natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the case under examination, the activities of MDPA linked to maintaining safety and environmental protection are not of an economic nature that would justify application of the Treaty's competition rules.
V primeru preiskave dejavnosti MDPA, povezane z vzdrževanjem varnosti in varstvom okolja, niso gospodarske narave, ki upravičuje uporabo pravil o konkurenci, določenih v Pogodbi.
Consequently, assuming that measures 1 and 2 have benefited MDPA and distorted competition, the Commission concludes that such distortion ended once MDPA ceased its commercial activities and once the mines were closed down.
Zato je ob predvidevanju, da sta ukrepa 1 in 2 dajala prednost MDPA in povzročila izkrivljanje konkurence, Komisija sklenila, da se je to končalo odkar je družba MDPA prenehala opravljati svoje poslovne dejavnosti in so se rudniki zaprli.
It also notes that MDPA's capital has been transferred to the State free of charge.
Komisija ugotovi tudi, da je bil kapital MDPA brezplačno prepuščen državi.
Under the circumstances, a Commission decision on the classification as aid of the measures in question and on their compatibility would have no practical effect.
Pod temi pogoji odločitev Komisije o naravi pomoči zadevnih ukrepov in njihovi združljivosti ne bi mogla povzročiti nobenega stvarnega učinka.
The formal investigation procedure initiated pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty thus serves no useful purpose,
Uradni postopek preiskave, sprožen v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES, je tako postal brezpredmeten –
The formal investigation procedure initiated on 10 October 2000 in respect of Mines de potasse d’Alsace pursuant to Article 88(2) of the Treaty is hereby terminated.
Uradni postopek preiskave, ki se je začel 10. oktobra 2000 v zvezi z Mines de Potasse d’Alsace v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe, je končan.
OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 22.
UL C 37, 3.2.2001, str. 22.
OJ C 196, 19.7.1994, p. 5.
UL C 196, 19.7.1994, str. 5.
Introduced by Decree No 46-1433 of 14 June 1948 on the status of employees of mining establishments and the like.
Uvedeno z dekretom št. 46-1433 z dne 14. junija 1948 o kadrovskih predpisih osebja rudnikov in s tem povezanih obratov.
OJ C 168, 12.6.1996, p. 11.
UL C 168, 12.6.1996, str. 11.
Decree No 67-797 of 20 September 1967 on the administrative and financial organisation of EMC.
Dekret št. 67-797 z dne 20. septembra 1967 o upravni in finančni organizaciji podjetja za rudarstvo in kemikalije.
Decree No 67-796 of 20 September 1967 regrouping the private potash mines of Alsace and the National Industrial Potassium Office into a public industrial and commercial establishment designated EMC and Decree No 67-797 of 20 September 1967 on the administrative and financial organisation of EMC.
Dekret št. 67-796 z dne 20. septembra 1967 o preoblikovanju alzaških državnih rudnikov kalija in nacionalnega industrijskega urada za dušik v javno ustanovo industrijske in trgovinske narave pod imenom podjetje za rudarstvo in kemikalije ter Dekret št. 67-797 z dne 20. septembra 1967 o upravni in finančni organizaciji podjetja za rudarstvo in kemikalije.
Decree No 2004-1286 of 26 November 2004 authorising the transfer to the State by EMC of its holding in the company Mines de potasse d’Alsace, Official Gazette of 28 November 2004.
Dekret št. 2004-1286 z dne 26. novembra 2004, ki dovoli prenos deleža Entreprise Minière et Chimique v družbi Mines de potasse d’Alsace na državo, Uradni list Francoske republike, 28.11.2004.
See Article 84 of the Mining Code.
Glej člen 84 rudarskega zakonika.
of 13 May 2003
z dne 13. maja 2003
on the State aid implemented by Germany for Kahla Porzellan GmbH and Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH
o državni pomoči Nemčije za Kahla Porzellan GmbH in Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH
(notified under document number C(2003) 1520)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2003) 1520)
On 16 November 1998 and 24 March 1999 the Commission received complaints from competitors alleging misuse of state aid purportedly granted by the Land of Thuringia to Kahla Porzellan GmbH (Kahla I) and Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH (Kahla II), both in Thuringia, Germany.
novembra 1998 in 24. marca 1999 je Komisija prejela pritožbe konkurentov o domnevni nepravilni uporabi državnih pomoči, ki jih je dežela Turingija dodelila podjetjema Kahla Porzellan GmbH (Kahla I) in Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH (Kahla II), obe iz Thüringena v Nemčiji.
