natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to point 1.2., State aid which is granted without imposing any obligation on the part of the recipients and which is intended to improve the situation of undertakings and increase their business liquidity and which has the effect of improving the recipient’s income is, as operating aid, incompatible with the common market.
Skladno s točko 1.2. je državna pomoč, ki se odobri brez obveznosti prejemnika in ki je namenjena izboljšanju položaja podjetij in izboljšanju njihove poslovne likvidnosti in ki poveča prejemnikov prihodek kot pomoč za tekoče poslovanje, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
According to the Guidelines, operating aid can only be declared compatible with the common market if such aid is linked to a restructuring plan compatible with the common market.
V skladu s smernicami se lahko pomoč za tekoče poslovanje razglasi kot združljivo s skupnim trgom, če je takšna pomoč povezana s programom za prestrukturiranje, združljivim s skupnim trgom.
As such a restructuring plan was not submitted, the Commission considered that the investments were incompatible with the common market.
Ker takšen načrt za prestrukturiranje ni bil predložen, je Komisija ugotovila, da so bile naložbe nezdružljive s skupnim trgom.
III COMMENTS FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM
III PRIPOMBE ZDRUŽENEGA KRALJESTVA
In its reply of 19 May 2005, the United Kingdom contends that SLAP should be considered as a private body.
V svojem odgovoru z dne 19. maja 2005 Združeno kraljestvo trdi, da bi bilo treba SLAP obravnavati kot zasebni subjekt.
It further states that all evidence concerning the case had already been forwarded to the Commission, that the information contained in the Seafish Merger Report is considered sufficient as a basis for the assumptions made, that the assumptions made in the report should be considered conservative and prudent, and that the original business case for the mergers as set out in the report was justifiable in the context of SLAP’s capacity as a private investor.
Nadalje navaja, da so bili vsi dokazi glede primera že posredovani Komisiji, da se informacije iz poročila o združitvi Shetland Seafish Merger Report štejejo za zadostne kot osnova za predpostavke, da bi bilo treba predpostavke v poročilu šteti za konservativne in preudarne, in da je bil prvotni poslovni primer združitve, kot je določen v poročilu, upravičen v okviru zmožnosti SLAP kot zasebnega vlagatelja.
The United Kingdom maintains that if the Commission adopts a negative decision, recovery of the aid should not be required, as it would be contrary to the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.
Združeno kraljestvo trdi, da če Komisija sprejme negativno odločbo, vračilo pomoči ni potrebno, ker bi bilo v nasprotju z načelom varovanja pravno utemeljenih pričakovanj.
With reference to Commission Decision 2003/612/EC of 3 June 2003 on loans for the purchase of fishing quotas in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom) [4], the United Kingdom closes by saying that the UK authorities have consistently acted in such a way that it could reasonably be concluded that the fund is a private fund under the rules governing the Community Structural Funds.
Ob sklicevanju na Odločbo Komisije 2003/612/ES z dne 3. junija 2003 o posojilih za nakup ribolovnih kvot na Shetlandskih otokih (Združeno kraljestvo) [4] Združeno kraljestvo zaključi z besedami, da so organi oblasti Združenega Kraljestva dosledno ravnali na takšen način, da se lahko upravičeno zaključi, da je sklad po pravilih, ki urejajo strukturne sklade Skupnosti, zasebni sklad.
IV ASSESSMENT
IV OCENA
It must be determined first whether the measure can be regarded as State aid and, if this is the case, whether this aid is compatible with the common market.
Najprej je treba opredeliti, ali se ukrep lahko šteje za državno pomoč in, če je tako, ali je ta pomoč združljiva s skupnim trgom.
According to Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, ‘save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’.
Po členu 87(1) Pogodbe ES, „razen če ta pogodba ne določa drugače, je državna pomoč ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, v kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
Four conditions are required for classifying a measure as a State aid: first, the measure must provide some advantage to the undertakings which benefit from it; second, the aid must be granted by the State or through State resources; third, it must distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings; and, finally, must affect trade between Member States.
Za opredelitev ukrepa kot državne pomoči so potrebni štirje pogoji: prvič, ukrep mora nuditi določeno ugodnost za podjetja, ki imajo od tega koristi; drugič, pomoč mora dodeliti država ali mora biti dodeljena iz državnih sredstev; tretjič, pomoč mora izkrivljati konkurenco ali groziti z izkrivljanjem konkurence z dajanjem prednosti določenim podjetjem; in nenazadnje mora vplivati na trgovino med državami članicami.
