natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On the basis of the above, it can be concluded that all training activities which provide workers with the skills necessary for the successful implementation of the two projects (production of the new model and extension of the press activities) would have been undertaken in any event, even without aid.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je mogoče ugotoviti, da bi bile vse dejavnosti usposabljanja, s katerimi bi delavci pridobili sposobnosti, ki jih potrebujejo za uspešno izvedbo obeh projektov (proizvodnja novega modela in razvoj stiskalniških dejavnosti), organizirane v vsakem primeru in celo brez pomoči.
Consequently, the corresponding aid does not lead to additional training but covers normal operating expenditure of the company, thereby reducing normal costs.
Zato posledica zadevne pomoči ni dodatno usposabljanje, ampak se z njo krijejo običajni obratovalni stroški podjetja, s čimer se tako zmanjšajo njegovi običajni stroški.
The Commission considers therefore that the aid will distort competition and affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest [14].
Komisija zato meni, da bo pomoč izkrivljala konkurenco in spreminjala trgovinske pogoje v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi [14].
Accordingly, the aid cannot be justified on the basis of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
V takih okoliščinah pomoči ni mogoče utemeljiti s členom 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
Since none of the other exemptions laid down in Article 87(2) and (3) of the Treaty can be applied either, the aid is incompatible with the common market.
Ker v zadevnem primeru ni mogoče uporabiti nobenega drugega odstopanja iz člena 87(2) in (3) Pogodbe, je pomoč nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
The above conclusion applies irrespective of the general or specific nature of the training in question.
Ta sklepna ugotovitev velja, če je zadevno usposabljanje splošno ali posebno.
In particular, the Commission notes that the general training activity labelled as ‘technical training’ [15] concerns skills that are necessary for the two new activities and, more generally, for the operation of a competitive car plant [16].
Komisija še posebej ugotavlja, da se dejavnost splošnega usposabljanja, ki je opredeljena kot „tehnično usposabljanje“ [15], nanaša na sposobnosti, potrebne za izvajanje zadevnih novih dejavnosti in splošneje za dejavnost konkurenčne tovarne motornih vozil [16].
However, the Belgian authorities have provided evidence showing that part of the general‘technical training’ concerns skills that call for a lengthy training period and that a significant number of the workers involved leave the company each year.
Belgijski organi so kljub temu predložili dokaze, da se del splošnega„tehničnega usposabljanja“ nanaša na kvalifikacije, za katere je potrebno dolgotrajno usposabljanje, in da tovarno vsako leto zapusti nezanemarljiv delež udeleženih delavcev.
This is linked to a substantial shortage of those skills in the Belgian labour market (‘bottleneck jobs’).
To je povezano s precejšnjim pomanjkanjem tovrstnih kvalifikacij na belgijskem trgu dela (gre za t. i. „kritične funkcije“ ali „bottleneck jobs“).
The Commission considers that Belgium has sufficiently substantiated these arguments for three of the general‘technical training’ activities.
Komisija meni, da je Belgija zadostno podkrepila svoje argumente, kar zadeva tri izmed dejavnosti splošnega„tehničnega usposabljanja“.
N.B: As regards ‘welding’, Belgium claims a total duration of the learning period of 60 hours and a workforce turnover in the plant of 4 %.
Opomba: kar zadeva „varjenje“, Belgija navaja, da bo izobraževanje skupaj trajalo 60 ur, delež fluktuacije zaposlenih v tovarni pa naj bi znašal 4 %.
The Commission considers that these figures are relatively low and do not prevent the company from appropriating the benefits of the training costs.
Komisija ocenjuje, da so te številke precej nizke in da podjetju ne preprečujejo, da bi si prilastilo dobiček od stroškov usposabljanja.
The workforce turnover is therefore not high enough to deter the company from incurring those costs.
Fluktuacija zaposlenih torej ni dovolj velika, da bi se v podjetju preprečil nastanek takih stroškov.
