natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The contributions to the Programme will come from the Netherlands and France.
Prispevke za ta dodatni program bosta zagotovili Nizozemska in Francija.
The breakdown of these contributions is as follows:
Razdelitev teh prispevkov je naslednja:
The Netherlands EUR 8200000
Nizozemska 8200000 EUR
France EUR 300000
Francija 300000 EUR
Total EUR 8500000
Skupaj 8500000 EUR
On 19 February 2004, the Council adopted a Decision concerning the adoption of a supplementary research programme to be implemented by the Joint Research Centre for the European Atomic Energy Community [1].
Svet je 19. februarja 2004 sprejel Odločbo o sprejetju dodatnega raziskovalnega programa, ki ga za Evropsko skupnost za atomsko energijo izvede Skupno raziskovalno središče [1].
That programme was adopted for a period of three years, until 1 January 2007.
Ta program je bil sprejet za obdobje treh let, do 1. januarja 2007.
repealing Decision 1999/572/EC accepting undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of steel wire ropes and cables originating in the People’s Republic of China, Hungary, India, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine
o razveljavitvi Sklepa 1999/572/ES o sprejetju zavez, ponujenih v zvezi s protidampinškimi postopki glede uvoza jeklene žice, vrvi in kablov s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, Madžarske, Indije, Republike Koreje, Mehike, Poljske, Južne Afrike in Ukrajine
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community [1], and in particular Articles 8 and 9 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 384/96 z dne 22. decembra 1995 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti [1], ter zlasti členov 8 in 9 Uredbe,
PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND EXISTING MEASURES
Prejšnje preiskave in obstoječi ukrepi
In August 1999, the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 [2], imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of steel ropes and cables originating, inter alia, in South Africa.
Svet je avgusta 1999 z Uredbo (ES) št. 1796/1999 [2] uvedel dokončno protidampinško dajatev na uvoz jeklenih vrvi in kablov s poreklom, med drugim, iz Južne Afrike.
In November 2005, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005 [3] decided that the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of the product concerned originating, inter alia, in South Africa should be maintained.
Svet je novembra 2005, po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa v skladu s členom 11(2) osnovne uredbe, z Uredbo (ES) št. 1858/2005 [3] sklenil, da se ohranijo protidampinški ukrepi, ki so se uporabljali za uvoz zadevnega izdelka s poreklom, med drugim, iz Južne Afrike.
The Commission, by Decision 1999/572/EC of 13 August 1999 [4], accepted a price undertaking from a South African company, Scaw Metals Group Haggie Steel Wire Rope (‘Haggie’ or ‘the company’).
Komisija je s Sklepom 1999/572/ES z dne 13. avgusta 1999 [4] sprejela cenovno zavezo južnoafriške družbe Scaw Metals Group Haggie Steel Wire Rope („Haggie“ ali „družba“).
By Decision 1999/572/EC the Commission also accepted price undertakings from the following companies: Usha Martin Industries & Usha Beltron Ltd, India; Aceros Camesa SA de CV, Mexico; and Joint Stock Company Silur, Ukraine.
Komisija je s Sklepom 1999/572/ES prav tako sprejela cenovno zavezo družb Usha Martin Industries & Usha Beltron Ltd iz Indije, Aceros Camesa SA de CV iz Mehike in Joint Stock Company Silur iz Ukrajine.
The Commission withdrew the acceptance of the undertaking offered by Joint Stock Company Silur, Ukraine by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1678/2003 [5].
Komisija je z Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 1678/2003 [5] umaknila sprejetje zaveze, ki jo je ponudila družba Joint Stock Company Silur iz Ukrajine.
The anti-dumping measures on steel wire ropes and cables originating in Mexico expired on 12 August 2004 [6].
Protidampinški ukrepi na uvoz jeklenih žičnatih vrvi in kablov s poreklom iz Mehike so se iztekli 12. avgusta 2004 [6].
The Commission withdrew the acceptance of the undertaking offered by Usha Martin Industries & Usha Beltron Ltd by Commission Decision 2006/38/EC of 22 December 2005.
Komisija je s Sklepom Komisije 2006/38/ES z dne 22. decembra 2005 umaknila sprejetje zaveze, ki jo je ponudila družba Usha Martin Industries & Usha Beltron Ltd.
As a result imports into the Community of the product concerned of South African origin, produced by the company and of the product type covered by the undertaking (the product covered) were exempted from the definitive anti-dumping duties.
Zato je bil uvoz v Skupnost zadevnega izdelka južnoafriškega porekla, ki ga je proizvajala družba, in vrste izdelka, ki ga zajema zaveza („izdelek iz zaveze“), izvzet iz dokončnih protidampinških dajatev.
