natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Smits/Stichting Ziekenfonds, C-157/99 [2001] ECR I-5473) and Abdon Vanbraekel, C-368/98 [2001]ECR I-5363
Smits/Stichting Ziekenfonds, PSES 2001, str. I-5473, in C-368/98, Abdon Vanbraekel, PSES 2001, str. I-5363.
judgment of 29 September 2000, on case T-55/99,‘Confederacion Espanola de Transporte de Mercancias’, [2000] ECR II-03207.
Sodba z dne 29. septembra 2000, zadeva T-55/99, „Confederacion Espanola de Transporte de Mercancias“, PSES 2000, str. II-03207.
see among others judgment of 13.7.1988 on case 102/87 French Rep v/s CCE, ECR 1988, p.04067 and judgment of 24.7.2003 on case C280/00 Altmark, ECR 2003, p.07747, points 77 and 78.
Glej, med drugim, sodbo z dne 13.7.1988 v zadevi 102/87 Republika Francija c/ CCE, PSES 1988, str. 04067, in sodbo z dne 24.7.2003 v zadevi C-280/00, Altmark, PSES 2003, str. I-07747, točki 77 in 78.
see footnote 3
Glej opombo 3.
see footnote 4
Glej opombo 4.
O.J. L10 of 13.01.2001, p.33
UL L 10, 13.1.2001, str. 33.
Guidelines on national regional aid, published in the O.J. C74 of 10.03.1998, p.9.
UL C 74, 10.3.1998, str. 9.
Article 87(2) stipulates that the following aid shall be compatible with the common market: (a) aid having a social character, granted to individual consumers, provided that such aid is granted without discrimination related to the origin of the products concerned; (b) aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences; (c) aid granted to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany…
Člen 87(2) določa, da so združljive s skupnim trgom: a) pomoč socialnega značaja, dodeljena posameznim potrošnikom, pod pogojem, da je dodeljena brez razlikovanja glede na poreklo zadevnih izdelkov; b) pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izjemni dogodki; c) pomoč, dodeljena gospodarstvu določenih območij Zvezne republike Nemčije…
Article 87(3) declares compatible with the common market b) aid to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest; c)“aid to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State”, and d) “aid to promote culture and heritage conservation where such aid does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent that is contrary to the common interest”.
Člen 87(3) določa, da so združljive s skupnim trgom: b) pomoč za pospeševanje izvedbe pomembnega projekta skupnega evropskega interesa ali za odpravljanje resne motnje v gospodarstvu države članice; c) pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne škoduje trgovinskim pogojem v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi; d) pomoč za pospeševanje kulture in ohranjanje dediščine, kadar takšna pomoč ne škoduje trgovinskim pogojem in konkurenci Skupnosti v obsegu, ki je v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
O.J. L337 of 13.12.2002, p.3.
UL L 337, 13.12.2002, str. 3.
see footnote 23
Glej opombo 23.
see footnote 24
Glej opombo 24.
see footnote 27.
Glej opombo 27.
see footnote 27
Glej opombo 27.
JO L83 of 27.3.1999, p.1.
UL L 83, 27.3.1999, str. 1
OJ, L 140, 30.4.2004, p.1.
UL L 140, 30.4.2004, str. 1
Information regarding the implementation of the Commission Decision C(2005)429
Podatki v zvezi z izvajanjem Odločbe Komisije C(2005)429
Please explain in detail how the amount of aid to be recovered from individual beneficiaries will be calculated?
Podrobno prikažite: kako bo obračunan znesek pomoči, ki ga morajo posamezni prejemniki vrniti, ločeno za
The principal
Glavnico
The interests
Obresti
What is the total amount of unlawful aid granted under this scheme that is to be recovered (gross aid equivalents; prices of …):
kolikšen je skupni znesek nezakonito dodeljene pomoči v smislu tega programa, ki ga je potrebno vrniti (bruto ekvivalent subvencije, višina zneska …)
What is the total number of beneficiaries from which unlawful aid granted under this scheme is to be recovered:
katero je skupno število prejemnikov, katerim je bila nezakonita pomoč dodeljena v smislu tega programa in ki morajo pomoč vrniti
Measures planned and already taken to recover the aid
Predvideni in že izvedeni ukrepi za vračilo pomoči
Please describe in detail what measures are planned and what measures have already been taken to effect an immediate and effective recovery of the aid.