Content of training
Vsebina usposabljanja
Total duration of learning period (hours)
Celotno trajanje usposabljanja
Workforce turnover: annual percentage of workers leaving the firm
Fluktuacija zaposlenih: v % delavcev, ki vsako leto zapustijo podjetje
Eligible costs: participants
Upravičeni stroški: udeleženci
Eligible costs: other costs
Upravičeni stroški: ostali stroški
Fork-lift-truck drivers
Vozniki viličarja
Toolmakers
Orodjarji
Maintenance techniques
Vzdrževalci
Thus it is apparent that, for those types of training, high workforce turnovers actually prevent the company from appropriating sufficient benefits to recoup the training costs incurred.
Torej je očitno, da zaradi visoke stopnje fluktuacije zaposlenih podjetje tovrstnih usposabljanj dejansko ne more dovolj izkoristiti, da bi si povrnilo njihove stroške.
Therefore, it is likely that the company would not incur those costs in the absence of aid.
Torej je možno, da brez pomoči ti stroški v podjetju ne bi nastali.
Accordingly, the Commission considers that the aid is necessary for the three training activities in question (unlike the rest of the general‘technical training’).
Glede na zgoraj navedene argumente Komisija meni, da je pomoč potrebna za tri zadevne dejavnosti usposabljanja (v nasprotju s preostankom splošnega„tehničnega usposabljanja“).
Training activities not directly related to the two projects
Dejavnosti usposabljanja, ki niso neposredno povezane z zadevnima projektoma
In their notification, the Belgian authorities described the whole training programme as being designed to support the two projects in question [17].
Belgijski organi so v priglasitvi celoten program usposabljanja predstavili kot podporo zadevnima projektoma [17].
However, additional information submitted by Belgium following the decision to initiate the procedure shows that some of the training activities relate to skills which are actually not indispensable for those projects.
Vendar dodatne informacije, ki jih je Belgija predložila po odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, kažejo, da se del dejavnosti usposabljanja nanaša na sposobnosti, ki dejansko niso nujno potrebne za izvedbo teh projektov.
The following training items concerned (see respective descriptions above) are:
Gre za naslednji postavki (glej opis zgoraj):
basic training;
osnovno usposabljanje,
simulated work environment (SWE).
simulirano delovno okolje (SDO).
The Commission notes that, contrary to the rest of the training programme, basic training and SWE relate to skills which are not necessary for the execution of the two projects at hand: the projects can be fully implemented and production started without a need for that type of training.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se v nasprotju s preostalim programom usposabljanja osnovno usposabljanje in SDO nanašata na kvalifikacije, ki niso potrebne za izvajanje zadevnih dveh projektov: projekta je mogoče v celoti izvesti in začeti proizvodnjo, ne da bi bilo treba organizirati tovrstno usposabljanje.
Nor do these training items concern skills which are immediately required for the production of cars.
Prav tako se ne nanašata na sposobnosti, ki se neposredno zahtevajo za proizvodnjo vozil.
Therefore, the reasoning developed above as to the necessity of the training is not applicable to them.
Zgornja argumentacija, ali je usposabljanje potrebno, ju torej ne zadeva.
As that training appears to exceed the needs of the company, it cannot be concluded that it would have been undertaken in the absence of aid.
Ker se zdi, da to usposabljanje presega potrebe podjetja, ni mogoče sklepati, da bi bilo organizirano tudi brez pomoči.
For want of further elements to the contrary, the Commission considers that the state aid seems to be necessary for the training in question to be carried out.
Ker ni dokazov o nasprotnem, se Komisiji zdi, da je državna pomoč potrebna za organizacijo zadevnega usposabljanja.
Lastly, the Commission observes that the expense item ‘general coordination’ does not concern a training activity as such but the advisory services in support of the general training.
Komisija poleg tega opaža, da stroškovna postavka „splošna koordinacija“ ne zadeva dejavnosti usposabljanja kot take, ampak svetovalne storitve, namenjene splošnemu usposabljanju.