In this regard it should be noted that certain types of steel wire ropes and cables currently produced by Haggie were excluded from the scope of the undertaking.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da so bile nekatere vrste jeklenih žičnatih vrvi in kablov, ki jih sedaj proizvaja Haggie, izključene iz obsega zaveze.
Accordingly, such steel wire ropes and cables were liable to the payment of the anti-dumping duty when entered into free circulation in the Community.
Zato je bilo za take jeklene žičnate vrvi in kable pri vstopu v prosti promet v Skupnosti treba plačati protidampinško dajatev.
Obligations of the company under the undertaking
Obveznosti družbe pod zavezo
The undertaking offered by the company obliges it to, inter alia, export the product covered to the European Community above certain minimum prices (MIPs) as stated in the undertaking.
Zaveza, ki jo je ponudila družba, jo zavezuje, da med drugim izvaža izdelek iz zaveze v Evropsko skupnost nad določenimi najnižjimi uvoznimi cenami, določenimi v zavezi.
It was further acknowledged by the company in the undertaking that with regard to the exemption from the anti-dumping duties afforded by the undertaking, such exemption is conditional upon the presentation to the Community customs services of an ‘undertaking invoice’.
Družba je v zavezi prav tako potrdila, da je glede na izvzetje od protidampinških dajatev, ki ga zaveza omogoča, tako izvzetje možno le s predložitvijo „računa na podlagi zaveze“ carinskim službam Skupnosti.
Moreover, the company undertook not to issue such undertaking invoices for sales of those types of product concerned which are not covered by the undertaking and which are therefore liable to the anti-dumping duty.
Poleg tega se je družba zavezala, da takih računov na podlagi zaveze ne bo izdajala za prodajo tistih vrst zadevnega izdelka, ki jih zaveza ne zajema in za katere je zato treba plačati protidampinško dajatev.
The company also acknowledged that the undertaking invoices issued had to contain the information set out first in the Annex of Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 and later in the Annex of Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005.
Družba je tudi potrdila, da izdani računi na podlagi zaveze morajo vsebovati informacije, sprva določene v Prilogi k Uredbi (ES) št. 1796/1999 in pozneje v Prilogi k Uredbi (ES) št. 1858/2005.
The terms of the undertaking also oblige the company to provide the Commission with regular and detailed information, in the form of a quarterly report of its sales of the product concerned to the European Community.
Pogoji zaveze družbo obvezujejo, da Komisiji v obliki četrtletnega poročila predloži redne in podrobne informacije o prodaji zadevnega izdelka v Evropsko skupnost.
Such reports should include the products covered by the undertaking which benefited from the exemption from the payment of the anti-dumping duty, as well as those types of steel ropes and cables which are not covered by the undertaking and which are therefore liable to the payment of the anti-dumping duty upon importation into the European Community.
Takšna poročila morajo vključevati izdelke, zajete v zavezi, za katere ima družba koristi od izvzetja od plačila protidampinške dajatve, kakor tudi tiste vrste jeklenih žičnatih vrvi in kablov, ki niso zajeti v zavezi in za katere je zato ob uvozu v Evropsko skupnost treba plačati protidampinško dajatev.
It is clear that the aforementioned sales reports should be, as submitted, complete, exhaustive and correct in all particulars and that the transactions fully comply with the terms of the undertaking.
Jasno je, da morajo biti ob predložitvi vsi podatki v navedenih poročilih o prodaji popolni, izčrpni in pravilni ter da morajo biti transakcije v celoti skladne s pogoji zaveze.
For the purpose of ensuring compliance with the undertaking, the Company also undertook to allow on-spot verification visits at its premises in order to verify the accuracy and veracity of data submitted in the said quarterly reports and to provide all information considered necessary by the Commission.
Za zagotovitev skladnosti z zavezo se je družba tudi zavezala, da bo dovolila preveritvene obiske na kraju samem v svojih prostorih za preverjanje točnosti in verodostojnosti predloženih podatkov v navedenih četrtletnih poročilih ter da bo predložila vse za Komisijo pomembne informacije.
It should be noted that the company already received a warning letter from the Commission Services on 28 October 2003 for breaching the undertaking by issuing undertaking invoices for products not covered by the undertaking but otherwise being subject to the anti-dumping measures.
Treba je opozoriti, da je družba 28. oktobra 2003 že prejela opozorilno pismo služb Komisije zaradi kršitve zaveze, ker je izdajala račune na podlagi zaveze za izdelke, ki niso zajeti v zavezi, vendar so predmet protidampinških ukrepov.