Prosimo vas, da podrobno navedete predvidene ukrepe in izvedene ukrepe za postopek takojšnjega in učinkovitega vračila pomoči.
Please also indicate where relevant the legal basis for the measures taken/planned.
Navedite pravno podlago ukrepov.
By what date will the recovery of the aid be completed?
Do katerega datuma bo pomoč vrnjena v celoti?
Information by individual beneficiary
Informacije v zvezi s posameznimi prejemniki
Please provide details for each beneficiary from whom unlawful aid granted under the scheme is to be recovered in the table overleaf.
Prosim vas, da v razpredelnico vnesete naslednje podrobne podatke za vsakega prejemnika, ki mora vrniti nezakonito pomoč, ki je bila dodeljena v skladu s programom pomoči, in znesek pomoči, ki jo mora prejemnik vrniti:
Identity of the beneficiary
Naziv prejemnika
Amount of unlawful aid granted [1]Currency: …
Znesek v višini …... nezakonito dodeljene pomoči [1]Valuta: …
Amounts reimbursed [2]Currency: …
Znesek vrnjene pomoči [2]Valuta: …
Amount of aid put at the disposal of the beneficiary (in gross aid equivalents; in prices of …).
znesek, ki je bil prejemniku dodeljen (v ekvivalentu subvencije, bruto)
(°) Gross amounts reimbursed (including interests).
(°) vrnjeni bruto zneski (obresti vključene)
By letter of 06.06.2003 (A/33954), the Commission received comments from interested parties. They were transmitted to Italy by letter D/55630 of 04.09.2003.
V pismu z dne 6. junija 2003 (A/33954) je Komisija prejela pripombe tretjih zainteresiranih strank, ki so bile posredovane Italiji s pismom D/55630 z dne 4. septembra 2003.
As it concerns the enforcement of the measure under assessment over the territory of the Country, according to the information supplied by Italy, the Regions Friuli Venezia Giulia, Sicily and Campania have not implemented at all the scheme at hand. Sardinia and the Autonomous Province of Trento put the measure into effect pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001, on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid [3], while Toscana and Umbria did the same them after the opening of proceedings on the present case.
Kar zadeva izvajanje ukrepa na nacionalnem ozemlju naj po podatkih, ki jih je posredovala Italija, dežele Furlanija Julijska krajina, Sicilija in Campania ne bi uresničile izvedbe ukrepa; Sardinija in avtonomna provinca Trento sta uresničili izvedbo ukrepa na osnovi uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 69/2002 z dne 12. januarja 2001 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES pri de minimis pomoči [3].
173/2001 and consequently did not implement the measure at all.
Le v avtonomni provinci Bolzano niso bila dodeljena finančna sredstva v skladu z DM 173/2001, iz česar sledi, da ta dežela ni izvajala ukrepa.
Some other regions actually implemented only part of the sub-measures in cause.
Druge dežele so dejansko le deloma uresničile podprograme, o katerih je govora.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1
JE SPREJELA NASLEDNJO ODLOČBO:
The Republic of Italy shall inform the Commission, within two months of the date of notification of this Decision, of the measures already taken and planned to comply with it.
V dveh mesecih od obvestila o tej odločbi Italija sporoči Komisiji glede vseh sprejetih in predvidenih ukrepih, v skladu s katerimi bo ravnala.
It will provide this information using the questionnaire attached in Annex 1 of this Decision.