Therefore, it can also be partially included in part in the eligible costs, in so far as it covers ‘basic training’, ‘SWE’ and the part of the general‘Technical training’ for which aid has been deemed necessary [18].
Zato jo je mogoče deloma vključiti v upravičene stroške, če krije „osnovno usposabljanje“, „SDO“ in del splošnega„tehničnega usposabljanja“, za katero je bilo ocenjeno, da je pomoč potrebna [18].
Taking into account the rule in Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 that limits trainees’ costs to the total amount of the other expenses, the eligible costs in the case of the parts of the training programme for which aid is necessary amount to EUR 4,362 million, and the aid itself to EUR 2,181 million. Since, as mentioned in paragraph 23, the other formal conditions in Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 are also met, the Commission concludes that this part of the notified aid is compatible with the common market.
Ob upoštevanju pravila iz Uredbe (ES) št. 68/2001, ki omejuje stroške za udeležence projekta usposabljanja na celotni znesek drugih stroškov, upravičeni stroški za dele programa usposabljanja, za katere je pomoč potrebna, znašajo 4,362 milijona EUR, sama pomoč pa 2,181 milijona EUR. Ker so prav tako izpolnjeni drugi formalni pogoji, določeni z Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 68/2001, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 23 zgoraj, Komisija sklepa, da je ta del priglašene pomoči združljiv s skupnim trgom.
The Commission finds that the measures notified by Belgium that represent eligible costs of EUR 4,362 million, corresponding to an aid amount of EUR 2,181 million, comply with the criteria for compatibility with the common market pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Komisija meni, da del ukrepov, ki jih je priglasila Belgija, ki znaša 4,362 milijona EUR upravičenih stroškov, kar je enako pomoči v višini 2,181 milijona EUR, izpolnjuje merila združljivosti s skupnim trgom na podlagi člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
The Commission finds that the rest of the aid is not necessary for carrying out the corresponding training activities.
Komisija meni, da preostanek pomoči ni potreben za izvedbo ustreznih ukrepov usposabljanja.
The aid is not compatible with the common market under any derogation laid down in the Treaty and must therefore be prohibited.
Ta pomoč ni združljiva s skupnim trgom na podlagi katerega koli odstopanja, določenega v Pogodbi, in se mora zato prepovedati.
According to the Belgian authorities, the aid has not yet been granted and so there is no need for it to be recovered,
Po trditvah belgijskih organov pomoč še ni bila dodeljena, torej je ni treba izterjati –
The state aid which Belgium is planning to implement for a training project at General Motors Belgium in Antwerp is incompatible with the common market to the extent of EUR 3157338,40.
Državna pomoč v višini 3157338,40 EUR, ki jo Belgija namerava izvesti za projekt usposabljanja v družbi General Motors Belgium v Antwerpnu, je nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
That part of the aid may accordingly not be implemented.
Ta del pomoči se zato ne sme izvesti.
The remainder of the state aid, amounting to EUR 2181161,60, is compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Preostali znesek državne pomoči v višini 2181161,60 EUR je združljiv s skupnim trgom na podlagi člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
Belgium shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Belgija obvesti Komisijo o ukrepih, ki jih je sprejela za izvršitev te odločbe, v dveh mesecih od datuma uradnega obvestila o tej odločbi.
OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 6.
UL C 210, 1.9.2006, str. 6.
Its validity has been prolonged until 30 June 2008 by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1976/2006 (OJ L 368, 23.12.2006, p. 85).
Njena veljavnost je bila podaljšana do 30. junija 2008 z Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 1976/2006 (UL L 368, 23.12.2006, str. 85).
Letter of 7 February 2006.
Dopis z dne 7. februarja 2006.
On account of this limitation of the trainees' costs that are eligible for aid, eligible general training costs are reduced to EUR 5438000 and eligible specific training costs to EUR 10478000.
Zaradi te omejitve upravičenih stroškov za delo udeležencev usposabljanja, se upravičeni stroški splošnega usposabljanja zmanjšajo na 5438000 EUR, upravičeni stroški posebnega usposabljanja pa na 10478000 EUR.