The warning letter stated that in view of the particular circumstances under which these breaches took place it was not intended to withdraw the acceptance of the undertaking, but it was also pointed out that any subsequent infringement of the undertaking, even of a minor nature, would make it difficult for the Commission to maintain the acceptance of the undertaking from the company.
V opozorilnem pismu je bilo navedeno, da zaradi posebnih okoliščin, v katerih je do teh kršitev prišlo, Komisija ne namerava umakniti sprejetja zaveze, vendar je bilo tudi izpostavljeno, da bo Komisiji v primeru kakršnih koli nadaljnjih kršitev zaveze, tudi manjših, težko ohraniti sprejetje zaveze družbe.
In this regard, a verification visit was carried out at the premises of the Company in South Africa from 5 February 2007 until 6 February 2007.
V zvezi s tem je bil 5. in 6. februarja 2007 opravljen preveritveni obisk v prostorih družbe v Južni Afriki.
The verification visit covered the period from 1 January 2004 until 31 December 2006.
Preveritveni obisk je zajel obdobje od 1. januarja 2004 do 31. decembra 2006.
Results of the verification visit to the Company
Rezultati preveritvenih obiskov družbe
The verification visit established that the company, on two occasions, issued undertaking invoices (undertaking invoice numbers: 935515 and 935516) for the products subject to the anti-dumping measure but not covered by the undertaking.
S preveritvenim obiskom je bilo ugotovljeno, da je družba v dveh primerih izdala račun na podlagi zaveze (številki računov na podlagi zaveze sta 935515 in 935516) za izdelke, ki so predmet protidampinških ukrepov, vendar niso zajeti v zavezi.
Therefore, these transactions unlawfully benefited from the exemption from the payment of the anti-dumping duty upon importation.
Zato je družba pri teh transakcijah imela nezakonite koristi od izvzetja od plačila protidampinških dajatev ob uvozu.
The verification visit established that, on one occasion, the company failed to adjust the unit sales price according to the terms of payment.
S preveritvenim obiskom je bilo ugotovljeno, da družba v skladu s pogoji plačila v enem primeru ni prilagodila prodajne cene na enoto.
The failure to make this adjustment for the financial cost linked to the actual time of the payment has led to a unit sale price below the applicable MIP.
Ta neprilagoditev za finančne stroške, povezane z dejanskim časom plačila, je privedla do prodajne cene na enoto, nižje od uporabljene najnižje uvozne cene.
Furthermore, the verification visit established that, on several occasions, the company issued undertaking invoices not in conformity with the Annex of Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005 by including the sentence ‘For sale offshore, not to be sold within the European Union’.
S preveritvenim obiskom je bilo poleg tega ugotovljeno, da je družba v več primerih izdala račune na podlagi zaveze, ki niso bili v skladu s Prilogo k Uredbi (ES) št. 1858/2005, saj je vključila stavek „za prodajo v tujini, ni za prodajo v Evropski uniji“.
Examination of the undertaking invoices issued for the time period concerned by the verification visit showed that one transaction was not included in the quarterly undertaking sales report submitted to the Commission.
Pregled računov na podlagi zaveze, izdanih v obdobju, ki ga je zajel preveritveni obisk, je pokazal, da ena transakcija ni bila vključena v četrtletnem poročilu o prodaji na podlagi zaveze, ki ga je družba predložila Komisiji.
Furthermore, it was also established that the company reported transactions not intended for release into free circulation in the Community as if they were intended to be released into free circulation in the Community.
Poleg tega je bilo prav tako ugotovljeno, da je družba o transakcijah, ki niso bile namenjene za sprostitev v prosti promet v Skupnosti, poročala, kot če bi bile namenjene za sprostitev v prosti promet v Skupnosti.
The verification visit also identified several transactions which were reported as transit sales, but, in reality, the goods were released into free circulation in the Community.
S preveritvenim obiskom je bilo odkritih tudi več transakcij, ki so bile vključene v poročilo kot tranzitne prodaje, vendar je bilo blago v resnici sproščeno v prosti promet v Skupnosti.
Moreover discrepancies were found between the quarterly undertaking sales reports and the corresponding invoices.
Poleg tega so bile ugotovljene neskladnosti med četrtletnim poročilom o prodaji na podlagi zaveze in ustreznimi računi.
The fact that the company issued undertaking invoices for product concerned which were not covered by the undertaking and the fact that these transactions benefited from the exemption from the payment of the anti-dumping duty only granted for the products covered by the undertaking constitute breaches of the undertaking.