Za to uporabi vprašalnik iz priloge k tej odločbi.
judgment of the Court of 27 September 1988 on the case C263/86, E.C.R. 1988, p.5365, points 9-10; 15-18
Sodba Sodišča z dne 27. septembra 1988 v zadevi C-263/86, Država Belgija proti Humbel in Edel, PSES 1988, str. 5365 točke 9-10 in 15-18.
judgment of the Court of 7 December 1993 on the case C109/92, E.C.R. 1993, p.I-6447
Sodba Sodišča z dne 7. decembra 1993, v zadevi C-109/92, Wirth proti Landeshauptstadt Hannover, PSES 1993, str. I-6447.
Investments of Shetland Leasing and Property Developments Ltd in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom)
Naložbe Shetland Leasing and Property Developments Ltd. na Shetlandskih otokih (Združeno kraljestvo)
(notified under document number C(2005) 4649)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2005) 4649)
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community and in particular the first paragraph of Article 88 (2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti prvega odstavka člena 88(2) Pogodbe,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [1], and in particular Article 14 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [1] in zlasti člena 14 Uredbe,
Having invited interested third parties to present their observations, in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 88 (2),
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranih strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu s prvim pododstavkom člena 88(2),
I PROCEDURE
I POSTOPEK
In January 2004 the Commission was informed by a citizen of the United Kingdom of investments made with the involvement of authorities of the Shetland Islands of the United Kingdom which possibly constituted State aid.
Januarja 2004 je državljan Združenega kraljestva obvestil Komisijo o naložbah, v katere so vpleteni organi Shetlandskih otokov Združenega kraljestva, ki domnevno predstavljajo državno pomoč.
By letters of 17 February 2004 and of 1 September 2004 the Commission requested the United Kingdom to provide information about these investments, to which the United Kingdom replied by letters of 30 April 2004 and 13 December 2004.
Z dopisoma z dne 17. februarja 2004 in 1. septembra 2004 je Komisija pozvala Združeno kraljestvo, naj zagotovi informacije o teh naložbah, na kar je Združeno kraljestvo odgovorilo z dopisoma z dne 30. aprila in 13. decembra 2004.
The Commission informed the United Kingdom by letter of 20 April 2005 of the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure under Article 88 (2) of the EC Treaty.
Z dopisom z dne 20. aprila 2005 je Komisija obvestila Združeno kraljestvo o odločbi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
The United Kingdom gave its comments on the case by letter of 19 May 2005.
Združeno kraljestvo je podalo svoje pripombe o tej zadevi s pismom z dne 19. maja 2005.
The Commission decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 10 June 2005 [2].
Odločba Komisije o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije10 junija 2005 [2].
The Commission invited any interested parties to submit their observations on the case.
Komisija je pozvala zainteresirane strani, naj predložijo svoje pripombe o zadevi.
No comments were received.
Prejela ni nobenih pripomb.
The Shetland Islands Council (SIC), a public authority in Shetland, set up two trusts, the Shetland Development Trust (Development Trust) and the Shetland Islands Council Charitable Trust (Charitable Trust).
Svet Shetlandskih otokov (Shetland Islands Council, SIC), organ oblasti na Shetlandu, je ustanovil dva sklada, Shetlandski razvojni sklad (Development Trust) in Dobrodelni sklad Sveta Shetlandskih otokov (Charitable Trust).
The Development Trust was established to serve as the main means for financing economic development projects in Shetland; it makes funding available through loans.
Razvojni sklad je bil ustanovljen, da bi služil kot glavno sredstvo za financiranje projektov gospodarskega razvoja na Shetlandu; financiranje omogoča s posojili.
The trustees are the councillors of SIC plus two independent trustees.
Skrbniki sklada so svetniki SIC in dva neodvisna skrbnika.
The Charitable Trust is the trust fund of the SIC that grants loans for charitable purposes.
Dobrodelni sklad je skrbniški sklad SIC, ki daje posojila v dobrodelne namene.
The trustees of the Charitable Trust are the councillors of SIC, plus two independent trustees.
