natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The risk-sharing pattern resulting from the above mechanism shall be reflected in an appropriate sharing between the trust account and the EIB of the risk margin charged by the EIB to its counterpart under the underlying loan guarantee instrument operation.
Vzorec delitve tveganja, ki izvira iz zgoraj omenjenega mehanizma, se odrazi v ustrezni delitvi meje tveganja med skrbniškim računom in EIB, ki jo EIB zaračuna svoji stranki v okviru instrumenta garancij za posojila, povezanega z zadevnimi posojili.
The EIB guarantee
Garancija EIB
The loan guarantee instrument shall consist of an EIB guarantee for a stand-by liquidity facility to be provided to an eligible project in terms consistent with the loan guarantee instrument.
Instrument garancij za posojila je sestavljen iz garancije EIB za rezervno likvidnostno posojilo, ki bo zagotovljeno upravičenemu projektu pod pogoji, ki so v skladu z instrumentom garancij za posojila.
If the stand-by liquidity facility providers are entitled to call the EIB guarantee under the terms of the loan guarantee instrument, the EIB shall pay out all sums due to the stand-by liquidity facility providers and become creditor to the project.
Če imajo ponudniki rezervnih likvidnostnih posojil pravico, da zahtevajo garancijo EIB pod pogoji iz instrumenta garancij za posojila, EIB ponudnikom rezervnih likvidnostnih posojil izplača vse zneske, ki jih dolguje, in tako postane upnik projekta.
Once the EIB has become creditor to a project, the EIB's rights under the loan guarantee instrument shall rank behind the debt service of the senior credit facility and ahead of equity and related financings.
Ko EIB postane upnik projekta, pravice EIB v okviru instrumenta garancij za plačila po pomembnosti ne presegajo dolžniških obveznosti višje kreditne institucije, vendar presegajo lastniški delež in povezana financiranja.
The stand-by liquidity facility should not exceed 20 % of the total amount of the senior debt committed at financial close.
Rezervna likvidnostna posojila ne smejo presegati 20 % skupnega zneska prednostnega dolga, dodeljenega ob finančnem zaključku.
The pricing of guarantees under the loan guarantee instrument, based upon the risk margin and the coverage of all administrative project-related costs of the guarantee instrument, shall be determined in accordance with relevant usual rules and criteria of the EIB.
Oblikovanje cen garancij v okviru instrumenta garancij za posojila, ki temelji na meji tveganja in kritju vseh upravnih stroškov instrumenta garancij, povezanih s projektom, se določi v skladu z ustreznimi splošnimi pravili in merili EIB.
Application procedure
Prijavni postopek
Applications for risk coverage under the loan guarantee instrument shall be addressed to the EIB in accordance with the EIB's standard application procedure.
Zahteve za kritje tveganja v okviru instrumenta garancij za posojila se naslovijo na EIB v skladu z običajnim prijavnim postopkom EIB.
Approval procedure
Postopek odobritve
The EIB shall carry out risk, financial, technical and legal due diligence and shall decide the issuance of a guarantee under the loan guarantee instrument in accordance with its usual rules and criteria, including, inter alia, the quality of individual proposals, the creditworthiness of the borrowers, acceptable terms and conditions and market demand.
EIB izvede skrbni pregled z vidika tveganja ter finančnega, tehničnega in pravnega vidika in se odloči glede izdaje garancije v okviru instrumenta garancij za posojila v skladu s svojimi splošnimi pravili in merili, med drugim vključno s kakovostjo posameznih predlogov, kreditno sposobnostjo jemalcev posojil, sprejemljivimi pogoji ter povpraševanjem na trgu.
Duration of the loan guarantee instrument
Trajanje instrumenta garancij za posojila
The Community contribution to the loan guarantee instrument shall be committed at latest by 31 December 2013.
Prispevek Skupnosti za instrument garancij za posojila se dodeli najkasneje do 31. decembra 2013.
The actual approval of guarantees is to be finalised by 31 December 2014.
Dejanska odobritev garancij mora biti zaključena do 31. decembra 2014.
In the event of termination of the loan guarantee instrument during the current financial framework any balances on the trust account, other than funds committed and funds needed to cover other eligible costs and expenses, shall be returned to the TEN-T budget line.
V primeru prenehanja veljavnosti instrumenta garancij za posojila med veljavno finančno perspektivo se vsa preostala sredstva na skrbniškem računu, razen odobrena sredstva in sredstva, potrebna za kritje drugih upravičenih stroškov in izdatkov, vrnejo v proračunsko vrstico TEN-T.