The Commission came to similar conclusions in paragraph 33 of its decision of 4 July 2006 concerning Ford Genk (OJ L 366, 21.12.2006, p. 32).
Komisija je prišla do podobnih sklepnih ugotovitev v točki 33 Odločbe z dne 4. julija 2006 za Ford Genk (UL L 366, 21.12.2006, str. 32).
Faced with this weak demand growth, productivity gains and falling prices, several large car manufacturers have closed plants or reduced their workforce in the Community in recent years.
Zaradi počasnega povečevanja povpraševanja, rasti produktivnosti in padanja cen je več proizvajalcev vozil v zadnjih letih zaprlo svoje tovarne ali zmanjšalo število zaposlenih v Skupnosti.
GM Europe announced a major restructuring plan at the end of 2004 that called for a reduction of the workforce by up to 12000 persons: http://www.gmeurope.com/news/archive_0410.html
Tudi GM Europe je konec leta 2004 napovedal obsežnejši načrt prestrukturiranja, zaradi česar naj bi se število zaposlenih zmanjšalo za 12000 oseb. http://www.gmeurope.com/news/archive_0410.html
Annex 2 to the notification.
Priloga 2 k priglasitvi.
The most likely candidates were plants already producing other versions of the Astra, and in particular Bochum (Germany).
Najverjetnejši kandidati so bile tovarne, ki že proizvajajo druge izvedenke Astre, predvsem Bochum (Nemčija).
Bertone states in its website that ‘Carrozzeria Bertone has always considered the human factor to be of strategic importance.
Bertone na svoji spletni strani navaja, da je „Carrozzeria Bertone človeškemu dejavniku vedno pripisovala strateški pomen.
[…] This is why Carrozzeria Bertone has always devoted special attention to continuously training and updating its workforce.
[…] Zato je Carrozzeria Bertone vedno posvečala posebno pozornost stalnemu usposabljanju in posodabljanju usposobljenosti svoje delovne sile.
In concrete terms, over the past two years this strategy has led to 240 hours of training [per capita]; an investment of 3 million euros.’ http://www.bertone.it/carrozzeria3.htm
Ali konkretneje: v skladu s to strategijo je bilo v zadnjih dveh letih usposabljanju posvečenih 240 ur [na osebo], kar pomeni naložbo v vrednosti 3 milijonov EUR.“ http://www.bertone.it/carrozzeria3.htm
See paragraph 11.
Glej točko 11 zgoraj.
Case T-459/93 Siemens SA v Commission, ECR [1995] II-1675, paragraph 48.
Zadeva T-459/93, Siemens SA proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. II-1675, točka 48.
See paragraph 7.
Glej točko 7 zgoraj.
For example, the production of the new model requires the welding of more parts, which increases the company's need of welders.
Za proizvodnjo novega modela je na primer potrebno varjenje večjega števila delov, zato podjetje potrebuje več varilcev.
On the basis of the number of training hours, the Commission concludes that 80,71 % of the ‘general coordination’ costs, representing an amount of EUR 0,723 million, can be attributed to basic training, SWE and the part of general technical training for which aid is necessary.
Na podlagi števila ur usposabljanja Komisija sklepa, da je mogoče 80,71 % stroškov za „splošno koordinacijo“ oziroma 0,723 milijona EUR pripisati osnovnemu usposabljanju, SDO in delu splošnega tehničnega usposabljanja, za katero je potrebna pomoč.
The training hours considered are: (i) technical training (letter from Belgium dated 28 February 2007): 50800 hours, of which 30000 related to the three activities for which aid is deemed necessary; (ii) basic training (letter from Belgium dated 7 February 2006; number of trainees multiplied by the average number of training hours per trainee over three years): 17000 hours; and (iii) SWE (idem): 40000 hours.
