natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In essence, the divestiture would consist of the transfer of the inventory and the customer list, the assignment of rights for use of trademarks, the licence of IP rights, the transfer of specifications relating to the design of J & J guidewires. The divestment has a field of use limited to Europe and does not include manufacturing, assembly, sterilisation (these operations are currently outsourced by J & J to a third party), distribution and warehousing;
Opustitev bi bila v bistvu sestavljena iz prenosa zalog in seznama strank, odstopa pravic do uporabe blagovnih znamk, licenca pravic IP in prenosa specifikacij, povezanih z načrtovanjem vodečih žic J & J. Področje uporabe opustitve je omejeno na Evropo in ne vključuje proizvodnje, sestavljanja, sterilizacije (te dejavnosti za J & J trenutno pogodbeno izvaja tretja stranka), distribucije in skladiščenja.
in the endovascular area, the parties have proposed to divest the entire operations (products, logistics, inventory, customer list, sales force, brand names, and intellectual property) of Guidant’s endovascular solutions business in the EEA.
Na endovaskularnem področju sta stranki predlagali, da opustita celotne dejavnosti (proizvode, logistiko, zaloge, sezname strank, prodajalce, blagovne znamke in intelektualno lastnino), ki spadajo v okvir Guidantovega poslovnega področja Endovascular Solutions v EGP.
The divestment does not include manufacturing, finance, administration, R & D, regulatory, quality and clinical research teams, which are based in the USA and operate on a worldwide basis.
Ta opustitev ne vključuje proizvodnje, financ, administracije, raziskav in razvoja, ekip za regulativne raziskave, raziskave kakovosti in klinične raziskave, ki se nahajajo v ZDA in delujejo v svetovnem merilu.
The parties offer to the purchaser an interim OEM supply agreement followed by either the continuation of such agreement or the full assistance to replicate the USA production facility in Europe.
Stranki ponujata kupcu vmesni sporazum o dobavi originalne opreme (OEM), ki bi mu sledilo podaljšanje takega sporazuma ali celovita pomoč pri vzpostavitvi proizvodnega obrata v Evropi, ki bo identičen obratu v ZDA.
The divestment also includes embolic protection devices and endovascular accessories on top of the endovascular stents on which the Commission’s analysis was focused;
Opustitev vključuje tudi pripomočke za zaščito pred embolusi in endovaskularne pripomočke poleg endovaskularnih stentov, na katerih temelji analiza Komisije.
for the cardiac surgery area, the parties have proposed to divest alternatively either:
Na področju srčne kirurgije sta stranki predlagali opustitev enega od naslednjih:
J & J’s endoscopic vessel harvesting products (EVH) and endoscopic radial artery harvesting (ERA kits); or
endoskopskih žilnih sistemov J & J („EVH“) in endoskopskih radialnih arterijskih sistemov („sklopi ERA“); ali
GDT worldwide assets and personnel of cardiac surgery business division; or
poslovnih sredstev in zaposlene GDT v poslovnem sektorju srčne kirurgije po vsem svetu; ali
Guidant’s endoscopic vessel harvesting products, namely procedural kits for EVH (EVH kits).
Guidantovih endoskopskih žilnih sistemov, in sicer postopkovnih sklopov za EVH („sklopi EVH“).
V. ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITMENTS SUBMITTED
V. OCENA PREDLAGANIH ZAVEZ
As confirmed by the results of the market test conducted by the Commission, these undertakings can be considered sufficient to properly remedy the competition concerns in the steerable guidewires, the endovascular and the cardiac surgery markets, as outlined above.
Kakor potrjujejo rezultati tržnega testiranja, ki ga je izvedla Komisija, se lahko šteje, da so predlagane zaveze zadostne za ustrezno odpravljanje zgornjih pomislekov v zvezi s konkurenco na trgu vodečih žic, trgu endovaskularnih pripomočkov in trgu srčne kirurgije.