If the loan guarantee instrument is not extended into the next financial framework, any remaining funds shall be returned to the revenue side of the general budget of the EU.
Če se veljavnost instrumenta garancij za plačila ne podaljša v naslednji finančni okvir, se vsa preostala sredstva vrnejo v prihodkovni del proračuna EU.
Funds allocated to the loan guarantee instrument may be called upon until the last guarantee expires or until the last subordinated debt has been reimbursed, whichever is earlier.
Sredstva, dodeljena instrumentu garancij za posojila, se lahko zahtevajo, dokler ne poteče zadnja garancija ali dokler podrejeni dolg ni bil povrnjen, kar se zgodi prej.
Annual reporting methods on the implementation of the loan guarantee instrument shall be agreed between the Commission and the EIB.
Komisija in EIB se dogovorita o načinih letnega poročanja o izvajanju instrumenta garancij za posojila.
Council Regulation (EC) No 681/2007
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 681/2007
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings [1], and in particular Article 45 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1346/2000 z dne 29. maja 2000 o postopkih v primeru insolventnosti [1] in zlasti člena 45 Uredbe,
Annexes A, B and C to Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 list the designations given in the national legislation of the Member States to the proceedings and liquidators to which that Regulation applies.
V prilogah A, B in C k Uredbi (ES) št. 1346/2000 so našteti nazivi, ki se uporabljajo v nacionalni zakonodaji držav članic za postopke in upravitelje, za katere se uporablja navedena uredba.
Annex A lists the insolvency proceedings referred to in Article 2(a) of that Regulation.
V Prilogi A so našteti postopki v primeru insolventnosti iz člena 2(a) navedene uredbe.
Annex B lists the winding-up proceedings referred to in Article 2(c) of that Regulation and Annex C lists the liquidators referred to in Article 2(b) of that Regulation.
Priloga B našteva likvidacijske postopke iz člena 2(c), Priloga C pa našteva upravitelje iz člena 2(b) navedene uredbe.
Annexes A, B and C to Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 were amended by the 2003 Act of Accession so as to include the insolvency proceedings, the winding-up proceedings and the liquidators of the 10 Member States which acceded to the European Union in 2004, by Regulation (EC) No 603/2005 [2] and Regulation (EC) No 694/2006 [3] in order to amend the said Annexes as regards several Member States and by Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006 so as to include the insolvency proceedings, the winding-up proceedings and the liquidators of Bulgaria and Romania.
Priloge A, B in C k Uredbi (ES) št. 1346/2000 so bile spremenjene z Aktom o pristopu iz leta 2003 zaradi vključitve postopkov v primeru insolventnosti, likvidacijskih postopkov in upraviteljev iz desetih držav članic, ki so k Evropski uniji pristopile leta 2004, z Uredbo (ES) št. 603/2005 [2] in z Uredbo (ES) št. 694/2006 [3] zaradi sprememb prej navedenih prilog glede več držav članic ter z Uredbo (ES) št. 1791/2006 zaradi vključitve postopkov v primeru insolventnosti, likvidacijskih postopkov in upraviteljev iz Bolgarije in Romunije.
On 29 August 2006 the Czech Republic notified the Commission, pursuant to Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000, of amendments to the lists set out in Annexes A, B and C to that Regulation.
Češka je 29. avgusta 2006 v skladu s členom 45 Uredbe (ES) št. 1346/2000 uradno obvestila Komisijo o spremembah seznamov iz prilog A, B in C k navedeni uredbi.
On 26 January 2007 Romania notified the Commission, pursuant to Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000, of amendments to the lists set out in Annexes A, B and C to that Regulation.
Romunija je 26. januarja 2007 v skladu s členom 45 Uredbe (ES) št. 1346/2000 uradno obvestila Komisijo o spremembah seznamov iz prilog A, B in C k navedeni uredbi.
On 27 February 2007 Italy notified the Commission, pursuant to Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000, of amendments to the lists set out in Annexes B and C to that Regulation.
Italija je 27. februarja 2007 v skladu s členom 45 Uredbe (ES) št. 1346/2000 uradno obvestila Komisijo o spremembah seznamov iz prilog B in C k navedeni uredbi.
On 23 March 2007 Sweden notified the Commission, pursuant to Article 45 of Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000, of an amendment to the list set out in Annex C to that Regulation.