After an extensive exchange of correspondence and meetings with representatives of Germany, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure on 15 November 2000 in respect of the ad hoc aid granted to the companies.
Po obsežni korespondenci in srečanjih s predstavniki Nemčije je Komisija 15. novembra 2000 sprožila formalni postopek preiskave zaradi začasnih pomoči, dodeljenih podjetjema.
At the same time, Germany was requested to provide sufficient information and data to make it possible to assess whether a number of aid measures complied with the terms of approved aid schemes under which they had allegedly been granted.
Istočasno je bila Nemčija pozvana, naj predloži zadostne podatke, da bo mogoče ugotoviti, ali so nekateri ukrepi pomoči v skladu z odobrenimi programi pomoči, po katerih so bili domnevno dodeljeni.
The Commission’s decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities [2].
Sklep Komisije o sprožitvi postopka je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropskih skupnosti [2].
The Commission invited interested parties to submit comments on the aid.
Komisija je pozvala zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe glede zadevne pomoči.
On 31 July 2001 the Commission received comments from Kahla II, which were forwarded to Germany by letter dated 7 August 2001.
julija 2001 je Komisija prejela pripombe podjetja Kahla II, ki so bile posredovane Nemčiji z dopisom z dne 7. avgusta 2001.
On 26 March 2001 Germany responded to the request for information, submitting information on the aid and informing the Commission of further aid to the company, the existence of which had not been notified before.
marca 2001 je Nemčija odgovorila na uredbo o predložitvi podatkov, predložila je podatke o pomočeh in obvestila Komisijo o nadaljnjih pomočeh za podjetje, ki pa niso bile priglašene.
The Commission requested additional documentation on 28 May 2001, which was received by the Commission on 31 June 2001.
Komisija je 28. maja 2001 zahtevala dodatne informacije, ki jih je prejela dne 31. junija 2001.
Additional information was submitted on 9 August 2001.
Dodatne informacije so bile posredovane 9. avgusta 2001.
By letter dated 30 November 2001 the Commission informed Germany that it had extended the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty to include those aid measures which did not comply with the terms of the approved aid schemes under which they had allegedly been awarded and those aid measures of which the Commission had not been informed before.
Z dopisom z dne 30. novembra 2001 je Komisija Nemčiji sporočila, da je v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES postopek razširila na pomoči, ki niso usklajene z odobrenimi programi pomoči, v okviru katerih so bile domnevno dodeljene, in na pomoči, o katerih Komisija prej ni bila obveščena.
On 10 December 2001 the case was discussed at length with representatives of Germany and of the company.
decembra 2001 je bil primer podrobno obravnavan s predstavniki Nemčije in podjetja.
The Commission’s decision to extend the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities [3].
Sklep Komisije o razširitvi postopka je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropskih skupnosti [3].
The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Komisija je pozvala zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe glede zadevne pomoči.
The Commission received comments from the aid recipient (Kahla II).
Komisija je prejela pripombe prejemnika pomoči (Kahla II).
These comments were forwarded by letter dated 6 March 2002 to Germany, which was given the opportunity to react.
Te pripombe so bile posredovane Nemčiji z dopisom z dne 6. marca 2002. Nemčiji je bila dana možnost, da predloži svoje pripombe.
On 30 January 2002 Germany responded to the extension of the formal investigation procedure, submitting extensive information.
januarja je Nemčija odgovorila na sklep o razširitvi formalnega postopka preiskave in posredovala izčrpne informacije.
Additional information was requested by letter dated 30 April 2002.
Z dopisom z dne 30. aprila 2002 so bile zahtevane dodatne informacije.
Germany submitted its reply by letter dated 29 May 2002, which was registered as received on the same day.