The funds of SLAP which have been used for the investment are derived from funding by the Charitable Trust.
Sredstva SLAP, ki so bila porabljena za naložbo, je financiral Dobrodelni sklad.
The Charitable Trust was created by the SIC to receive and hold, on behalf of the Shetland community, disturbance receipts which the oil industry had agreed to pay.
Dobrodelni sklad je ustanovil SIC za prejemanje in posedovanje prejemkov za motnje v imenu Shetlandske skupnosti, za katere je naftna industrija privolila, da jih plača.
As was already pointed out by the Commission in its decision of 3 June 2003 on loans for the purchase of fishing quotas in the Shetland Islands, these monies, which are directly related to the disturbance caused to the Shetland Islands population and not to the actual provision of the harbour facilities, cannot be regarded as private funds but must be regarded as ‘State resources’ for the purposes of Article 87 of the EC Treaty.
Kot je Komisija že poudarila v svoji odločbi z dne 3. junija 2003 o posojilih za nakup ribolovnih kvot na Shetlandskih otokih, teh denarnih sredstev, ki so neposredno povezana z motnjo, povzročeno prebivalstvu Shetlandskih otokov in ne z dejanskim upravljanjem pristaniških objektov in naprav, ni mogoče šteti za zasebna sredstva, temveč za državna sredstva za namene člena 87 Pogodbe ES.
The investments of SLAP currently under investigation are funded from the same type of funding.
Naložbe SLAP, ki se trenutno raziskujejo, so financirane iz iste vrste sredstev.
With regard to the conclusions of the Commission in its decision mentioned in paragraph (24) and the fact that the United Kingdom has not provided any additional evidence that these funds are private funds, the Commission considers that the investments must be regarded as funded from State resources.
Glede na zaključke Komisije v svoji odločbi, omenjeni v odstavku 24, in dejstvo, da Združeno kraljestvo ni predložilo dodatnih dokazov, da so ta sredstva zasebna sredstva, Komisija meni, da je treba naložbe šteti kot financirane iz državnih sredstev.
In its decision mentioned above, the Commission also pointed out that the trustees of the Charitable Trust are the councillors of the SIC.
V svoji zgoraj omenjeni odločbi je Komisija tudi poudarila, da so skrbniki Dobrodelnega sklada svetniki SIC.
Although these councillors act as trustees ex officio, the fact that they are nominated by the SIC means that the latter is able to exercise a dominant influence over the trust and SLAP as well as over the funds at their disposal.
Čeprav ti svetniki delujejo kot skrbniki po uradni dolžnosti, dejstvo, da jih imenuje SIC pomeni, da ima SIC lahko prevladujoč vpliv na sklad in SLAP ter na sredstva, ki so jima na voljo.
There is therefore a set of indicators showing that decisions cannot be taken without regard to the requirements of the public authority.
Tako obstaja vrsta kazalcev, ki kažejo, da odločitev ni mogoče sprejeti ne glede na zahteve organa oblasti.
Therefore, in the light of the Stardust case [5] and given the fact that the funds of SLAP are derived from public funding and that the public authority is able, directly or indirectly, to exercise a dominant influence over both the Charitable Trust and its funds, the decisions regarding those funds must be regarded as decisions imputable to the public authority and granted through State resources.
Zato je treba, ob upoštevanju primera Stardust [5] in ob dejstvu, da sredstva SLAP izhajajo iz javnega financiranja in da ima organ oblasti lahko, neposredno ali posredno, prevladujoč vpliv na Dobrodelni sklad in njegova sredstva, odločitve glede teh sredstev šteti kot odločitve organa oblasti in dodeljene prek državnih sredstev.
Advantage for the beneficiary and the Market economy investor principle
Prednost za upravičenca in načelo vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu
Public investments are regarded as State aid if the investments are decided upon in circumstances which would not be acceptable to a private investor acting under normal market-economy principles.
Javne naložbe se štejejo za državno pomoč, če se o njih odloča v okoliščinah, ki ne bi bile sprejemljive za zasebnega vlagatelja, ki deluje v skladu z običajnimi načeli tržnega gospodarstva.