Skrbniki Dobrodelnega sklada so svetniki SIC in dva neodvisna skrbnika.
The funding of both the Charitable Trust and the Development Trust is derived from a reserve fund set up by the SIC.
Financiranje Dobrodelnega in Razvojnega sklada izhaja iz rezervnega sklada, ki ga je ustanovil SIC.
This reserve fund itself is funded from an agreement concluded on 12 July 1974 between the SIC and oil companies using the harbour facilities of Sullum Voe.
Ta rezervni sklad se financira iz dogovora, sklenjenega dne 12. julija 1974 med SIC in naftnimi družbami, ki uporabljajo pristaniške objekte v Sullum Voe.
This agreement states that fees are paid by these companies ‘in respect of the import of crude oil and as compensation for disturbance caused thereby’.
Ta dogovor navaja, da ta podjetja plačajo pristojbine „za uvoz surove nafte in kot odškodnino za s tem povzročeno motnjo“.
For commercial and development activities the SIC has set up Shetland Leasing and Property Ltd (SLAP), which is a trading company with limited liability, operating for profit and wholly owned by Charitable Trust.
Za trgovske in razvojne dejavnosti je SIC ustanovil Shetland Leasing and Property Ltd. (SLAP), ki je trgovska družba z omejeno odgovornostjo, ki posluje za dobiček in je v celoti v lasti Dobrodelnega sklada.
The tasks of SLAP are to take equity holdings in local businesses, to make loans to local industry at commercial rates and to construct industrial buildings for lease at commercial rents.
Naloge SLAP so nakup lastniških deležev v lokalnih podjetjih, dajanje posojil lokalni industriji po tržnih stopnjah in gradnja industrijskih objektov za najem po tržnih najemninah.
As a commercial limited company wholly owned by the Charitable Trust, SLAP obtains the funding for its activities from the Charitable Trust and from its own profits.
Kot trgovska družba z omejeno odgovornostjo, ki je v celoti v lasti Dobrodelnega sklada, pridobiva SLAP finančna sredstva za svoje dejavnosti iz Dobrodelnega sklada in iz lastnega dobička.
For some specific projects funds are also provided by the Development Trust.
Za določene projekte priskrbi sredstva Razvojni sklad.
In 1999 the board of SLAP decided to invest in a company named Shetland Seafish Ltd This company was established on 7 October 1999 as a result of a financial merger between Williamson Ltd and Ronas Ltd. Both companies were loss-making at the time and were considered insolvent.
Leta 1999 se je uprava SLAP odločila investirati v podjetje Shetland Seafish Ltd. To podjetje je bilo ustanovljeno 7. oktobra 1999 kot rezultat finančne združitve med Williamson Ltd. in Ronas Ltd. Obe podjetji sta takrat poslovali z izgubo in sta veljali za plačilno nesposobni.
By setting up Shetland Seafish Ltd and merging both loss-making companies it was expected that profits would grow and that the new company would be profit making within a short time.
Z ustanovitvijo Shetland Seafish Ltd. in združitvijo obeh podjetij, ki sta poslovali z izgubo, je bilo pričakovati, da se bo dobiček večal in da bo novo podjetje kmalu poslovalo z dobičkom.
It was projected that by the end of 2002 Shetland Seafish Ltd would be generating a profit in excess of GBP 460000.
Predvideno je bilo, da bo Shetland Seafish Ltd. do konca leta 2002 ustvarjal dobiček, ki bi presegal 460000. GBP.
SLAP invested in Shetland Seafish Ltd by acquiring 156250 shares (62,5 %) of the ordinary shares of GBP 1 each and 1000000 preference shares of GBP 1 each (100 %).
SLAP je investiral v Shetland Seafish Ltd. z nakupom 156250 (62,5 %) navadnih delnic, vsake v vrednosti 1 GBP, in 1000000 prednostnih delnic, vsake v vrednosti 1 GBP (100 %).