The Commission, therefore, reached the conclusion that, on the basis of the commitments submitted by the Parties, the notified concentration will not significantly impede effective competition, in the common market or in a substantial part of it.
Komisija je zato sklenila, da na podlagi zavez, ki sta jih predložili stranki, priglašena koncentracija ne bo znatno ovirala učinkovite konkurence na skupnem trgu ali na pretežnem delu tega trga.
Consequently, the Decision suggests declaring the concentration compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement, in accordance with Articles 2(2) and 8(2) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement.
Posledično se v odločbi predlaga združljivost koncentracije s skupnim trgom in Sporazumom EGP, v skladu s členom 2(2) in členom 8(2) Uredbe o združitvah in členom 57 Sporazuma EGP.
For the reasons set out above, the Commission concluded that the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it.
Iz zgoraj navedenih razlogov je Komisija sklenila, da predlagana koncentracija ne ovira znatno učinkovite konkurence na skupnem trgu ali na pretežnem delu tega trga.
The concentration was therefore declared compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement in a decision on 25 August 2005, in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement.
Koncentracija je bila zato razglašena kot združljiva s skupnim trgom in Sporazumom EGP v odločbi z dne 25. avgusta 2005, v skladu s členom 8(1) Uredbe o združitvah in členom 57 Sporazuma EGP.
relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 of the EC Treaty against Automobiles Peugeot SA and Peugeot Nederland NV
v zvezi s postopkom na podlagi člena 81 Pogodbe ES proti Automobiles Peugeot SA in Peugeot Nederland NV
(Cases COMP/E2/36623, 36820 and 37275 — SEP and others/Automobiles Peugeot SA)
(Zadeve COMP/E2/36623 36820 37275 – SEP et autres/Automobiles Peugeot SA)
(notified under document number C(2005) 3683)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2005) 3683)
On 5 October 2005, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 of the EC Treaty.
Komisija je 5. oktobra 2005 sprejela Odločbo v zvezi s postopkom na podlagi člena 81 Pogodbe ES.
In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 [1], the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.
Komisija v skladu z določbami iz člena 30 Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1/2003 [1] objavlja imena strank in glavno vsebino Odločbe ter sankcije, ki so jim bile po potrebi naložene, ob upoštevanju pravnega interesa podjetij do varovanja poslovnih skrivnosti.
A non-confidential version of the full text of the decision can be found in the authentic languages of the case and in the Commission’s working languages at DG COMP’s website at http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/index_en.html1.
Različica celotnega besedila odločbe, ki ni zaupna, je na voljo v verodostojnih jezikih zadeve in v delovnih jezikih Komisije na spletišču GD COMP: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/index_en.html1.
In response to complaints from several French intermediaries, on 5 October 2005 the Commission adopted a decision under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (hereinafter the Decision) addressed to Automobiles Peugeot SA, a motor vehicle manufacturer, and Peugeot Nederland NV, its wholly-owned subsidiary responsible for importing Peugeot vehicles into the Netherlands (hereinafter PNE), for infringement of Article 81 of the Treaty.
Komisija je na podlagi pritožb, ki so jih predložili določeni francoski posredniki, 5. oktobra 2005 sprejela Odločbo v skladu s členom 7 Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003 (v nadaljnjem besedilu „Odločba“), naslovljeno na podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA, proizvajalec avtomobilov, in Peugeot Nederland NV, njegovo hčerinsko podjetje, 100-odstotno odgovorno za uvoz avtomobilov znamke Peugeot na Nizozemsko (v nadaljnjem besedilu „PNE“), zaradi kršitve člena 81 Pogodbe.
These undertakings had, in collusion with the dealers belonging to the Peugeot network in the Netherlands, infringed Article 81 by implementing two measures aimed at impeding cross-border car sales from that country to final consumers in other Member States, particularly France.
Dejansko sta ti podjetji, sporazumno s koncesionarji, ki pripadajo mreži Peugeot na Nizozemskem, kršili člen 81 z izvajanjem dveh ukrepov, katerih namen je bilo oviranje čezmejne prodaje avtomobilov iz te države, namenjenih končnim potrošnikom, ki prebivajo v drugih državah članicah, še zlasti v Franciji.