Nemčija je posredovala svoj odgovor z dopisom z dne 29. maja 2002, ki je bil evidentiran istega dne.
By letter dated 28 February 2002 the Commission received comments from Kahla II, which were transmitted to Germany by letter dated 6 March 2002.
Z dopisom z dne 28. februarja 2002 je Komisija prejela pripombo podjetja Kahla II, ki je bila posredovana Nemčiji z dopisom z dne 6. marca 2002.
On 18 March 2002 a new complaint was received alleging that Kahla II had received new aid.
marca 2002 je prispela nova pritožba, da je Kahla II prejela nadaljnje pomoči.
This information was sent to Germany by letter dated 30 April 2002.
Ta informacija je bila posredovana Nemčiji z dopisom z dne 30. aprila 2002.
Germany’s response to this complaint was received on 29 May 2002.
Odgovor Nemčije na pritožbo je prispel dne 29. maja 2002.
On 24 July 2002 the case was discussed again with representatives of Germany.
julija 2002 je bil primer znova obravnavan s predstavniki Nemčije.
Following this meeting, Germany submitted further comments on 7 August 2002.
Po tem srečanju je Nemčija dne 7. avgusta 2002 posredovala dodatna pojasnila.
On 30 July 2002 Kahla II indicated that it was adhering to its previous arguments.
julija 2002 je Kahla II še naprej vztrajala na svojih prejšnjih utemeljitvah.
By letter dated 1 October 2002, registered as received on the same day, Germany submitted further comments.
Z dopisom z dne 1. oktobra 2002, evidentiranim istega dne, je Nemčija posredovala dodatno pripombo.
Kahla II is the successor to Kahla I. Both Kahla I and Kahla II are active in the production of porcelain dishes and china.
Kahla II je naslednik podjetja Kahla I. Tako Kahla I kot Kahla II izdelujeta posodo iz porcelana in fine keramike.
They are located in a region eligible for aid under Article 87(3)(a) of the EC Treaty.
Njun sedež se nahaja v regiji prejemnici pomoči po členu 87(3)(a) Pogodbe ES.
The company was created on 1 March 1990 by transforming VEB Vereinigte Porzellanwerke Kahla into two private limited companies, one of which was Kahla I, in accordance with the German regulation on the conversion of state-owned combines, enterprises and installations into companies with share capital (Verordnung zur Umwandlung von volkseigenen Kombinaten, Betrieben und Einrichtungen in Kapitalgesellschaften (UmwandVO)).
Podjetje je bilo v skladu z nemško uredbo o pretvorbi državnih kombinatov, podjetij in obratov v kapitalske družbe (UmwandVO) 1. marca 1990 ustanovljeno s pretvorbo VEB Vereinigte Porzellanwerke Kahla v dve družbi z omejeno odgovornostjo.
On 23 April 1991 the Treuhandanstalt (THA) privatised Kahla I by selling it for DEM 2 to a Mr Hoffmann (75,1 % of the shares) and a Mr Ueing (24,9 % of the shares).
Ena izmed teh družb je Kahla I. 23. aprila 1991 je Treuhandanstalt (THA) privatiziral Kahlo I s prodajo gospodu Hoffmannu (75,1 % glavnice) in gospodu Ueingu (24,9 % glavnice) za 2 DEM.
The privatisation contract was concluded with the sole bidders after the THA published the intended sale in its list of companies for sale (Hoppenstedt) and contacted associations in the ceramics industry and chambers of commerce.
Pogodba o privatizaciji je bila sklenjena z edinima ponudnikoma, potem ko je THA objavil načrtovano prodajo na svojem seznamu podjetij za prodajo (Hoppenstedt) in navezal stike z združenji keramične industrije in gospodarsko zbornico.
Germany states that the company’s liquidation would have implied higher costs for the THA.
Nemčija je izjavila, da bi bila likvidacija podjetja za THA predraga.
Germany further states that the privatisation contract became effective only on 11 December 1992.
Pogodba o privatizaciji je po navedbah Nemčije začela veljati šele 11. decembra 1992.
The following data on the company’s operation were submitted by Germany (turnover and operating result in DEM million):
Nemčija je posredovala naslednje podatke o poslovanju (prihodek in izid iz rednega poslovanja v mio DEM).
