natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Instead he will always seek to obtain an appropriate return on his investment according to the particular circumstances and the satisfaction of his short-, medium- or long-term interests.
Namesto tega bo vedno stremel k primernemu donosu na svojo vlogo glede na zadevne okoliščine in svoje kratko-, srednje- ali dolgoročne interese.
In the light of the market-economy investor principle, the key question in examining this case is whether a market-economy investor would have transferred capital that had the same characteristics as the Land of Schleswig-Holstein's promotion-related assets and under the same conditions, especially in view of the expected return on the investment
Ob upoštevanju „načela vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu“ se torej temeljno vprašanje v zadevni preiskavi glasi, ali bi vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu kapital, ki ima enake značilnosti kot sredstva dežele Schleswig-Holstein za pospeševanje, prenesel pod enakimi pogoji, zlasti glede na predviden donos na naložbo.
Article 295 lays down that the system of property ownership in the various Member States must not be affected.
V skladu s členom 295 Pogodbe ES ostajajo lastniška razmerja v različnih državah članicah nespremenjena.
But this cannot justify any infringement of the Treaty's competition rules.
To pa ne opravičuje nobene kršitve pravil o konkurenci iz Pogodbe.
In connection with the Landesbank proceedings, Germany has argued that the resources transferred could not have been used in any other profitable manner than by transferring them to a similar public institution.
Nemčija glede primerov deželnih bank trdi, da prenesena sredstva ne bi mogla biti uporabljena na kakršen koli drug dobičkonosen način kot s prenosom na podobno javno institucijo.
It is therefore argued that any remuneration for the transfer, i.e. any additional return on the assets transferred, would be sufficient to justify the transfer in the light of the market-economy investor principle.
Tako bi bilo vsako povračilo za prenos, t.j. vsak dodaten donos iz prenesenih sredstev, zadostno za utemeljitev prenosa z ozirom na „načelo vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu“.
It may be true that the transfer of the promotion-related assets to LSH, which subsequently allowed LSH to use the capital for solvency purposes, was the most commercially sensible use.
Morda je res tako, da je bil prenos sredstev za pospeševanje na LSH, ki je slednji omogočil, da kapital uporabi za namene solventnosti, gospodarsko najbolj smiselna uporaba.
However, as soon as such public funds and assets are used for commercial competitive activities, they must be subject to normal market economy rules.
Vendar je treba, takoj ko gre za uporabo javnih sredstev ali drugih aktiv za trgovske in konkurenčno usmerjene dejavnosti, uporabiti običajna pravila tržnega gospodarstva.
No change in ownership structure
Nespremenljivost lastniške strukture
One way for a market-economy investor in a bank to secure a normal market remuneration is to have an appropriate share in the bank's profits and increases in its value.
En način, da si vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu pri banki zagotovi običajno tržno nadomestilo, je ustrezna udeležba pri dobičkih in povečanjih vrednosti banke.
This can be achieved by means of a change in the structure of ownership in line with the capital injection, giving the investor an appropriate share in the dividends and in a possible increase in value as a result of enhanced earning capacities.
To je mogoče doseči s spremembo lastniške strukture, skladno s kapitalskim vložkom. To vlagatelju omogoča primerno udeležbo pri dividendah in morebitnem povečanju vrednosti kot rezultat večjih možnosti donosa.
Therefore, one way of ensuring an adequate return on the capital provided would have been to increase the Land's participation in LSH accordingly, provided that the bank's overall profitability corresponds to the normal rate of return that a market-economy investor would expect from his investment.
En način zagotovitve primernega donosa iz zagotovljenega kapitala bi bilo torej ustrezno povečanje udeležbe dežele pri LSH, v kolikor splošna donosnost banke ustreza običajnemu donosu, ki ga vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu pričakuje za svojo naložbo.
This would have avoided the discussion of whether the agreed rate of remuneration on that part of the funds actually used to underpin competitive business is appropriate.
S tem bi se izognili razpravi o vprašanju, ali je dogovorjeno povračilo za tisti del sredstev, ki so bila dejansko uporabljena za kritje konkurenčnih dejavnosti, primerno.
However, this course was not adopted by the Land.
Vendar se dežela Schleswig-Holstein ni odločila za takšno postopanje.
In this regard Germany argues that, for the purposes of state aid law, it is irrelevant how the Land of Schleswig-Holstein arranged a remuneration from LSH for the transfer of IB's capital, as the capital injection was not necessarily linked to acquisition of a share in profits and voting rights.