Švedska je 23. marca 2007 v skladu s členom 45 Uredbe (ES) št. 1346/2000 uradno obvestila Komisijo o spremembi seznama iz Priloge C k navedeni uredbi.
The United Kingdom and Ireland are bound by Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000, and, by virtue of Article 45 of that Regulation, are therefore taking part in the adoption and application of this Regulation.
Uredba (ES) št. 1346/2000 zavezuje Irsko in Združeno kraljestvo, ki v skladu s členom 45 navedene uredbe sodelujeta pri sprejemu in uporabi te uredbe.
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Denmark does not take part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
V skladu s členoma 1 in 2 Protokola o stališču Danske, ki je priložen Pogodbi o Evropski uniji in Pogodbi o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti, Danska ne sodeluje pri sprejetju te uredbe, ki zato zanjo ni zavezujoča in se zanjo ne uporablja.
Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Uredbo (ES) št. 1346/2000 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti –
Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 is hereby amended as follows:
Uredba (ES) št. 1346/2000 se spremeni:
However, the designations in Annexes A, B and C for the Czech Republic shall apply from 1 January 2008.
Nazivi v prilogah A, B in C za Češko pa se začnejo uporabljati 1. januarja 2008.
Done at Luxembourg, 13 June 2007.
V Luxembourgu, 13. junija 2007
OJ L 121, 6.5.2006, p. 1.
UL L 121, 6.5.2006, str. 1.
ANNEX II
PRILOGA
Council Regulation (EC) No 682/2007
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 682/2007
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels originating in Thailand
o uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve in o dokončnem pobiranju začasne dajatve, uvedene na uvoz nekaterih vrst pripravljene ali konzervirane sladke koruze v zrnju s poreklom iz Tajske
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] (the ‘basic Regulation’) and in particular Article 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] („osnovna uredba“) in zlasti člena 9 Uredbe,
On 28 March 2006, the Commission published a notice [2] initiating an anti-dumping proceeding on imports into the Community of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels originating in Thailand.
Komisija je 28. marca 2006 objavila Obvestilo [2], s katerim je uvedla protidampinški postopek glede uvoza nekaterih vrst pripravljene ali konzervirane sladke koruze v zrnju s poreklom iz Tajske v Skupnost.
On 20 December 2006, the Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 1888/2006 [3] (the provisional Regulation) imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of the same product.
Komisija je 20. decembra 2006 z Uredbo (ES) št. 1888/2006 [3] („začasna uredba“) uvedla začasno protidampinško dajatev na uvoz istega proizvoda.
A meeting pursuant to Article 6(6) of the basic Regulation among one exporting producer, an Association of Thai producers, the Thai Government and the Community producers took place on 9 February 2007 at the Commission premises.
Srečanje v skladu s členom 6(6) osnovne uredbe v prostorih Komisije med proizvajalcem izvoznikom, Združenjem tajskih proizvajalcev, tajsko vlado in proizvajalci Skupnosti je potekalo 9. februarja 2007.
The meeting was devoted to the issue of competition on the Community market for sweetcorn.
Na srečanju je bilo obravnavano vprašanje konkurence na trgu Skupnosti za sladko koruzo.
All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels originating in Thailand and the definitive collection of the amounts secured by way of the provisional duty.
Vse stranke so bile obveščene o bistvenih dejstvih in premislekih, na podlagi katerih se je nameravala priporočiti uvedba dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz nekaterih vrst pripravljene ali konzervirane sladke koruze v zrnju s poreklom iz Tajske in dokončno pobiranje zneskov, zavarovanih z začasno dajatvijo.
Parties were also granted a period within which to make representations subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which definitive measures are imposed.
Strankam je bil po razkritju bistvenih dejstev in premislekov, na podlagi katerih so bili uvedeni dokončni ukrepi, določen tudi rok za predložitev stališč.
It is recalled that the investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005 (‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’).
Treba je opozoriti, da je preiskava dampinga in škode zajela obdobje od 1. januarja 2005 do 31. decembra 2005 („obdobje preiskave“ ali „OP“).
With respect to the trends relevant for the injury assessment, the Commission analysed data covering the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2005 (period considered).
Glede na gibanja, pomembna za oceno škode, je Komisija analizirala podatke, ki zajemajo obdobje od 1. januarja 2002 do 31. decembra 2005 („obravnavano obdobje“).
The period used for the findings on undercutting, underselling and injury elimination is the aforementioned IP.
