holdingov z 27. februára 2012, s. 8, zdroj: výročné správy spoločnosti Hidroelectrica, správa správcu z roku 2010, analýza spoločnosti KPMG.
Commission Decision C(2012) 2556 final of 25 April 2012 concerning case SA.33581 (OJ C 395, 20.12.2012, p. 34).
Správa spoločnosti KPMG, príloha 3 k memorandu energetických holdingov z 27. februára 2012, s. 21, zdroj: ANRE.
OJ L 115, 9.5.2008, p. 92.
Obchodné tajomstvo.
Case SA.33623 (OJ C 189, 29.6.2012, p. 3); case SA.33624 (OJ C 268, 5.9.2012, p. 21); case SA.33451 (OJ C 395, 20.12.2012, p. 5) and case SA.33581 (OJ C 395, 20.12.2012, p. 34).
Rozhodnutie Komisie z 5. marca 2014 týkajúce sa konania podľa článku 102 ZFEÚ, ktorým sa ukladajú pokuty podľa článku 7 nariadenia (ES) č. 1/2003 vo veci AT.39984 „Romanian Power Exchange/OPCOM“.
Including the preliminary observations submitted by Luxten-Lighting and Euro-Pec before publication of the invitation to provide comments on the opening decision: Luxten-Lighting on 14 August 2012 and Euro-Pec on 13 August 2012.
Zoznam kupujúcich je uvedený v prílohe II tabuľke 1.
All members of Hidroelectrica's Board of Directors except the General Director of Hidroelectrica and the representative of Fondul Proprietatea (2010), cumulated other functions in various Ministries and were appointed through Orders issued by the Ministry of Economy and Trade, as follows: (i) in 2005-2006: the personal adviser in the cabinet of the Minister of Economy and Trade; the director of cabinet of the Minister for Small and Medium Enterprises; the personal adviser in the cabinet of the Minister in the Ministry of Public Finance and the personal adviser in the General Secretariat of the Government were members of Hidroelectrica's Board of Directors; (ii) in 2007-2008 — situation unknown; (iii) in 2009: the State Secretary in the Ministry of Economy and Trade was also the President of Hidroelectrica's Board of Directors (2009), while another State Secretary in the Ministry of Public Finance and two general directors in the Ministry of Economy and Trade were also members of Hidroelectrica's Board of Directors; (iv) in 2010: three personal advisers in the Ministry of Economy and Trade, a State Secretary in the Ministry of Finance and a General Director in the Ministry of Economy and Trade were members of Hidroelectrica's Board of Directors.
Niektorí predajcovia elektrickej energie (t. j.
See International Energy Agency: ‘Projected costs of generating electricity’ 2010 edition, Section 4.2 ‘Country by country data on electricity generating costs’, p. 89.
Alpiq RomIndustries, EFT, Alro Electrocarbon a Elsid).
Decision of Tribunal of Bucharest No 22456/3/2012 dated 26 June 2012.
Jeden predajca elektrickej energie (EFT) a spoločnosť Alro.
Decision of Tribunal of Bucharest No 6482 dated 26 June 2013.
Len v prípade spoločnosti Alro.
Available in Romanian only at http://www.euroinsol.eu/uploads/Raport%2059%20Hidro%20v11.pdf
Nariadenie Rady (ES) č. 659/1999 z 22. marca 1999 ustanovujúce podrobné pravidlá na uplatňovanie článku 93 Zmluvy o ES (Ú. v. ES L 83, 27.3.1999, s. 1).
Electrica concluded two short-term contracts with Hidroelectrica.
V rozpore s vecami týkajúcimi sa maďarských preferenčných taríf za elektrickú energiu – T-80/06 a T-182/09, Budapesti Erőmű/Komisia (ECLI:EU:T:2012:65).
Contract with Alpiq RomEnergie; two contracts with Electrica; and two contracts with ArcelorMittal.
Ďalšie informácie nájdete vo výročnej správne orgánu ANRE o monitorovaní za rok 2007 a nasledujúce roky.
Five contracts with electricity traders (Alpiq RomIndustries; Electromagnetica; Energy Holding; Euro-Pec; Luxten-Lighting).
Spoločnosti Alpiq RomIndustries a Alpiq RomEnergie.
Contracts with EFT (electricity trader) and Alro.
Vec C-482/99, Francúzska republika/Komisia (Stardust Marine), Zb.
Contracts with Electrocarbon and Elsid.
I-4397.
Two contracts with Arcelor Mittal.
Spoločnosti AlpiqRomEnergie, AlpiqRomIndustrie, Electromagnetica, Energy Holding, Electrocarbon, Elsid, ArcelorMittal a Alro.
Two contracts with Electrica.
Spoločnosť Energy Holding, obchodník s elektrickou energiou.
The contract with Luxten-Lighting (electricity trader) was terminated by Luxten-Lighting by notice dated 15 November 2011, with effect from 1 January 2012.
Spoločnosti EFT, Electromagnetica, Luxten-Lighting a Energy Holding.
Contracts with Electrocarbon and Elsid expired on 13 March 2013 and the contract with Electromagnetica (electricity trader) expired on 30 April 2014.
Spoločnosti EFT, Electromagnetica, Luxten-Lighting a Alro.
Addendum 1 to the contract with Electrocarbon provided for a pre-set price (at a fixed amount — the same price) until 28 February 2008; Addendum 2 to the contract with Elsid provided for a pre-set price until 31 December 2007.
Spoločnosti EFT, Luxten-Lighting, Electrocarbon a Elsid.
On 1 July 2004 the parties agreed on a table pre-setting a per year fixed price for the period 2006-2013 (i.e.: Addendum 4 to the contract with Electrocarbon and Addendum 5 to the contract with Elsid).
Spoločnosti Alpiq RomEnergy a Alpiq RomIndustries.
The prices were subsequently modified on 1 January 2005 with prices pre-set at a fixed amount until 31 December 2007 for Elsid and until 28 February 2008, for Electrocarbon.
Spojené veci T-80/06 a T-182/09, Budapesti Erőmű/Európska komisia, body 50 až 62.
As of 2006 the contract prices were readjusted yearly for Electrocarbon and Elsid.
Ú. v. EÚ L 157, 21.6.2005, s. 96.