In June 2000 the board of SLAP decided to invest once more in Shetland Seafish Ltd when the company decided to take over the activities of Whalsay Ltd, a loss-making fish-processing company based in Shetland.
Junija 2000 se je uprava SLAP odločila, da ponovno investira v Shetland Seafish Ltd., ko se je podjetje odločilo, da prevzame dejavnosti Whalsay Ltd., podjetja za predelavo rib s sedežem na Shetlandu, ki je poslovalo z izgubo.
The funding of this takeover by SLAP consisted in SLAP’s acquiring 2000000 additional preference shares in Shetland Seafish Ltd, which were subscribed by SLAP in two tranches; in November 2000 SLAP acquired 1200000 Preference Shares and on 16 February another 800000 Preference Shares.
Financiranje tega prevzema s strani SLAP je bilo sestavljeno iz nakupa 2000000 dodatnih prednostnih delnic Shetland Seafish Ltd., ki jih je SLAP vpisal v dveh tranšah; novembra 2000 je SLAP kupil 1200000 prednostnih delnic, 16. februarja pa še dodatnih 800000 prednostnih delnic.
As from 16 February 2001, the issued shared capital of Shetland Seafish Ltd thus comprised 250000 Ordinary shares and 3000000 Preference shares, held in the same proportions and by the same shareholders as at the initial issuing of shares in 1999.
Od 16. februarja 2001 so izdane delnice Shetland Seafish Ltd. tako vključevale 250000 navadnih delnic in 3000000 prednostnih delnic v enakih razmerjih in v lasti istih delničarjev kot pri prvotni izdaji delnic leta 1999.
According to a special resolution adopted in 17 December 1999 by the board of Shetland Seafish Ltd the preference shares in Shetland Seafish Ltd have ‘the right to a fixed non-cumulative preferential dividend at the rate of 10 % (net of associated tax credit) per annum on the capital for the time being paid up or credit as paid up thereon accruing from the date of subscription therefore and to be paid (to the extent that there are profits available for distribution) annually on 31 January in each year in respect of the 12 months ending on that date; and may be redeemed at par (i.e. at 1 per preference share) plus any unpaid preferential dividend, at the option of the Company at any time after the first anniversary of the date of the allotment of the preference shares.’
V skladu s posebno resolucijo, ki jo je dne 17. decembra 1999 sprejela uprava Shetland Seafish Ltd., imajo prednostne delnice v Shetland Seafish Ltd. „pravico do fiksne nekumulativne prednostne dividende v višini 10 % (neto dobropisa na že plačane združene davke) letno na kapital, ki je trenutno vplačan, ali posojilo, vplačano in nato črpano od datuma odobritve ter plačljivo (v kolikor obstaja dobiček, ki je na voljo za razdelitev) letno 31. januarja vsako leto ob upoštevanju, da se 12-mesečno obdobje konča na ta datum; lahko se izplačajo po nominalni vrednosti (tj. 1 na prednostno delnico) skupaj z neplačanimi prednostnimi dividendami, po izbiri podjetja kadar koli po prvi obletnici dodelitve prednostnih delnic“.
From the data provided it is clear that Shetland Seafish Ltd has been loss making since 1999.
Iz navedenih podatkov je razvidno, da Shetland Seafish Ltd. od leta 1999 posluje z izgubo.
In its letters of 30 April 2004 and 13 December 2004, the United Kingdom stated that the investments should be considered as private investments, as SLAP is a private body and at the time of the investments both the SIC and SLAP had legitimate expectations that the monies involved should be considered as private funds.
V svojih dopisih z dne 30. aprila 2004 in 13. decembra 2004 je Združeno kraljestvo pojasnilo, da je treba naložbe šteti za zasebne naložbe, saj je SLAP zasebni subjekt in sta SIC in SLAP v času naložb imela legitimna pričakovanja, da se zadevna denarna sredstva šteje za zasebna sredstva.
Secondly the United Kingdom stated that if the monies involved are considered to be public funds, the investments made by SLAP are investments which could have been decided upon by a normal private operator.