The first measure, which was implemented from 1997 until 2003, consisted of a system of bonuses to dealers which discriminated against export sales and which, when viewed from the angle of its objective modus operandi, went beyond what was necessary to induce Dutch dealers to devote their best sales efforts to their contract territory.
Prvi ukrep, katerega izvajanje je potekalo med leti 1997 in 2003, je vključeval sistem premij, plačanih koncesionarjem, kar je povzročilo diskriminiranje pri prodaji na tuje trge, in je hkrati z vidika objektivnega delovanja, presegel tisto, kar je bilo potrebno za spodbujanje nizozemskih koncesionarjev, da bi si čim bolj prizadevali za prodajo na svojem pogodbenem ozemlju.
The second measure, which was implemented from 1997 until 2001, consisted of Automobiles Peugeot SA bringing pressure to bear on dealers active in export sales — a direct measure which strengthened the impact of the discriminatory bonus.
Drugi ukrep, katerega izvajanje je potekalo med leti 1997 in 2001, je obsegal pritiske podjetja Automobiles Peugeot SA na koncesionarje, dejavne pri izvozu, to je bil neposredni ukrep, ki je okrepil vpliv diksriminatorne premije.
The facts
Dejstva
The undertakings and the product concerned
Podjetji in zadevni proizvod
The undertakings
Podjetji
Peugeot SA (hereinafter called PSA), the secondlargest European motor manufacturer accounting in 2002 for 15,5 % of all sales (passenger cars and light commercial vehicles), comprises the Peugeot and Citroën makes.
Podjetje Peugeot SA (v nadaljnjem besedilu „PSA“) je drugi evropski proizvajalec vozil, s prodajo, ki je v letu 2002 znašala 15,5 % (osebna vozila in lahka gospodarska vozila), zajema pa znamki Peugeot in Citroën.
Automobiles Peugeot SA is a generalist motor manufacturer, wholly owned by PSA, which develops, produces and distributes cars under the Peugeot name.
Podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA je hčerinsko podjetje za splošno proizvodnjo vozil v 100-odstotni lasti podjetja PSA, ki razvija, proizvaja in distribuira vozila pod znamko Peugeot.
In each of the 25 Member States, Peugeot products and services are distributed by a national retail distribution network.
V vsaki od petindvajsetih držav članic distribucijo proizvodov in storitev podjetja Peugeot zagotavlja nacionalna maloprodajna distribucijska mreža.
In the Netherlands the network is organised and run by an importer wholly controlled by Automobiles Peugeot SA, namely PNE, whose headquarters are in Utrecht.
Na Nizozemskem to mrežo organizira in spodbuja uvoznik, v tem primeru podjetje PNE s sedežem v Utrechtu na Nizozemskem, ki ga 100-odstotno nadzoruje podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA.
In the Netherlands, the Peugeot network is made up of dealers and agent resellers contractually tied to those dealers.
Na Nizozemskem je mreža podjetja Peugeot sestavljena iz koncesionarjev in posredniških agentov, ki so z njim pogodbeno povezani.
The number of dealers and agent resellers belonging to the Peugeot network in the Netherlands fell appreciably between 1995 and 2003.
Število koncesionarjev in posredniških agentov, ki so člani mreže Peugeot na Nizozemskem, se je med leti 1995 in 2003 močno zmanjšalo.
The relevant market
Zadevni trg
The passenger car market can be divided into a number of segments.
Trg osebnih vozil se deli na določeno število segmentov.
The restriction of competition to which the Decision relates is a restriction ‘by object’, which remains appreciable not only when the market is viewed from the perspective of each of the relevant segments taken individually, but also if it is considered that a segment of relevance to this case and the two neighbouring segments overlap to form a relevant market or if it is considered that the latter is made up of all the segments mentioned in the recitals to the Decision.