Turnover
Prihodek
Operating result
Izid iz rednega poslovanja
The company filed for bankruptcy on 9 August 1993.
avgusta 1993 je podjetje prijavilo stečaj.
Bankruptcy proceedings were opened on 29 September 1993.
Stečajni postopek je bil sprožen 29. septembra 1993.
According to Germany, following the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings the administrator in bankruptcy sought investors to take over the assets.
Po navedbah Nemčije je stečajni upravitelj od sprožitve stečajnega postopka iskal investitorje, ki bi prevzeli premoženje.
The administrator in bankruptcy considered that the best price for the assets would be obtained by selling the company as a going concern.
Po mnenju stečajnega upravitelja bi bilo mogoče najbolj ugodno ceno za premoženje doseči tako, da bi se podjetje prodalo kot še vedno delujoče podjetje.
In November 1993 Kahla II was created by a private investor, Mr G. Raithel.
Novembra 1993 je zasebni investitor, g. G. Raithel, ustanovil podjetje Kahla II.
The total price amounted originally to DEM 7,391 million.
Kupnina je sprva znašala 7,391 milijona DEM.
The contract was amended on 5 October 1994, providing in its new form that the price of DEM 2,05 million payable for plant - which was to be financed by a grant of DEM 2,5 million (see measure 15) - was to be paid upon signature of the contract as amended.
Pogodba je bila 5. oktobra 1994 spremenjena, tako da je bila kupnina v višini 2,05 milijona DEM za obrat, ki naj bi se financirala iz nepovratnih sredstev v višini 2,5 milijona DEM (glej ukrep 15), plačljiva ob podpisu spremenjene pogodbe.
Legal rights, trademarks, registered patterns and know-how were transferred for DEM 1.
Zakonske pravice, blagovna znamka, patentirani vzorci ter strokovno znanje in izkušnje so bili preneseni za 1 DEM.
The list of customers and the order book were taken over free of charge.
Seznam strank in naročila so bili preneseni brezplačno.
The price of DEM 2,136 million for stocks was to be paid in ten instalments starting on 1 March 1994.
Kupnina v višini 2,136 milijona DEM za zaloge naj bi bila poravnana v 10 obrokih od 1. marca 1994.
The real estate, which was to be free of charges, was sold for DEM 3,205 million, payable within 14 days.
Zemljišče naj bi bilo prodano brez dajatev za 3,205 milijona DEM, plačljivo v roku 14 dni.
Germany states that part payments were made until 1996.
Po navedbah Nemčije so se obroki plačevali do leta 1996.
An amount of DEM 1 million was finally paid in 1999, after the administrator in bankruptcy had lifted a mortgage on part of the real estate.
Leta 1999 je bil plačan znesek v višini 1 milijona DEM, potem ko je stečajni upravitelj dvignil hipoteko na del zemljišča.
The total price finally paid amounted to DEM 6,727 million.
Končna cena je znašala 6,727 milijona DEM.
Germany states that a reduction in the price for the stocks of DEM 0,664 million took place owing to defects found after the sale.
Po navedbah Nemčije je bilo zmanjšanje cene za zaloge v višini 0,664 milijona DEM posledica škode, ki je bila ugotovljena po prodaji.
The available information shows that the sale was financed mainly through state aid.
Razpoložljivi podatki kažejo, da je bila prodaja večinoma financirana z državno pomočjo.
Own resources not containing any element of state aid amounted to only DEM 55000.
Lastna sredstva brez elementov pomoči so znašala le 55000 DEM.
The sale of the real estate was approved by the THA on 18 July 1994 [4] and by its legal successor, the Bundesanstalt für vereiningungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben (BvS) on 19 October 1995.
Prodajo zemljišča je 18. julija 1994 [4] odobril THA in 19. oktobra 1995 njegov pravni naslednik, zvezni urad Bundesanstalt für vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben (BvS).
The sale contract also provided that Thüringer Industriebeteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG (TIB), a state-owned undertaking set up by the Land of Thuringia and controlled by it through a foundation, would acquire a silent participation of 49 % in Kahla II.