Nemčija v tem smislu ugovarja, da za pravila o državni pomoči nima pomena, na kakšen način si je dežela Schleswig-Holstein uredila nadomestilo s strani LSH za vlogo kapitala IB, saj kapitalski vložek ni nujno povezan s pridobitvijo udeležbe pri dobičku in glasovalnih pravicah.
It also points out that the transfer of IB's capital to LSH enabled the Land to obtain a higher price than would have otherwise been possible for holdings in LSH acquired by WestLB and Landesbank Baden-Württemberg.
Nadalje je treba upoštevati, da je prenos kapitala IB na LSH deželi Schleswig-Holstein omogočil doseči za udeležbo WestLB in Landesbank Baden-Württemberg pri LSH višjo nakupno ceno od tiste, ki bi bila mogoča brez tega prenosa.
Normally a market-economy investor is not content to avoid losses or to obtain a limited return on his investment, but attempts to maximise the return on his assets according to the circumstances in question and his interests.
Vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu se ponavadi ne zadovolji s tem, da se izogne izgubam ali da za svojo naložbo doseže omejen donos, temveč skuša donos iz svojih sredstev sorazmerno z obstoječimi okoliščinami in svojimi interesi čimbolj povečati.
So a private investor who already holds shares in the beneficiary undertaking will usually insist on either a change in ownership structure or an appropriate fixed remuneration.
Zato bo ponavadi tudi zasebni vlagatelj, ki že ima delnice upravičene družbe, zahteval bodisi spremembo lastniške strukture bodisi primerno fiksno obrestovano nadomestilo.
Otherwise he would forgo part of the additional returns achieved as a result of the capital injection, as the other shareholders would also profit from higher dividends and an increase in the undertaking's value without having made a corresponding contribution.
Sicer bi se odrekel delu dodatnih donosov, doseženih kot posledice vložka kapitala, saj imajo tudi ostali delničarji koristi od višjih dividend ter povečanja vrednosti družbe, brez da bi sami prispevali ustrezen kapital.
There is therefore nothing to indicate that a market-economy investor would have forgone an appropriate direct remuneration in a situation comparable to the transfer of promotion-related assets to LSH, where no shift in share structure was achievable and the owner of the other half of the shares did not make a corresponding capital contribution directly connected with the capital injection.
Torej ni razvidno, da bi se vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu v situaciji, primerljivi s prenosom sredstev za pospeševanje na LSH, v kateri ni bilo mogoče doseči premika v delniški strukturi in lastnik druge polovice delnic ni prispeval ustreznega kapitala, neposredno povezanega s kapitalskim vložkom, odrekel primernemu neposrednemu nadomestilu.
Capital basis for the remuneration
Kapitalska osnova za nadomestilo
As with its approach in the WestLB case, the Commission will determine the appropriate remuneration for the promotion-related assets transferred and the special purpose real-estate reserve on the basis of their commercial benefit to LSH, while drawing a distinction in the present case between the ‘business-expansion function’ and the (mere) ‘guarantee function’ of the promotion assets made available as equity capital for the bank's business activities.
Kot v primeru WestLB Komisija določa primerno nadomestilo za prenesena sredstva za pospeševanje in nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene glede na njihovo poslovno uporabnost za LSH. Komisija tudi v obravnavanem razlikuje med tako imenovano funkcijo širjenja dejavnosti in (samo) funkcijo jamstva sredstev za pospeševanje, ki so na razpolago kot lastni kapital za poslovne dejavnosti kreditne institucije.
In this regard the starting point for determining the normal market remuneration is the remuneration that would be demanded by a private investor providing a bank with core capital.
V tej zvezi je izhodišče za določitev običajnega tržnega nadomestila nadomestilo, ki bi ga zahteval zasebni vlagatelj, ki banki zagotavlja temeljni kapital.
Where the capital provided is shown in the balance sheet as equity but is not recognised as core capital for supervisory purposes or is intended to underpin promotion-related activities, it is not available for expanding business.
Če je razpoložljiv kapital v bilanci stanja sicer vknjižen kot lastni kapital, a ni priznan s strani nadzorstva kot temeljni kapital ali se uporablja za kritje dejavnosti pospeševanja, ni na razpolago za širjenje dejavnosti.
Its availability to the bank's creditors at least for the purposes of covering liabilities (‘guarantee function’) means that its economic function can still be compared to that of a surety or guarantee.
Ker je upnikom kreditne institucije na razpolago vsaj za namene jamstva (t.i. funkcija jamstva), se lahko njegova gospodarska funkcija vseeno primerja s funkcijo jamstva ali garancije.