V Odločbi obravnavana omejitev konkurence je namerna omejitev, ki ostaja pomembna ne le, če se trg presoja na podlagi vsakega zadevnega segmenta posamezno, ampak tudi, če predpostavimo, da se segment, pomemben za to zadevo, in dva sosednja segmenta prekrivata in tvorita upoštevni trg, ali če predpostavimo, da je slednji sestavljen iz vseh segmentov, omenjenih v uvodni izjavi.
It is not necessary, therefore, to take a definitive decision here as to which segment is to be considered the relevant market or to settle the question whether the market for passenger cars comprises the Community as a whole or whether each Member State is a distinct geographic market.
Torej ni treba sprejeti končne odločitve glede segmenta, ki ga je treba obravnavati kot upoštevni trg, prav tako ni treba odgovoriti na vprašanje, da bi vedeli, če trg za osebna vozila zajema Skupnost v celoti ali je vsaka država članica ločen geografski trg.
Between 1995 and 2002, the total number of new passenger cars registered each year in the European Union and the European Economic Area went up from 12034316 to 14398718 units.
Med leti 1995 in 2002 je skupno število novih osebnih vozil, vsako leto registriranih v Evropski uniji in Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru, naraslo z 12034316 na 14398718 enot.
The Peugeot make on its own accounted for a total of 861696 registrations in 1995 and 1277738 registrations in 2002, jumping from sixth to third place among makes in the European Union with a market share up from 7,2 % in 1995 to 8,9 % in 2002 [2].
V letu 1995 je bilo registriranih 861696 vozil znamke Peugeot same, v letu 2002 pa 1277738, zato je med znamkami v Evropski uniji prešla s šestega na tretje mesto s tržnim deležem, ki je leta 1995 znašal 7,5 %, leta 2002 pa 8,9 % [2].
The Peugeot make also experienced strong, steady market share growth in the Netherlands, increasing from 6,5 % in 1997 to 10,7 % in 2003 in the case of passenger cars.
Znamka Peugeot je imela na Nizozemskem prav tako močno in stalno rast svojih tržnih deležev, ki so z 6,5 % v letu 1997 narasli na 10,7 % v letu 2003 za osebna vozila.
The agreement at issue
Zadevni sporazum
The Decision concerns an infringement committed against the background of the exclusive, selective distribution agreements governing relations between Peugeot and its Dutch dealers.
Odločba zadeva kršitev, ki se je izvajala v okviru sporazumov o izključni in selektivni distribuciji, ki ureja odnose med podjetjem Peugeot in njegovimi nizozemskimi koncesionarji.
The infringement hinged on two specific measures liable to restrict parallel trade: a dealer remuneration system dependent on the vehicle’s geographic destination, and pressure on dealers actively involved in exporting.
Ta kršitev se je osredotočila na dva posebna ukrepa, ki sta omejevala vzporedno trgovino: sistem nadomestil za koncesionarje, odvisen od geografskega namembnega kraja vozila, in pritiskov na koncesionarje, dejavne pri izvozu.
Discriminatory bonus
Diskriminatorna premija
In the Netherlands, dealers’ remuneration was made up of a fixed part (the margin on invoices [3]) and a part linked to the dealer’s results (the bonus [4]), which the dealer needed in order to earn a profit from his business.
Na Nizozemskem so nadomestila za koncesionarje vključevala fiksni del (marža na računu [3]) in del, povezan z doseženimi rezultati koncesionarja (ali premija [4]), ki ga je koncesionar potreboval za pridobivanje dobička iz svoje dejavnosti.
This bonus could be obtained by a Dutch dealer only if the cars he sold were registered in the Netherlands.
Toda to premijo je nizozemski koncesionar lahko dobil le pod pogojem, da so bila vozila, ki jih prodal, registrirana na ozemlju njegove države članice.
The system introduced by Peugeot distinguished between two phases of the bonus grant mechanism. Acquisition of entitlement to the bonus was based on a progressive scale of achievement of a target agreed at year’s beginning, being a sales target to be met in the dealer’s territory.