Dejstvo, da je družba izdala račune na podlagi zaveze za zadevne izdelke, ki niso bili zajeti v zavezi, in dejstvo, da je pri teh transakcijah družba imela koristi od izvzetja od plačila protidampinške dajatve, odobrenega samo za izdelke, zajete v zavezi, se štejeta za kršitev zaveze.
The obligation of the company to respect the MIP for all sales of the product covered was not met.
Družba ni izpolnila svoje obveznosti spoštovanja najnižje uvozne cene za vse prodaje izdelka iz zaveze.
Issuing undertaking invoices not in conformity with the Annex of Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005 for sales of product covered can be confusing for the customs authorities and no longer allow the customs authorities to effectively monitor the undertaking and, therefore, render the undertaking impractical.
Izdajanje računov na podlagi zaveze, ki niso v skladu s Prilogo k Uredbi (ES) št. 1858/2005, za prodajo izdelka iz zaveze, lahko carinske organe zmede in jim prepreči učinkovito spremljanje zaveze, zaradi česar je zaveza nesmiselna.
The facts set out in recital (17) have led to the conclusion that the quarterly undertaking sales reports as submitted by the company were not complete, exhaustive and correct in all particulars and therefore these reports were not sufficiently reliable to be used for monitoring the undertaking.
Dejstvi iz uvodne izjave 17 sta privedli do sklepa, da vsi podatki v četrtletnih poročilih o prodaji na podlagi zaveze, ki jih je predložila družba, niso bili popolni, izčrpni in pravilni, zato ta poročila niso bila dovolj zanesljiva, da bi se lahko uporabila za spremljanje zaveze.
Non-compliance with reporting requirements also constitutes a breach of the undertaking.
Neupoštevanje zahtev za poročanje se prav tako šteje za kršitev zaveze.
Written submissions and hearing
Pisna stališča in zaslišanje
Lack of understanding of the Undertaking
Nezadostno razumevanje zaveze
The company acknowledged by its written submission that errors occurred when issuing undertaking invoices and preparing the undertaking reports due to a lack of understanding of the technical provisions of the undertaking, of incorrect reading of the text and/or the company’s failure to consult it.
Družba je v pisnem stališču priznala, da je pri izdajanju računov na podlagi zaveze in pripravljanju poročil na podlagi zaveze prišlo do napak zaradi nezadostnega razumevanja tehničnih določb zaveze, nepravilne razlage besedila in/ali neupoštevanje besedila.
It was also stated in its written submission and during the hearing on 26 April 2007 that changes in the senior management and the restructuring of the organization contributed to lack of understanding of the complex requirements of the undertaking.
Prav tako je v pisnem stališču in na zaslišanju 26. aprila 2007 izjavila, da so spremembe v višjem vodstvu in prestrukturiranje organizacije prispevali k nezadostnemu razumevanju kompleksnih zahtev zaveze.
The company also admitted the receipt of the warning letter from the Commission Services on the 28 October 2003.
Družba je tudi potrdila prejem opozorilnega pisma Služb Komisije z dne 28. oktobra 2003.
However, the company argued that it never received a verification report which it assumed would have outlined the actual error made.
Vendar pa je družba trdila, da ni prejela poročila o preveritvi, ki bi po njenih domnevah opredelilo dejansko napako.
The company argued that the fact that it was not made aware of the actual errors also contributed to its failure to change its practices concerning the preparation of undertaking reports or improve its understanding.
Družba je prav tako trdila, da ni spremenila prakse pri pripravljanju poročil na podlagi zaveze ali izboljšala razumevanja zaveze zaradi dejstva, da ni bila seznanjena z dejanskimi napakami.
In respond to these arguments it has to be noted that the company on 18 September 2003 received a letter from the Commission which set out in detail the breaches identified.
V odziv na te trditve je treba poudariti, da je družba 18. septembra 2003 od Komisije prejela pismo, v katerem so bile podrobno opisane ugotovljene kršitve.
The warning letter of 28 October 2003 did not repeat the breaches in detail any longer but referred to the earlier correspondence between the Commission and the company.
V opozorilnem pismu z dne 28. oktobra 2003 niso bile ponovno navedene podrobnosti kršitev, vendar pa se je pismo sklicevalo na prejšnjo korespondenco med Komisijo in družbo.
It also should be noted that the company might have been confused when it referred to a verification report.
Treba je tudi opozoriti, da se je družba morda zmotila, ko se je sklicevala na poročilo o preveritvi.
The Commission did not carry out a verification visit prior to issuing the warning letter on 28 October 2003 as the breaches which let to issuance of the warning letter were established on the basis of desk analysis of the undertaking reports.