The normal market remuneration of the ‘guarantee function’ of capital is calculated according to the return which a private guarantor would have demanded from a credit institution comparable to LSH in size and risk strategy.
Običajno tržno nadomestilo za tako imenovano funkcijo jamstva kapitala se izračuna na podlagi nadomestila, ki bi ga zasebni garant zahteval od kreditne institucije, primerljive z LSH, kar zadeva njegovo velikost in strategijo tveganja.
On 1 January 1991, the Land of Schleswig-Holstein transferred to LSH the capital of IB, which, according to the final audit, came to DEM 1306 million.
Dežela Schleswig-Holstein je 1. januarja 1991 na LSH prenesla kapital IB, ki se je glede na končno revizijo popravil na 1306 milijonov DEM.
The capital transferred increased in value year on year, amounting to DEM 1967,6 million in 2003.
Vložen kapital IB se je povečeval iz leta v leto in leta 2003 dosegel vrednost 1967,6 milijona DEM.
On the balance-sheet date of 31 December 1999 the Land also transferred the special-purpose real-estate reserve to LSH, thereby increasing the equity capital shown on the balance sheet by DEM […] million.
Na datum bilance stanja 31. decembra 1999 je dežela na LSH prenesla tudi nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene, kar je privedlo do povečanja lastnega kapitala za [...] milijonov DEM, kakor je prikazano v bilanci stanja.
After two further transfers, this special-purpose reserve totalled DEM […] million at 31 December 2002.
Po dveh nadaljnjih prenosih je ta rezerva za posebne namene 31. decembra 2002 skupaj znašala [...] milijonov DEM.
Each year the full amount of the capital transferred from IB was recognised as additional core capital by BAKred.
Prenesen kapital IB je BAKred vsako leto v celoti priznal kot dodatni temeljni kapital.
However, it was not entirely at LSH's disposal for underpinning its competitive business.
Vendar LSH ni bil na razpolago v celoti za kritje njenih konkurenčnih dejavnosti.
As in the WestLB case, part of the special-purpose reserve was also used for promotion-related tasks by IB itself.
Kot v primeru WestLB se je rezerva za posebne namene delno uporabljala tudi za naloge pospeševanja IB same.
Accordingly, this part of the special-purpose reserve was not at LSH's disposal for expanding competitive areas of its business, although it did have a guarantee function.
Ta del rezerve za posebne namene tako LSH sicer ni bil na razpolago za širjenje konkurenčnih dejavnosti, opravljal pa je funkcijo jamstva.
The same applied to the special-purpose real-estate reserve, which was not recognised as core capital by BAKred, but served as a guarantee for the bank.
Enako velja za nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene, ki jih BAKred ni priznal kot temeljni kapital, a so za banko opravljale funkcijo jamstva.
The Commission believes that the extent to which the capital provided was actually used cannot be a factor in determining the appropriate remuneration.
Komisija je mnenja, da pri določanju primernega nadomestila ni mogoče upoštevati obsega, v katerem je bil razpoložljiv kapital dejansko uporabljen.
So the fact that LSH used the injected capital in full between 1999 and 2003 is irrelevant to the question of the capital basis being examined.
Zato je dejstvo, da je LSH razpoložljiv kapital uporabila v celoti le v obdobju med 1999 in 2003, nepomembno tudi za tukaj obravnavano odločilno kapitalsko osnovo.
According to Germany, it was only from that time on that the capital could be used to cover risk-bearing assets.
Po navedbah Nemčije je bilo kapital šele po tem mogoče uporabljati za kritje tveganih sredstev.
However, insofar as the capital had already been shown in the balance sheet as own funds, it also had at least a guarantee function, as explained above in more detail.
V kolikor je bil kapital že pred tem v bilanci stanja vknjižen kot lastna sredstva, je opravljal vsaj funkcijo jamstva, kot je bolj podrobno pojasnjeno zgoraj.
The same applies to the amount used by the IB itself and to the special-purpose real-estate reserve.
Enako velja za znesek, uporabljen s strani IB same, in za nepremičnine kot rezervo za posebne namene.
These points must also be taken into account in determining the appropriate remuneration.
To je treba upoštevati pri določanju primernega nadomestila.
As explained above, the starting point for determining the normal market remuneration in this case is the remuneration that would be demanded by a market-economy investor providing a bank with equity capital.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, je izhodišče za določitev običajnega tržnega nadomestila v tem primeru nadomestilo, ki bi ga zahteval vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu, ki banki zagotavlja lastni kapital.
It is beyond dispute that the promotion-related assets transferred to LSH cannot be compared directly to other transactions.