Sistem, ki ga je vzpostavil Peugeot, je razločeval dve fazi, ki sta urejali mehanizem dodeljevanja premije: pridobitev pravice do premije je bila vzpostavljena na podlagi progresivne lestvice doseganja dogovorjenega cilja na začetku proračunskega leta, pri čemer je bilo treba cilj prodaje doseči na koncesionarjevem ozemlju.
Subsequently, once the sales target had been met, payment of the entitlement thus gained was also made on the basis of vehicles sold in that territory.
V drugi fazi, ko je bil cilj prodaje dosežen, se je izplačilo tako pridobljene pravice izvedlo tudi na podlagi vozil, prodanih na ozemlju.
Registration in the Netherlands was required by Automobiles Peugeot SA for the purpose of 1. achieving any sales target leading to the acquisition of entitlement to the bonus and the determination of the level of discount per car, and 2. identifying each vehicle sold by Automobiles Peugeot SA eligible for such remuneration (payment of the bonus).
Podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA je zahtevalo tako registracijo na ozemlju države članice, (1) da bi se zadostilo kakršnemu koli cilju prodaje, ki dopušča pridobitev pravice do premije, in določilo raven rabata na vozilo, a hkrati tudi (2) identificiralo vsako vozilo, ki ga je prodalo podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA, upravičeno do tega nadomestila (izplačilo premije).
During the period between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 1999, Automobiles Peugeot SA operated a dealer remuneration system which consisted in paying the dealer a flat-rate additional amount (‘bonus’ and ‘superbonus’) for the sale of all passenger car models registered in the Netherlands after 1 January 1997.
Podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA je v obdobju od 1. januarja 1997 do 31. decembra 1999 dejansko uporabilo sistem nadomestil za koncesionarje, ki je vključeval plačilo dodatnega pavšalnega nadomestila koncesionarju (premiji „bonus“ in „superbonus“) za prodajo vseh modelov osebnih vozil, registriranih na Nizozemskem po 1. januarju 1997.
Subsequently, during the period between 1 January 2000 and 1 October 2003, Automobiles Peugeot SA modified the dealer remuneration system in order to introduce a variable margin component while retaining a ‘quantity bonus’ paid to dealers who achieved their targets for the registration of Peugeot vehicles in the Netherlands.
Nato je podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA v obdobju od 1. januarja 2000 do 1. oktobra 2003 spremenilo sistem nadomestil za koncesionarje, da bi uvedlo variabilni del marže in hkrati obdržalo „kvantitativno premijo“, izplačano tistim koncesionarjem, ki so dosegli svoje cilje glede registriranih vozil znamke Peugeot na Nizozemskem.
The principle of the quantity bonus varied little during these two periods.
Načelo kvantitativne premije se je v teh dveh obdobjih le malo spreminjalo.
For the purposes of applying the bonus, dealers were divided into categories according to the number of cars in their target.
Za uporabo premije so bili koncesionarji razdeljeni v dve kategoriji glede na število vozil v svojem cilju.
The bonus was determined on the basis of the model of car, the category of dealer and the percentage of target attained.
Premija je bila določena na podlagi modela vozila, kategorije koncesionarja in odstotkov doseženega cilja.
From January 1997, the annual circulars to all dealers concerning implementation of the new bonus scheme stipulated — as is borne out by other evidence — that only passenger cars registered in the Dutch market would as a rule count towards payment of the bonus.
Od januarja 1997 je bilo v letnih okrožnicah, poslanih vsem koncesionarjem, glede izvajanja novega sistema premij, potrjenih z drugimi poskusnimi elementi, predvideno, da so se pri izplačilu premije na splošno upoštevala samo tista osebna vozila, registrirana na nizozemskem trgu.
Pressure on dealers
Pritiski na koncesionarje
The second of the two measures referred to above concerns the exerting of pressure on dealers by Automobiles Peugeot SA, which pressure strengthened the impact of the discriminatory bonus scheme through direct action against dealers or attempts to limit, by threatening to restrict supplies, the export business they had plainly developed.