Gre za naslednje ure: (i) tehnično usposabljanje (dopis Belgije z dne 28. februarja 2007): 50800 ur, od katerih jih je 30000 povezanih s tremi dejavnostmi, za katere se šteje, da je pomoč potrebna; (ii) osnovno usposabljanje (dopis Belgije z dne 7. februarja 2006; število udeležencev se pomnoži s povprečnim številom ur usposabljanja na udeleženca v obdobju treh let): 17000 ur; (iii) SDO (id.): 40000 ur.
In paragraph 52 of its judgment of 30 September 2003 in Joined Cases C-57/00 P and C-61/00 P, the Court of Justice ruled that ‘whatever the interpretation given by the Commission to Article 92(2)(c) [now 87(2)(c)] of the Treaty in the past, that cannot affect the correctness of the Commission's interpretation of that provision in the contested decision and hence its validity.’
Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti je v točki 52 sodbe z dne 30. septembra 2003 v združenih zadevah C-57/00 P in C-61/00 P navedlo, da „ne glede na to, kako je Komisija v preteklosti razlagala člen 92(2)(c) Pogodbe [postal člen 87(2)(c)], to ne more vplivati na utemeljenost razlage iste določbe s strani Komisije v sporni odločbi in posledično na njeno veljavnost“.
Similarly, in paragraph 177 of its judgment of 15 June 2005 in Case T-171/02, the Court of First Instance indicated that ‘the legality of a Commission decision declaring that new aid does not fulfil the conditions under which the exemption in Article 87(3)(c) EC applies must be assessed solely in the context of that article, and not in the light of the Commission's earlier decision-making practice, assuming that is established.’
Podobno je Sodišče prve stopnje Evropskih skupnosti v točki 177 sodbe z dne 15. junija 2005 v zadevi T-171/02 navedlo, da se: „zakonitost neke odločbe Komisije, v kateri je bilo ugotovljeno, da nova pomoč ne izpolnjuje pogojev za uporabo tega odstopanja, presoja samo v okviru člena 87(3)(c) ES in ne z vidika predhodne prakse odločanja Komisije, če je ta ugotovljena“.
on the State aid C 1/06 (ex NN 103/05) implemented by Spain for Chupa Chups
o ukrepih C 1/06 (ex NN 103/05) Španija za Chupa Chups
(notified under document number C(2007) 1710)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 1710)
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provision cited above [1] and having regard to their comments,
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranim strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenim členom [1], in ob upoštevanju teh pripomb,
By letter registered on 22 April 2005, the Commission received a complaint from a competitor about an alleged aid measure in favour of Chupa Chups SA.
Z dopisom, evidentiranim 22. aprila 2005, je Komisija prejela pritožbo tekmeca o domnevnem ukrepu pomoči v korist družbi Chupa Chups SA.
The Commission requested information by letters dated 10 June 2005 and 7 September 2005, to which Spain replied by letters registered on 11 August 2005, 26 October 2005, 18 November 2005 and 12 December 2005.
Komisija je zaprosila za informacije z dopisoma z dne 10. junija 2005 in 7. septembra 2005, na katera je Španija odgovorila z dopisi, evidentiranimi 11. avgusta 2005, 26. oktobra 2005, 18. novembra 2005 in 12. decembra 2005.
The Commission decided on 25 January 2006 to initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 88(2) of the Treaty as it had doubts about the compatibility with the common market of various measures granted by public bodies to Chupa Chups.
Komisija se je 25. januarja 2006 odločila sprožiti postopek v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe, ker je dvomila o združljivosti različnih ukrepov, ki so jih javni organi odobrili Chupa Chupsu, s skupnim trgom.
Spain submitted comments by letter of 2 March 2006.
Španija je predložila pripombe v dopisu z dne 2. marca 2006.
The Commission requested information from the Spanish authorities on 25 April 2006, 6 July 2006 and 24 November 2006.
Komisija je španske organe zaprosila za informacije 25. aprila 2006, 6. julija 2006 in 24. novembra 2006.
These authorities replied by letters registered on 22 May 2006, 5 September 2006, 7 September 2006, 20 October 2006, 1 February 2007, 6 February 2007 and 12 March 2007.