Nesporno drži, da sredstev za pospeševanje, ki so bila prenesena na LSH, ni mogoče neposredno primerjati z drugimi transakcijami.
The transfer might resemble certain instruments in some respects, but there are also enough differences compared with each instrument to assign only a limited value to this comparison.
Čeprav je lahko transakcija v nekaterih pogledih podobna določenim instrumentom, pa obstaja glede na vsak instrument toliko razlik, da ima vsaka primerjava le omejeno veljavo.
Consequently, as in the WestLB case, the appropriate remuneration can be determined only by comparing the asset transfer with various equity instruments normally found on the markets, in order to determine by analogy which instrument is most similar to it and is therefore the benchmark for determining the remuneration.
Posledično je mogoče, kot v primeru WestLB, primerno nadomestilo tudi tukaj določiti samo tako, da se prenos sredstev primerja z različnimi instrumenti lastnega kapitala, ki se običajno pojavljajo na trgu, da se smiselno določi instrument, ki mu je najbolj podoben in ki zato služi kot merilo za določitev nadomestila.
The complainant submits that the promotion-related assets concentrated in the special-purpose reserve can be compared only to share capital.
Pritožnik trdi, da je sredstva za pospeševanje, ki so zbrana v rezervi za posebne namene, mogoče primerjati le z osnovnim kapitalom.
The special-purpose reserve was recognised by BAKred as core capital (‘tier 1’ capital) and can therefore be compared only with equity instruments that were recognised as core capital in Germany in the year of the transfer.
Rezervo za posebne namene je nemški bančni nadzorni organ (Bundesaufsichtsamt für das Kreditwesen – „BAKred“) priznal kot temeljni kapital (kapital „razred 1“) in jo je torej mogoče primerjati le s takimi instrumenti lastnega kapitala, ki so bili v Nemčiji priznani kot temeljni kapital v letu prenosa.
However, Germany considers that the only purpose of comparison with various equity instruments is to determine which risk profile (and hence which range of remuneration) is closest to that of the investment from an investor's point of view.
Nemčija pa meni, da je edini namen primerjave z različnimi instrumenti lastnega kapitala določiti, kakšnemu profilu tveganja (in s tem razponu nadomestila) je naložba z vidika vlagatelja najbližja.
IB's capital is therefore said to be closest in nature to perpetual preferred shares, profit participation certificates and silent partnership reserves.
IB-kapital je tako najbolj podoben trajnim prednostnim delnicam, pravicam za udeležbo pri dobičku in vložkom tihe družbe.
It should be borne in mind that the instruments used by Germany for the comparison normally provide a bank with only a very limited part of own funds.
Treba je upoštevati, da instrumenti, ki jih je Nemčija uporabila za primerjavo, banki praviloma zagotavljajo le zelo omejen del njenih lastnih sredstev.
By contrast, the promotion-related assets transferred to LSH virtually tripled its own funds for solvency purposes.
S prenosom sredstev za pospeševanje pa so bila lastna sredstva za potrebe solventnosti skoraj potrojena.
Even if one takes account only of the increase in the amount usable by LSH to underpin its commercial business, this still represents an increase of over 50 %.
Tudi če upoštevamo zgolj povečanje zneska, ki ga je LSH lahko uporabila za kritje svojih poslovnih dejavnosti, pomeni to še vedno povečanje lastnih sredstev za več kot 50 %.
As the BdB points out, the other instruments referred to were usually issued up to a much lower level.
Kakor poudarja BdB, so se drugi navedeni instrumenti ponavadi uporabljali le za bistveno manjši delež.
It would not have been possible to increase LSH's capital in the same way, and on a permanent basis, by one of the instruments compared.
Z nobenim izmed primerljivih instrumentov ne bi bilo mogoče kapitala LSH povečati na enak način in na trajni osnovi.
In this connection, it should also be stressed that the relatively wide range of innovative equity instruments now available to credit institutions in several countries for use as original own funds and additional own funds did not exist in Germany back in 1991, when IB's capital was transferred or in 1993, when LSH had to comply with new, stricter capital requirements.
V povezavi s tem je treba tudi poudariti, da relativno široka paleta inovativnih instrumentov lastnega kapitala, ki so sedaj kreditnim institucijam na razpolago v več državah kot temeljna lastna sredstva in dodatna lastna sredstva, v Nemčiji še ni obstajala, ko se je leta 1991 zgodil prenos kapitala IB na LSH in ko je morala LSH leta 1993 izpolniti strožje kapitalske zahteve, ki so začele veljati v tistem času.