According to the United Kingdom, SLAP acted like a normal market-economy investor in investing in Shetland Seafish Ltd and the takeover of Whalsay Ltd by Shetland Seafish Ltd. This allegedly follows from two reports submitted to the board at the time of the investments: the Shetland Seafish Merger Report and the Whalsay Report.
Po mnenju Združenega kraljestva je SLAP ravnal kot običajni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu z naložbo v Shetland Seafish Ltd. in njegovim prevzemom Whalsay Ltd. To domnevno izhaja iz dveh poročil, predloženih upravi v času naložb: poročila o združitvi Shetland Seafish in poročila Whalsay.
An investment can be considered to be in line with the market economy investor principle if the investment is made in circumstances that would be acceptable to a private investor operating under normal market economy conditions.
Naložba se šteje za usklajeno z načelom vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, če je izvedena v okoliščinah, ki bi bile sprejemljive za zasebnega vlagatelja, ki deluje pod običajnimi pogoji tržnega gospodarstva.
An investment would not be considered in line with the principle where the financial position of the company, and particularly the structure and volume of its debt, is such that a normal return cannot be expected within a reasonable time from the investment.
Naložba se ne šteje za usklajeno z načelom, če je finančno stanje podjetja, zlasti struktura in višina njegovega dolga, takšno, da ni mogoče pričakovati običajnega donosa v razumnem roku od naložbe.
The prognoses of profit contained in the Seafish Merger Report of 27 September 1999 are based on a number of assumptions, for which insufficient arguments are provided.
Napovedi dobička v poročilu o združitvi Seafish Merger Report z dne 27. septembra 1999 so osnovane na številnih predpostavkah, za katere je na voljo premalo argumentov.
The report contains a projected profit–and-loss account, a projected balance sheet and a projected cash flow statement for 2000, 2001 and 2002.
Poročilo vsebuje načrtovani izkaz poslovnega izida, načrtovano bilanco stanja in načrtovani izkaz finančnega izida za leta 2000, 2001 in 2002.
The data in those sheets show that Shetland Seafish Ltd would become profitable and that the turnover was expected to increase, relative to 2000, by more than 16 % in 2001 and by 26 % in 2002.
Podatki v teh izkazih kažejo, da bi Shetland Seafish Ltd. postal donosen in da naj bi se prihodek leta 2001 povečal za več kot 16 % v primerjavi z letom 2000 in za 26 % v letu 2002.
However, the report does not contain sufficient figures and arguments to demonstrate the reliability of these projections, since the requisite figures on supply, prices and production needed to support these expectations are not contained in the report.
Vendar pa poročilo vsebuje premalo številčnih podatkov in argumentov, da bi dokazalo zanesljivost teh napovedi, saj zahtevane številke o dobavi, cenah in proizvodnji, ki naj bi potrdile ta pričakovanja, v poročilu niso vsebovane.
Apart from the fact that the Commission is not able to establish the credibility of these projections and assumptions, even if they could be considered accurate and reliable, without such figures on supply, prices and production they would be insufficient for any normal private investor wishing to invest in such an operation.
Napovedi in predpostavke bi bile ne glede na to, da Komisija ni zmožna dokazati njihove verodostojnosti, brez takšnih številčnih podatkov o dobavi, cenah in proizvodnji, nezadostne za običajnega zasebnega vlagatelja, ki želi vlagati v takšno dejavnost, četudi bi bile točne in zanesljive.
It is mentioned in the report that ‘the new management organisation and production strategy have been carefully devised to address previous shortfall within the two companies concerned.
V poročilu je omenjeno, da „je bila nova strategija organizacije upravljanja in proizvodnje skrbno načrtovana, da bi odpravila prejšnji primanjkljaj v teh dveh zadevnih podjetjih.
But the core of the new philosophy is the recognition that only a market led approach will ensure success and continued whitefish processing in Shetland’, which according to the United Kingdom demonstrates that the intent at the time when the investments were made was to ensure that the companies were operating in a manner consistent with their market in order to ensure the long term viability of the companies.
Vendar pa je bistvo nove filozofije spoznanje, da bo le tržno voden pristop zagotovil uspeh in nadaljnjo predelavo belih rib na Shetlandu“, kar po mnenju Združenega kraljestva kaže, da je bil namen v času naložb zagotoviti, da podjetja delujejo na način, skladen z njihovim trgom, da bi bila zagotovljena dolgoročna sposobnost preživetja podjetij.