Drugi zgoraj navedeni ukrep zadeva pritiske na koncesionarje, ki jih je izvajalo podjetje Automobiles Peugeot SA, in ki so skušali okrepiti učinek sistema diskriminatornih premij s pomočjo neposrednega posredovanja pri koncesionarjih ali poskusov, da se s pomočjo groženj glede omejevanja dobave omeji dejavnost izvoza, ki so jo očitno razvijali.
It should be noted that Automobiles Peugeot SA’s strategy of limiting exports from the Netherlands was known to the members of the distribution network, who feared the long-term effects of exports on their profits and who indicated, at three meetings with the importer, that they shared the aim of the measures requested by it.
Tu je treba poudariti, da so člani distribucijske mreže, ki so se bali dolgoročnih posledic izvoza na svoj dobiček, in so med tremi srečanji z uvoznikom poudarili, da se strinjajo s ciljem, ki ga je z ukrepi zahteval uvoznik, poznali strategijo podjetja Automobiles Peugeot SA, s katero je podjetje poskušalo omejiti izvoz z Nizozemske.
Peugeot was keen to ensure that all members of the Dutch network toed the line: if any exporting took place, the importer would intervene with direct threats and supply restrictions in order to restore discipline.
Podjetje Peugeot je skušalo zagotoviti kohezijo ravnanja članov nizozemske mreže, tako da je uvoznik posredoval v primeru izvoza z neposrednimi grožnjami in omejitvijo dobave, da bi okrepil tako vzpostavljen red.
To begin with, PNE applied direct pressure by occasionally acting to limit the export sales of certain dealers.
Sprva je podjetje PNE izvajalo neposredne pritiske z občasnim posredovanjem, da bi nekaterim koncesionarjem omejilo prodajo na tuje trge.
It brought such pressure to bear among other things through its Account Managers Dealernet (AMDs), who were employed by its Car Sales Department.
Podjetje PNE je izvajalo pritiske predvsem s pomočjo zaposlenih v Account Managers Dealernet (AMD), ki so kot del storitev uvoznika odgovorni za prodajo vozil.
In some of the inspection reports drawn up by these AMDs, mention was made of sales of vehicles to consumers living abroad.
V delu poročil o inšpekcijskih pregledih teh zaposlenih v AMD so bile omenjene prodaje vozil potrošnikom, ki prebivajo v tujini.
The comments by these AMDs mentioned in the Decision make sense only if exports were, from Automobile Peugeot SA’s point of view, to remain altogether exceptional.
Pripombe teh zaposlenih v AMD, omenjene v Odločbi, dobijo pravi smisel šele ob dejstvu, da je moral biti izvoz s stališča podjetja Automobiles Peugeot SA povsem izjemnega značaja.
There are other examples of pressure being brought to bear with the same end in view, otherwise than through the AMDs.
Drugi primeri potrjujejo izvajanje pritiskov za dosego istega cilja in katerega izvajanje se ni opiralo na zaposlene v AMD.
Direct action affected eight dealers between 1997 and 2001.
Neposredna posredovanja so zadevala osem koncesionarjev med leti 1997 in 2001.
From 1997 onwards, the pressure also took the form of threats to reduce supplies, including of the most exported models such as the 806.
Nato so se pritiski od leta 1997 dalje spremenili v grožnje glede omejitve dobave, zlasti glede modelov, ki so jih najbolj izvažali, kot je model 806.
In 1997 certain models such as the 406 Airline and the 106 Accent were strictly reserved for the Dutch market: their export constituted improper conduct for which the exporting dealer would be held responsible.
Za proračunsko leto 1997 so bili nekateri modeli, kot sta 406 Airline in 106 Accent, strogo rezervirani za nizozemski trg: njihovo izvažanje je pomenilo kaznivo dejanje, za katero je odgovoren koncesionar izvoznik.