Some of these instruments have been developed in the meantime, while others already existed but were not accepted in Germany.
Nekateri izmed teh instrumentov so bili razviti šele kasneje, drugi pa so že obstajali, a v Nemčiji niso bili priznani.
In practice, the main instruments which were available and used were profit participation certificates and subordinated loans (both of which are additional own funds, the latter being accepted only since 1993).
Instrumenti, ki so v praksi bili na razpolago in so se v glavnem tudi uporabljali, so bila potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku in podrejena posojila (obakrat gre za dodatna lastna sredstva, drugi instrument pa je bil priznan šele leta 1993).
It is therefore inappropriate to compare IB's capital to such innovative instruments, most of which have developed in the meantime and some of which were available only in other countries.
Primerjava kapitala IB s takšnimi inovativnimi instrumenti, ki so bili večinoma razviti šele kasneje in so bili deloma na razpolago le v drugih državah, tako ni primerna.
As to the two instruments which, as the closest benchmarks, play the central role in Germany's comparison, namely perpetual preferred shares and profit participation certificates, a number of specific points should be stressed.
Glede instrumentov lastnega kapitala, ki imata kot najbližji referenčni vrednosti v primerjavi Nemčije osrednjo vlogo, namreč trajne prednostne delnice in potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku, je treba poudariti nekatere posebnosti.
Perpetual preferred shares constitute original own funds (core capital) in some countries but are still not accepted as such in Germany.
Trajne prednostne delnice se v nekaterih državah štejejo kot temeljna lastna sredstva (temeljni kapital), vendar v Nemčiji kot take še naprej niso priznane.
Profit participation certificates constitute only additional own funds, whereas IB's capital qualifies as original own funds.
Potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku štejejo zgolj k dodatnim lastnim sredstvom, medtem ko ima kapital IB kakovost temeljnih lastnih sredstev.
The latter is therefore of much greater use to LSH because it can be used to raise additional own funds (such as profit participation certificates) up to the same amount in order to increase the bank's own funds.
LSH ima zato od kapitala IB veliko večjo korist, saj si lahko z njim zagotovi dodatna lastna sredstva (kot na primer potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku) do enakega obsega z namenom povečanja lastnega kapitala.
Moreover, if profitable years followed loss-making ones, profit participation certificates would be replenished before IB's capital.
Prav tako bi se v primeru, da po letih poslovanja z izgubo nastopijo dobičkonosna leta, najprej do nominalne vrednosti napolnila potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku in šele nato kapital IB.
In addition, IB's capital is available to LSH without any time limitation, while profit participation certificates are usually issued for a period of ten years.
Poleg tega je kapital IB LSH na razpolago brez vsakršne časovne omejitve, medtem ko so potrdila o udeležbi pri dobičku ponavadi izdana za deset let.
It is also worth recalling the enormous, atypical size of the capital injection and the fact that the ranking in the event of losses must be seen in this context.
Nadalje je treba znova opozoriti na to, da je ogromen obseg kapitalskega vložka atipičen in da je treba v zvezi s tem upoštevati vrstni red obremenitev v primeru izgub.
Since the share of IB's capital is rather large, it will be used relatively quickly when major losses occur.
Ker je delež kapitala IB relativno velik, bo ob pojavu večjih izgub uporabljen relativno hitro.
For all these reasons, the Commission believes that, because of the peculiarities of IB's capital, the comparison with innovative equity instruments submitted by Germany is not a suitable way to determine the appropriate remuneration to be paid for IB's capital.
Iz vseh teh razlogov je Komisija mnenja, da primerjava z inovativnimi instrumenti lastnega kapitala, ki jo je opravila Nemčija, zaradi posebnosti kapitala IB ni primerna, da bi služila kot osnova za določitev primernega nadomestila za kapital IB.
Moreover, in the understanding of 8 October 2004, the parties assumed that the transaction was akin to a share capital injection.
Poleg tega so v zadevnem primeru stranke v dogovoru z dne 8. oktobra 2004 izhajale iz podobnosti zadevne transakcije vložku osnovnega kapitala.
Furthermore, the Commission agrees with the BdB that the risk to the investor is not reduced by the subordination agreement in the covering agreement between LSH's shareholders whereby IB's capital is to be used only after other equity capital of LSH.
Nadalje se Komisija strinja z BdB, da dogovor o podrejenosti v okvirnem sporazumu med delničarji LSH, po katerem je kapital IB uporabljen šele za ostalim lastnim kapitalom LSH, za vlagatelja ne predstavlja manjšega tveganja.