Obdobje, uporabljeno za ugotovitve o odpravi nelojalnega nižanja cen, prodajanja po dampinških cenah in škode, je prej omenjeno OP.
In the absence of any comments concerning the product concerned and like product, recitals 13 to 15 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobene pripombe v zvezi z zadevnim proizvodom in podobnim proizvodom, se uvodne izjave 13 do 15 začasne uredbe potrdijo.
Sampling and individual examination
Vzorčenje in individualna preiskava
A number of exporters and an association of Thai producers raised objections to the sampling and individual examination assessment described in recitals 16 to 20 of the provisional Regulation.
Številni izvozniki ter združenje tajskih proizvajalcev so ugovarjali vzorčenju in oceni individualne preiskave, opisane v uvodnih izjavah 16 do 20 začasne uredbe.
In particular, it was claimed that the sample was not representative since the Commission disregarded other factors such as the size of the companies and their geographical location.
Trdili so predvsem, da vzorec ni bil reprezentativen, ker Komisija ni upoštevala tudi drugih dejavnikov, kot so velikost družb in njihov geografski položaj.
Furthermore, it was claimed that it would not have been unduly burdensome to investigate more companies than the four sampled.
Poleg tega so trdili, da bi bilo mogoče preiskati več družb, ne da bi to preveč obremenilo preiskave.
As explained in recitals 16 to 18 of the provisional Regulation, the Commission considered that in order to reach the highest possible representativeness of the sample taking into account the time limits of the investigation, it was appropriate to include only four companies in the sample since (i) this allowed coverage of a large volume of exports and (ii) it was feasible to investigate these four companies within the time available.
Kot je bilo navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 16 do 18 začasne uredbe, je Komisija menila, da je za uresničitev najvišje možne ravni reprezentativnosti vzorca, ob upoštevanju rokov preiskave, primerno vključiti v vzorec le štiri družbe, ker (i) to omogoča vključitev večjega obsega izvoza in (ii) je bila v času, ki je bil na voljo, izvedljiva preiskava le teh štirih družb.
Article 17 of the basic Regulation does not specify any threshold beyond which the number of exporters would be considered so large as to warrant sampling, neither does it provide a precise indication on the appropriate number of parties to be included in the sample.
Člen 17 osnovne uredbe ne opredeljuje zgornje meje, nad katero bi se število izvoznikov štelo dovolj visoko za vzorčenje, in ne opredeljuje natančno ustreznega števila strank, ki morajo biti vključene v vzorec.
As for the latter, the Commission itself has to judge what is feasible to investigate within the given time limit while ensuring that the sample should cover as large a part as possible of the exports in question.
V zvezi s tem mora Komisija sama presoditi kaj je možno preiskati v času, ki je na voljo, pri čemer mora zagotoviti, da vzorec čim bolj zajema čim večji možni del zadevnih izvoznikov.
In this respect, the sample selected covered 52 % of the total Thai exports during the investigation period, which indeed is considered as highly representative on a volume basis.
Izbrani vzorec je zajel več kot 52 % vseh tajskih izvoznikov med obdobjem preiskave, kar se po obsegu dejansko šteje za zelo reprezentativen vzorec.
In accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation, the criteria applied for the selection of the sample was the largest representative volume of exports from Thailand into the Community that could reasonably be investigated within the time available.
V skladu s členom 17(1) osnovne uredbe je bilo merilo za izbiro vzorca največji reprezentativni obseg izvoza iz Tajske v Skupnost, ki ga je bilo mogoče ustrezno preiskati v razpoložljivem času.
In view of the high representativity of the selected sample in terms of volume, it was not considered necessary to examine other factors such as the size of the companies or their geographical location.
Glede na visoko reprezentativnost izbranega vzorca z vidika obsega ni bilo treba preučiti ostalih dejavnikov, kot so velikost družb in njihov geografski položaj.
As already mentioned in recital 20 of the provisional Regulation, to investigate more companies would have rendered the investigation unduly burdensome and would have prevented completion of the investigation in good time.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 20 začasne uredbe, bi preiskava večjega števila družb preveč obremenila preiskavo in bi preprečila pravočasen zaključek preiskave.
The claims raised by some parties concerning recitals 16 to 20 of the provisional Regulation are therefore rejected and those recitals are hereby confirmed.
Trditve nekaterih strank glede uvodnih izjav 16 do 20 začasne uredbe se zato zavrnejo, navedene uvodne izjave pa se potrdijo.