Poleg tega je Združeno kraljestvo pojasnilo, da če se zadevna denarna sredstva šteje za javna sredstva, so naložbe SLAP naložbe, za katere bi se lahko odločil običajni zasebni subjekt.
To support this statement the United Kingdom had provided two reports issued with regard to the investments in question: the Shetland Seafish Merger Report and the Whalsay Report.
Da bi podprlo to izjavo, je Združeno kraljestvo posredovalo dve poročili o zadevnih naložbah: poročilo o združitvi Shetland Seafish Merger Report in poročilo Whalsay Report.
Shetland Seafish Merger Report
Poročilo o združitvi Shetland Seafish (Shetland Seafish Merger Report)
The Seafish Merger Report of 27 September 1999 is a report by Mr. M. Goodlad and Mr. S. Gillani to the Directors of SLAP on ‘A proposed restructure and merger of L.A.
Poročilo o združitvi Shetland Seafish z dne 27. septembra 1999 je poročilo, ki sta ga pripravila M. Goodlad in S. Gillani za direktorje SLAP o „Predlaganem prestrukturiranju in združitvi L.A.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited’.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited in Ronas Fisheries Limited“.
According to the figures and the prognoses in the report, the merger of L.A.
Glede na številke in napovedi v poročilu bi združitev L.A.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited & Ronas Fisheries Limited, through the establishment of Shetland Seafish Ltd would begin to yield profits within three years.
Williamson & Sons (Shetland) Limited in Ronas Fisheries Limited z ustanovitvijo Shetland Seafish Ltd. začela prinašati dobiček v treh letih.
Whalsay Report
Poročilo Whalsay (Whalsay Report)
The Whalsay Report is a report by Mr. John Inkster, who at that time held the position of Managing Director of Whalsay Fish Processors Ltd, issued in June 2000. This report gives an analysis of the situation of the companies involved, the developments in the market and possible advantages for Shetland Seafish Ltd to acquire Whalsay Ltd.
Poročilo Whalsay, izdano junija 2000, je pripravil John Inkster, ki je takrat opravljal funkcijo glavnega direktorja Whalsay Fish Processors Ltd. Poročilo analizira stanje udeleženih podjetij, razvoj na trgu in morebitne prednosti za Shetland Seafish Ltd. ob nakupu Whalsay Ltd.
Grounds of the formal investigation procedure
Razlogi za formalni postopek preiskave
The Commission considered that it could not be established from the figures and data contained in the reports submitted by the authorities of the United Kingdom whether these investments could be considered to be profitable investments and whether SLAP had acted like a normal private investor.
Komisija je ugotovila, da se na podlagi številk in podatkov v poročilih, ki so jih predložili organi Združenega kraljestva, ne da ugotoviti, ali je te naložbe mogoče šteti za dobičkonosne in ali je SLAP ravnal kot običajni zasebni vlagatelj.
As, furthermore, the investments were clearly for the benefit of the companies involved and those companies were in direct competition with other fish-processing companies both within the United Kingdom and in other Member States, the Commission considered that the investments appeared to be State aid within the meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty.
Ker so bile naložbe nedvomno v korist udeleženih podjetij in so ta podjetja neposredno konkurirala drugim podjetjem za predelavo rib v Združenem kraljestvu in drugih državah članicah, je Komisija upoštevala, da so naložbe državna pomoč v smislu člena 87 Pogodbe ES.
As the investments were made in 1999 and 2000, they were assessed in the light of the 1997 Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture [3].
Ker so bile naložbe izvedene v letih 1999 in 2000, so bile ocenjene z vidika smernic za pregled državne pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo [3] iz leta 1997.
According to point 2.3 of those Guidelines, aid that does not fulfil the conditions laid down therein must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Skladno s točko 2.3. teh smernic pomoč ne izpolnjuje pogojev, ki so v njej določeni, in jo je treba oceniti na podlagi posameznega primera.