Prodajna pogodba je poleg tega predvidevala, da bi Thüringer Industriebeteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG („TIB“), podjetje v državni lasti, ki ga je ustanovila dežela Turingija in ga nadzorovala preko sklada, prevzel tiho družabništvo v Kahli II v višini 49 %.
This occurred on 5 March 1994.
To se je zgodilo 5. marca 1994.
The following data on the company’s operation were supplied by Germany (turnover and operating result in DEM million):
Nemčija je predložila naslednje podatke o poslovanju podjetja (prihodek in izid iz rednega poslovanja v mio DEM).
Operating result[…] [5]
Izid iz rednega poslovanja[…] [5]
Financial measures
Finančni ukrepi
Financial measures in favour of Kahla I
Finančni ukrepi za Kahlo I
The following financial measures were granted by the public authorities to Kahla I from the time of its creation until its bankruptcy (amounts in DEM million):
Podjetju Kahla I so bili od njegove ustanovitve pa do stečaja dodeljeni naslednji finančni ukrepi iz državnih sredstev (v mio DEM).
Measures in favour of Kahla I
Ukrepi za podjetje Kahla I
Measures before privatisation
Ukrepi pred privatizacijo
Export guarantee
Jamstvo za izvoz
Measures during privatisation
Ukrepi med privatizacijo
Assumption of environmental liabilities
Prevzem okoljske odgovornosti
Taking-over of old debts
Prevzem starih dolgov
Measures after privatisation
Ukrepi po privatizaciji
Direct investment grants
Neposredna investicijska podpora
Revenue from exploitation of property
Izkupiček od uporabe zemljišč
Credits
Krediti
Investment allowances
Investicijska sredstva
Measure 1: An export guarantee granted before privatisation which, according to Germany, was never called.
Ukrep 1: Jamstvo za izvoz, dodeljena pred privatizacijo, ki po trditvah Nemčije nikoli ni bila uporabljena.
Measures 2 and 3: A taking-over by the THA of debts relating to credits from Dresdner Bank AG dating from before 1 July 1990 and to loans granted by the THA before privatisation.
Ukrepa 2 in 3: Prevzem dolgov s strani THA iz kreditov banke Dresdner Bank AG pred 1. julijem 1990 in iz posojil, ki jih je THA dodelil pred privatizacijo.
Measure 4: Germany has indicated that these guarantees from the THA were granted to secure investments, loss cover and credits granted by Dresdner Bank AG.
Ukrep 4: Nemčija navaja, da so bila ta jamstva THA dodeljena za zavarovanje investicij, kritje izgub in kredite, ki jih je dodelila banka Dresdner Bank AG.
In support of these guarantees, the company put up several securities, which the THA refrained from availing itself of following the opening of bankruptcy proceedings.
Za ta jamstva je podjetje zastavilo različna zavarovanja, ki jih THA po sprožitvi stečajnega postopka ni uveljavljal.
As an additional security, the THA was entitled to receive the revenues from the exploitation of that part of the company’s real estate which was not directly related to the business.
Kot dodatno zavarovanje je bila THA upravičena do uporabe zemljišč podjetja, ki niso bila nujno potrebna za poslovanje.
This real estate was valued at DEM 13,3 million.
Ta zemljišča so bila ocenjena na 13,3 milijona DEM.
The expected revenues were to have been used to repay those credits which were backed by the THA’s guarantees.
Izkupiček naj bi bil uporabljen za poplačilo kreditov, za katere je THA nudil jamstvo.
Germany admits that, with the consent of the THA, the credits to which these guarantees related were never repaid.
Nemčija priznava, da krediti, zavarovani s temi jamstvi, s soglasjem THA nikoli niso bili vrnjeni.
At the time they were availed of, these guarantees, including interest, totalled some DEM 24,9 million.
V času uveljavljanja so ta jamstva skupaj z obrestmi znašala 24,9 milijona DEM.
Measure 5: In December 1991 the company obtained direct investment grants (Investitionszuschüsse) of DEM 1,825 million from the Land of Thuringia.