From the figures and data contained in the report the Commission observes that the UK’s arguments have not been applied correctly and thoroughly.
Iz številk in podatkov iz poročila Komisija ugotavlja, da argumenti Združenega kraljestva niso bili pravilno in temeljito uporabljeni.
In absence of comprehensive data pointing to the decision to invest, the Commission considers, indeed, that the investment cannot be considered a profitable investment and thus that SLAP had not acted like a normal private investor.
Brez obsežnih podatkov, ki bi kazali na odločitev za naložbo, Komisija seveda meni, da naložb ni mogoče šteti za donosne in zato SLAP ni ravnal kot običajni zasebni vlagatelj.
The Whalsay report was issued by the managing director of Whalsay Ltd and cannot be considered to be an independent report on Whalsay and on the possible acquisition of the company by Shetland Seafish Ltd In the report it is stated that both companies clearly suffer from the restrictive supplies of salmon on the market and that a merger between the two companies ‘offers not only the best, but maybe the only chance of securing continued and sustainable employment in this industry’.
Poročilo Whalsay je izdal generalni direktor Whalsay Ltd. in ga ni mogoče šteti za neodvisno poročilo o morebitnem nakupu podjetja s strani Shetland Seafish Ltd. V poročilu je navedeno, da sta obe podjetji nedvomno prizadeti zaradi omejene dobave lososa na trgu in da združitev teh dveh podjetij „nudi ne le najboljšo, temveč morda edino možnost zagotovitve nadaljnjega in trajnostnega zaposlovanja v tej industriji“.
The report furthermore concludes that ‘The decision of the Board of SLAP, should it approve proposals to invest in the merger between Seafish and Whalsay, must therefore be to a background of ensuring that salmon supplies are secured on an enduring basis; the risk of not achieving this must make approval of the merger a highly risky decision and leave both SLAP and Seafish vulnerable.’.
Nadalje poročilo zaključi, da „mora odločitev uprave SLAP, če naj bi odobrila predloge za naložbo v združitev Seafish in Whalsay, zagotoviti trajno dobavo lososa; zaradi tveganja, da to ne bo doseženo, je odobritev združitve zelo tvegana in pušča SLAP in Seafish ranljiva“.
The report clearly expresses doubts as to the profits following from the merger between the companies and the reference to securing employment in this industry.
Poročilo jasno izrazi dvome glede dobičkov, ki izhajajo iz združitve podjetij, in glede sklicevanja na zagotavljanje zaposlovanja v tej industriji.
Furthermore, the report does not contain sufficient data to show the profitability of the investment in question.
Poleg tega poročilo ne vsebuje zadostnih podatkov, da bi prikazalo donosnost zadevnih naložb.
It shows that no additional information has become available and been used when deciding to invest; the United Kingdom has explicitly confirmed that the decision to invest was indeed taken solely on the basis of this report.
Kaže, da dodatni podatki niso bili na voljo in uporabljeni, ko se je odločalo o naložbi; Združeno kraljestvo je izrecno potrdilo, da je bila odločitev za naložbo dejansko sprejeta le na podlagi tega poročila.
Therefore, in particular having regard to the doubt expressed in the report and the lack of additional data proving otherwise, the Commission can only conclude that this investment would likewise not have been decided upon by a normal private investor.
Zato lahko Komisija, zlasti ob upoštevanju dvoma, izraženega v poročilu, in ob pomanjkanju dodatnih podatkov, ki bi dokazali nasprotno, zaključi, da se tudi običajni zasebni vlagatelj ne bi odločil za to naložbo.
With regard to the foregoing, the Commission considers that the investments in Shetland Seafish Ltd made in 1999 and 2000 by SLAP are not normal commercial investments which could have been decided upon by any normal private investor.
Ob upoštevanju navedenega Komisija meni, da naložbe v Shetland Seafish Ltd., ki jih je v letih 1999 in 2000 izvedel SLAP, niso običajne gospodarske naložbe, za katere bi se odločil običajni zasebni vlagatelj.
From the information available, the Commission concludes that the companies involved, L.A.
Iz razpoložljivih podatkov Komisija zaključi, da udeleženi podjetji, L.A.
Williamson Ltd and Ronas Ltd, merged into Shetland Seafish Ltd and Whalsay Ltd, would not have been able to continue operating without the investments concerned.