Ti organi so odgovorili z dopisi, evidentiranimi 22. maja 2006, 5. septembra 2006, 7. septembra 2006, 20. oktobra 2006, 1. februarja 2007, 6. februarja 2007 in 12. marca 2007.
The Commission Decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities [2], with an invitation to interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Odločitev Komisije, da sproži postopek, je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2], s povabilom vsem zainteresiranim strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe glede pomoči.
The Commission received comments from Chupa Chups, registered on 30 May 2006, and from Inmobiliaria Casa Batlló, registered on 8 August 2006.
Komisija je prejela pripombe od Chupa Chupsa, evidentirane 30. maja 2006, in od družbe Inmobiliaria Casa Batlló, evidentirane 8. avgusta 2006.
These comments were forwarded to the Spanish authorities on 28 September 2006.
Te pripombe so bile španskim organom poslane 28. septembra 2006.
Spain did not react to them.
Španija se nanje ni odzvala.
No other observation from third parties was received.
Od tretjih strank ni bilo prejetih nobenih drugih pripomb.
The complainant did not intervene.
Pritožnik se ni vmešal.
Chupa Chups is the holding company of an industrial group established in Spain in 1940.
Chupa Chups je holdinška družba industrijske skupine, ustanovljene v Španiji leta 1940.
Its main activity consists in the production and commercialisation of candies, notably lollypops.
Njena glavna dejavnost sta proizvodnja in trženje slaščic, predvsem lizik.
Currently the group operates four production centres, located in Russia, Mexico, Sant Esteve de Sesrovires (Barcelona) and Villamayor (Asturias).
Skupina trenutno upravlja štiri proizvodne centre, ki so v Rusiji, Mehiki, Sant Estevu de Sesrovires (v Barceloni) in Villamayoru (v Asturiji).
In June 2006 Chupa Chups, until then a group of family-owned companies, was sold to the Italian–Dutch candies corporation Perfetti Van Melle [3].
Junija 2006 je bil Chupa Chups, ki je bil do tedaj skupina podjetij v družinski lasti, prodan italijansko-nizozemski korporaciji za proizvodnjo slaščic Perfetti Van Melle [3].
Since 2002 the Chupa Chups group has undergone considerable financial difficulties, with consolidated losses of EUR 22500000 in 2002, EUR 4720000 in 2003 and EUR 5950000 in 2004, and a decreasing turnover [4].
Od leta 2002 je imela skupina Chupa Chups precejšnje finančne težave, s konsolidiranimi izgubami v znesku 22500000 EUR leta 2002, 4720000 EUR leta 2003 in 5950000 EUR leta 2004, ter upadajočim prometom [4].
in July 2002, a syndicated loan of a maximum of EUR 75 million was granted to Chupa Chups by a group of private banks. The contract stipulated a number of obligations for the company, including compliance with certain financial ratios.
julija 2002 je skupina zasebnih bank Chupa Chupsu odobrila sindicirano posojilo v najvišjem znesku 75 milijonov EUR. Pogodba je določala številne obveznosti za družbo, vključno s spoštovanjem nekaterih finančnih razmerij.
The loan was guaranteed by several companies belonging to the group [5].
Za posojilo je jamčilo več družb iz skupine [5].
In 2005 the banks offered to Chupa Chups to renew the financing, but the offer was eventually declined,
V letu 2005 so banke Chupa Chupsu ponudile podaljšanje financiranja, vendar pa je bila ponudba na koncu zavrnjena,
in March 2003, Chupa Chups’ owners injected in the capital of the company extra funds amounting to EUR 8 million,
marca 2003 so lastniki Chupa Chupsa v kapital družbe injicirali dodatna sredstva v znesku 8 milijonov EUR,
a reshuffling of the corporate structure enabled the raising of additional funds to the amount of EUR 6790000 [6].
reorganizacija korporacijske strukture je omogočila pridobitev dodatnih sredstev v znesku 6790000 EUR [6].