One exporting producer claimed that a number of mathematical errors had been made in its normal value calculation.
En proizvajalec izvoznik je trdil, da je pri izračunu normalne vrednosti prišlo do številnih računskih napak.
These claims were cross-checked and it was found that no errors had been made.
Te trditve so bile navzkrižno preverjene in odkrite niso bile nobene napake.
In the absence of any other comments in this respect, recitals 21 to 32 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker drugih pripomb v zvezi s tem ni bilo, se potrdijo uvodne izjave 21 do 32 začasne uredbe.
Following the provisional disclosure, one exporting producer contested the findings in recital 34 of the provisional Regulation.
Po začasnem razkritju je en proizvajalec izvoznik nasprotoval ugotovitvam uvodne izjave 34 začasne uredbe.
This party claimed that all export sales of the company, including its sales of purchased product manufactured by other independent producers, should have been taken into account.
Ta stranka je trdila, da je treba upoštevati ves izvoz družbe, vključno s prodajo kupljenih proizvodov, ki jih je proizvedel drugi neodvisni proizvajalec.
This party claimed that purchased finished products should be regarded as originating from its own production as it was alleged that they were manufactured in the framework of a tolling system.
Ta stranka je trdila, da je treba kupljene končne proizvode obravnavati kot proizvode, ki izvirajo iz lastne proizvodnje, ker naj bi bili proizvedeni v okviru podizvajanja („tolling“).
In this context, it is to be noted that only products produced by the exporting producer in question can be considered when determining individual dumping margins.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da se lahko pri določanju individualne stopnje dampinga upoštevajo samo proizvodi, ki jih je proizvedel zadevni proizvajalec izvoznik.
If an exporting producer is partly purchasing product for further resale to the Community it is, in fact, in a position similar to that of an agent or trader in respect of those purchases and such resales cannot be considered when establishing its individual dumping margin.
Če proizvajalec izvoznik kupuje proizvod med drugim za nadaljnjo prodajo v Skupnost, dejansko pri tem ravna podobno kot prodajni agent ali trgovec in ta nadaljnja prodaja se pri določanju individualne stopnje dampinga ne more upoštevati.
In the investigation it was established that the exporting producer in question was actually buying from other producers part of the goods sold to the Community.
V preiskavi je bilo ugotovljeno, da je zadevni izvoznik proizvajalec od drugih proizvajalcev dejansko kupoval del blaga, ki ga je prodajal v Skupnost.
It was further found that this exporter always paid for finished products and that such transactions were recorded in its accounting system as purchases of finished goods.
Poleg tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da je ta izvoznik vedno plačeval končne proizvode in da je te transakcije v svoj računovodski sistem zabeležil kot nakup končnih proizvodov.
No contractual or other evidence (e.g. so called ‘tolling’ agreement) was shown to prove that the goods were from the outset owned by the exporting producer and that the activity of the other companies was limited to a simple transformation of the products in question.
Predloženi niso bili nobeni pogodbeni ali drugi dokazi (npr. tako imenovani „tolling“ sporazumi), da je bilo blago prvotno last proizvajalca izvoznika in da je bila dejavnost drugih družb omejena le na preoblikovanje zadevnega proizvoda.
Following definitive disclosure, the exporting producer in question reiterated its claims, underlining that it should be considered as a co-producer of the product purchased from other producers.
Po dokončnem razkritju je zadevni proizvajalec izvoznik ponovil svojo zahtevo in vztrajal, da ga je treba šteti za soproizvajalca proizvoda, kupljenega od drugih proizvajalcev.
However, given that the ownership of the goods produced by other parties was transferred to the exporting producer concerned only after completion of the manufacturing process, as evidenced by the purchase invoices, it is confirmed that this exporting producer cannot be considered as the producer, or co-producer, of the product purchased for resale.
Glede na to, da je bilo lastništvo blaga, ki so ga proizvedle druge stranke, preneseno na zadevnega proizvajalca izvoznika šele po zaključku proizvodnega procesa, kot je razvidno iz računov, se potrdi, da se navedeni proizvajalec izvoznik ne more šteti za proizvajalca ali soproizvajalca blaga, ki ga je kupil za nadaljnjo prodajo.
In view of the above, the claim of the exporting producer is rejected and recitals 33 and 34 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega se zahteva proizvajalca izvoznika zavrne in uvodne izjave 33 in 34 začasne uredbe se potrdijo.