Williamson Ltd. in Ronas Ltd., združeni v Shetland Seafish Ltd. in Whalsay Ltd., ne bi bili zmožni še naprej delovati brez zadevnih naložb.
In any case, the investments have strengthened their position on the market, which would not have occurred otherwise.
Vsekakor so naložbe okrepile njun položaj na trgu, kar se drugače ne bi zgodilo.
Selectivity and distortion of competition
Selektivnost in izkrivljanje konkurence
The investments are for the benefit of the companies involved, and these companies are in direct competition with other fish processing companies both within the United Kingdom and in other Member States; therefore they distort or threaten to distort competition.
Naložbe so v korist udeleženih podjetij in ta podjetja neposredno konkurirajo z drugimi podjetji za predelavo rib v Združenem kraljestvu in v drugih državah članicah; zato izkrivljajo ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco.
In the light of the foregoing the investments of SLAP in Shetland Seafish Ltd are regarded as State aid within the meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty.
Glede na navedeno se naložbe SLAP šteje za državno pomoč v smislu člena 87 Pogodbe ES.
State aid can be declared compatible with the common market if it complies with one of the exceptions set out in the EC Treaty.
Državno pomoč se lahko razglasi za združljivo s skupnim trgom, če ustreza eni izmed izjem, navedenih v Pogodbi ES.
As regards State aid to the fisheries sector, State aid measures are deemed to be compatible with the common market if they comply with the conditions of the 2004 Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture [6].
Glede državne pomoči ribiškemu sektorju se ukrepi državne pomoči štejejo za združljive s skupnim trgom, če so skladni s pogoji smernic za pregled državne pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo [6] iz leta 2004.
According to point 5.3 of those Guidelines, an ‘unlawful aid’ within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 will be appraised in accordance with the guidelines applicable at the time when the administrative act setting up the aid has entered into force.
Skladno s točko 5.3. teh smernic se bo „nezakonita pomoč“ v smislu člena 1(f) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 presojala v skladu s smernicami, ki so veljale v času, ko je začel veljati upravni akt, ki uvaja pomoč.
As the investments made by SLAP took place in 1999 and 2000, the compatibility of the aid will have to be assessed under the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture of 1997 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Guidelines’; see point 22)), which were in force at the time.
Ker so bile naložbe SLAP izvedene v letih 1999 in 2000, bo treba združljivost pomoči oceniti v okviru smernic za pregled državne pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo iz leta 1997 (v nadaljevanju „smernice“; glej točko (22)), ki so bile takrat veljavne.
According to Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2468/98, which replaced Regulation (EC) No 3699/93 on 3 November 1998 [7], Member States may under the conditions of Annex II to that regulation take measures to encourage capital investment in the field of processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products.
V skladu s členom 11(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 2468/98, ki je nadomestila Uredbo (ES) št. 3699/93 dne 3. novembra 1998 [7], lahko države članice pod pogoji Priloge II te uredbe sprejmejo ukrepe za spodbujanje kapitalskih naložb na področju predelave in trženja ribiških proizvodov in proizvodov iz ribogojstva.
Point 2.4 of Annex II states that eligible investments for processing and marketing shall in particular relate to the construction and acquisition of buildings and installations, to the acquisition of new equipment and installations needed for the processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products between the time of landing and the end-product stage or to the application of new technologies intended in particular to improve competitiveness and add value.
Točka 2.4. Priloge II navaja, da se morajo upravičene naložbe v predelavo in trženje nanašati predvsem na izgradnjo in nakup objektov in obratov, potrebnih za predelavo in trženje ribiških proizvodov in proizvodov iz ribogojstva v času med iztovarjanjem in fazo končnega produkta, ali na uporabo novih tehnologij, namenjenih zlasti izboljšanju konkurenčnosti in dodane vrednosti.
The investments of SLAP cannot be considered to be investments relating to either of these issues and should thus in accordance with point 2.3 of the Guidelines be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Naložb SLAP ni mogoče šteti za naložbe, ki se nanašajo na katero koli od teh zadev, in jih je treba zato v skladu s točko 2.3. smernic oceniti na osnovi posameznega primera.
As the investments have the effect of improving the general financial situation of Shetland Seafish Ltd, this aid should be viewed as operating aid.
Ker so naložbe izboljšale splošno finančno stanje Shetland Seafish Ltd., je treba to pomoč obravnavati kot pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.