Ukrep 5: Decembra 1991 je podjetje od dežele Turingije dobilo investicijsko podporo v višini 1,825 milijona DEM.
Measure 6: On 5 October 1992 the THA granted a loan of DEM 4,2 million to avert insolvency.
Ukrep 6: 5. oktobra 1992 je THA za preprečitev stečaja odobril posojilo v višini 4,2 milijona DEM.
Measure 7: A further loan of DEM 1,8 million was made available by the THA on 1 December 1992, also with the aim of averting insolvency.
Ukrep 7: 1. decembra 1992 je THA za preprečitev stečaja zagotovil nadaljnje posojilo v višini 1,8 milijona DEM.
Measure 8: The income from exploiting the company’s real estate mentioned in measure 3 totalled DEM 5,676 million.
Ukrep 8: Izkupički od uporabe zemljišč podjetja, omenjenih v ukrepu 3, so znašali skupaj 5,676 milijona DEM.
In 1993 DEM 3,4 million of the total income was made available to Kahla I instead of being used to repay the credits guaranteed by the THA.
Leta 1993 so bili 3,4 milijona DEM od celotnega izkupička dani na razpolago podjetju Kahla I, namesto da bi bil znesek uporabljen za poplačilo kreditov, ki jih je zavaroval THA.
Germany states that the payment of this amount to the THA was deferred but not waived as the whole amount of DEM 5,676 million was registered as part of the estate in bankruptcy.
Nemčija navaja, da je bilo plačilo tega zneska THA sicer preloženo, ni pa bilo opuščeno, saj je bil celotni znesek v višini 5,676 milijona DEM vključen v stečajno maso.
Consequently, the amount of the THA funds from which the company benefited instead of their being used to repay credits totalled DEM 5,676 million.
Zato znašajo sredstva THA, ki jih je dobilo podjetje in ki niso bila uporabljena za poplačilo kreditov, 5,676 milijona DEM.
Germany has not contested this fact.
Nemčija temu ni oporekala.
Measure 9: Two credits from Kreis- und Stadtsparkasse Jena totalling DEM 3,9 million.
Ukrep 9: Dva kredita Kreis- in Stadtsparkasse Jena v višini 3,9 milijona DEM.
These credits bore an interest rate of 13,25 % and 17,25 % and were secured by mortgages of DEM 10 million.
Ta dva kredita z obrestno mero 13,25 % oz. 17,25 % sta bila zavarovana s hipotekama v višini 10 milijona DEM.
Measure 10: Investment allowances of DEM 0,035 million granted during the period 1992–1995.
Ukrep 10: V času med 1992 in 1995 so bila plačana investicijska sredstva v višini 0,035 milijona DEM.
Kahla I benefited from financial support from the public authorities totalling DEM 115,736 million.
Kahla I je iz državnih sredstev skupno prejela finančno podporo v višini 115,736 milijona DEM.
Despite this financial support, bankruptcy proceedings were initiated on 29 September 1993.
Kljub tej finančni podpori je bil 29. septembra 1993 sprožen stečajni postopek.
Germany states that the THA registered liabilities amounting to DEM 41,2 million as part of the estate in bankruptcy.
Nemčija navaja, da je THA kot del stečajne mase vnesel obveznosti v višini 41,2 milijona DEM.
This amount included measures 3, 6, 7 and 8, including interest.
Ta znesek vsebuje ukrepe 3, 6, 7 in 8, vključno z obrestmi.
On 27 September 1993 the THA decided not to avail itself of the securities put up by the company in support of the guarantees under measure 4.
septembra 1993 se je THA odločil, da se bo odpovedal uveljavljanju zavarovanj podjetja za jamstva, omenjena v ukrepu 4.
On 18 July 1994 the THA, or its successor the BvS, relinquished its legal right to take possession of the land.
julija 1994 se je THA oz. njegova naslednica BvS odpovedal zakonitemu prevzemu zemljiške posesti.
According to Germany, this would have meant compensating other creditors and hence additional costs.
Po navedbah Nemčije bi ta ukrep pomenil poravnave z drugimi upniki in s tem dodatne stroške.
Financial measures in favour of KAHLA II
Finančni ukrepi za KAHLO II