Komisija ni izvedla preveritvenega obiska pred izdajo opozorilnega pisma 28. oktobra 2003, saj so bile kršitve, ki so privedle do izdaje opozorilnega pisma, ugotovljene na podlagi teoretične analize poročil na podlagi zaveze.
The Commission did carry out a verification in May 2004 but since that verification did not lead to further action no letter relating to it needed to be sent the company.
Komisija je preveritev izvedla maja 2004, vendar ta preveritev ni privedla do nadaljnjih ukrepov, zato družbi ni bilo treba poslati pisma v zvezi s tem.
Moreover, the company submitted during the hearing that, after the verification visit, the company revisited its complete system, based on the comments made on the spot, in order to accommodate the necessary changes to meet the requirements of the undertaking.
Poleg tega je družba na zaslišanju povedala, da je po preveritvenem obisku na podlagi pripomb, izrečenih na kraju samem, pregledala svoj celotni sistem, da bi lahko uvedla potrebne spremembe za izpolnitev zahtev zaveze.
The arguments presented by the company in its defence regarding its lack of understanding of the undertaking do not alter the Commission’s view that the company failed to comply with the obligations of the undertaking.
Trditve družbe v njeno obrambo v zvezi z nezadostnim razumevanjem zaveze ne spremenijo stališča Komisije, da družba ni izpolnila obveznosti iz zaveze.
It also has to be noted that the company already received a warning letter for breaching the undertaking in the past and it failed to adopt the measures necessary to prevent that new breaches of the undertaking would occur.
Prav tako je treba opozoriti, da je družba v preteklosti že prejela opozorilno pismo zaradi kršitve zaveze in da ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za preprečitev novih kršitev zaveze.
The lack of understanding of the requirements of the undertaking constitutes a high risk for the sufficiency and reliability of the monitoring of the undertaking.
Nezadostno razumevanje zahtev zaveze pomeni veliko tveganje za zadostnost in zanesljivost spremljanja zaveze.
With regard to the price violation, the company admitted that a price violation occurred on one occasion because it failed to do the necessary adjustments in the sales price in respect of late payment.
Glede kršitve cenovne zaveze je družba priznala, da je v enem primeru prišlo do kršitve cenovne zaveze, ker ni prilagodila prodajne cene glede na pozno plačilo.
However, it was argued that the sales prices of all other transactions were strictly in compliance with the MIP.
Vendar pa je bilo poudarjeno, da so bile prodajne cene vseh drugih transakcij popolnoma v skladu z najnižjo uvozno ceno.
Moreover, it was submitted that the late payment occurred due to unforeseen circumstances as the client concerned normally pre-pays for goods prior to shipment taking place.
Poleg tega je bilo zatrjeno, da je do poznega plačila prišlo zaradi nepredvidenih okoliščin, saj zadevna stranka običajno vnaprej plača za blago pred pošiljanjem.
In response to these arguments it should be pointed out that in accordance with the undertaking, the company undertook to ensure that the Net Sales Price of all sales covered by the undertaking shall be at or above the MIPs set out in the undertaking.
V odziv na te trditve je treba poudariti, da se je v skladu z zavezo družba zavezala zagotoviti, da bo neto prodajna cena celotne prodaje, ki jo zaveza zajema, enaka najnižjim uvoznim cenam iz zaveze ali višja od njih.
Moreover, regarding the issue of proportionality, the basic Regulation contains no direct or indirect requirement that a breach of an undertaking must relate to a minimum percentage of sales or must relate to a minimum percentage of the MIP.
Osnovna uredba v zvezi z vprašanjem sorazmernosti prav tako neposredno ali posredno ne zahteva, da mora biti kršitev zaveze povezana z najnižjim odstotkom prodaje ali najnižjim odstotkom najnižje uvozne cene.
This approach has also been confirmed by the jurisprudence of the Court of First Instance which has ruled that any breach of an undertaking is sufficient to justify the withdrawal of acceptance of an undertaking [7].
Ta pristop je potrdila tudi sodna praksa Sodišča prve stopnje, ki je odločilo, da je ob vsakršni kršitvi zaveze umik sprejetja zaveze upravičen [7].
Accordingly, the arguments presented by the company with regard to proportionality do not alter the Commission’s view that a breach of the undertaking occurred and that the acceptance of the undertaking should be withdrawn.
Zato trditve, ki jih je predložila družba v zvezi s sorazmernostjo, ne spremenijo stališča Komisije, da je bila zaveza kršena in da je sprejetje zaveze treba umakniti.
Good faith of the company
Dobra vera družbe