natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The events which led to the granting of the aid cannot be said to constitute unforeseeable and exceptional occurrences.
Za dogodki, ki so pripeljali do dodelitve pomoči, ne moremo reči, da pomenijo nepredvidljive in izredne dogodke.
Nor can the aid be exempted on the basis of Article 87(3)(b).
Pomoč tudi ni mogoče izvzeti na podlagi člena 87(3)(b).
It was not part of a sectoral scheme applied horizontally in the same way to all Czech banks [19].
Ni bila dodeljena v okviru sektorskega programa, ki se uporablja horizontalno in enako za vse češke banke [19].
Article 87(3)(c) EC and the Guidelines on Rescue and Restructuring
Člen 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES in Smernice za reševanje in prestrukturiranje
As the primary objective of the aid concerns the restoration of the long-term viability of an undertaking in difficulty, only the exemption of Article 87(3)(c) EC Treaty provides for the authorisation of State aid that is granted to promote the development of certain economic sectors, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
Ker je glavni cilj pomoči ponovna vzpostavitev dolgoročne rentabilnosti podjetja v težavah, samo izjema od člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES predvideva odobritev državne pomoči, ki se dodeli za spodbujanje razvoja nekaterih gospodarskih sektorjev, če taka pomoč ne vpliva neugodno na pogoje poslovanja v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
For measures adopted before 9 October 1999, the 1994 Guidelines set out the conditions under which such aid is considered compatible with the common market [20].
Za ukrepe, sprejete pred 9. oktobrom 1999, Smernice iz leta 1994 določajo pogoje, pod katerimi se taka pomoč šteje za združljivo s skupnim trgom [20].
The agreements concerning the Warranties and Indemnities and the Put Option were signed on 21 and 22 June 1998 [21].
Sporazum o jamstvih in garancijah ter Pogodba o prodajni opciji sta bila podpisana 21. in 22. junija 1998 [21].
Although, as found above, those measures are still applicable after accession, and the Czech Republic may thereby yet grant aid whose nature and amount is substantially undefined, this would be done pursuant to measures adopted whilst the 1994 Guidelines were still in force and it is therefore appropriate to consider them in the light of the 1994 Guidelines [22].
Čeprav se ti ukrepi, kot je bilo že zgoraj ugotovljeno, uporabljajo še po pristopu in z njimi Češka republika še lahko dodeli pomoč, katere značaj in znesek sta v bistvu nedoločena, bi to storila v skladu z ukrepi, ki so bili sprejeti, ko so se uporabljale še Smernice iz leta 1994, zato je ustrezno, da se jih obravnava v luči Smernic iz leta 1994. [22]
In its Decision of 14 July 2004 the Commission described its serious doubts that the requirements of the 1994 Guidelines were met.
Komisija je v svoji odločbi z dne 14. julija 2004 izrazila resni dvom, da so bile izpolnjene zahteve iz Smernic iz leta 1994.
The Commission’s serious doubts in particular with regard to the fulfilment of the formal criteria of the Guidelines have not been removed.
Komisija še vedno resno dvomi zlasti o izpolnjevanju formalnih meril iz Smernic.
The Commission has the power to review only those aid measures that are considered to be applicable after accession.
Komisija je pristojna samo za presojo tistih ukrepov pomoči, za katere se meni, da so se uporabljali po pristopu.
However, in order to assess the compatibility of restructuring aid it is necessary to look at the full set of restructuring measures.
Da se oceni združljivost pomoči za prestrukturiranje, je treba proučiti celo vrsto ukrepov za prestrukturiranje.
In the present case, there was a set of interventions decided by the Czech authorities.
V tem primeru so se češki organi odločili za vrsto ukrepov.
All these restructuring measures have to be taken into account when assessing the compatibility of measures still applicable after accession against the criteria set out in the 1994 Guidelines, such as restoration of viability, proportionality of the aid and avoidance of undue distortions of competition.
Vse te ukrepe za prestrukturiranje je treba upoštevati pri presoji združljivosti ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo še po pristopu, z merili iz Smernic iz leta 1994, kot so ponovna vzpostavitev rentabilnosti, sorazmernost pomoči in preprečitev nedovoljenega izkrivljanja konkurence.
The 1994 Guidelines consider a firm to be in difficulties if it is unable to recover through its own resources or by raising the funds it needs from shareholders or borrowing.
V skladu s Smernicami iz leta 1994 je podjetje v težavah tisto podjetje, ki si ne more opomoči samo ali s sredstvi delničarjev ali posojili.
In September 1996 AGB had losses of CZK 8487 million and an equity balance of minus CZK 5476 million.
Septembra 1996 je znašala izguba AGB 8487 milijonov CZK, lastniški kapital pa je bil negativen za 5476 milijonov.
On the basis of this information AGB (including the banking business which later became AGB1) was not able to recover without State intervention and was therefore in difficulties within the meaning of point 2.1 of the 1994 Guidelines.
Na podlagi tega podatka si AGB (ki je vključevala bančno poslovanje, ki je pozneje postalo AGB1) ni mogla opomoči brez posredovanja države in je bila zato v težavah v smislu točke 2.1 Smernic iz leta 1994.
However GECB and GECIH were not in financial difficulties; in this respect the requirements of the 1994 Guidelines are thus not fulfilled.
GECB in GECIH pa nista bili v finančnih težavah, zato pri njih zahteve iz Smernic iz leta 1994 niso izpolnjene.
The 1994 Guidelines describe rescue aid as measures which temporarily maintain the position of a firm that is facing a substantial deterioration in its financial position.
V Smernicah iz leta 1994 je pomoč za reševanje opisana kot ukrep, s katerim se začasno ohrani položaj podjetja, katerega finančno stanje se je občutno poslabšalo.
The measures should generally not continue for a period of more than six months.
Ukrep naj se na splošno ne bi uporabljal dlje kot šest mesecev.
Since the Warranties and Indemnities and the Put Option are not temporary and exceed a period of six months, the aid does not qualify as rescue aid under point 2.1 of the 1994 Guidelines.
Ker jamstva in garancije ter prodajna opcija niso začasni ukrepi in se uporabljajo dlje kot šest mesecev, pomoč ne izpolnjuje pogojev za pomoč za reševanje v skladu s točko 2.1 Smernic iz leta 1994.
Restoration of viability (point 3.2.2(i) of the 1994 Guidelines)
Ponovna vzpostavitev rentabilnosti (točka3.2.2(i) Smernic iz leta 1994)
According to the 1994 Guidelines restructuring aid must be linked to a viable restructuring/recovery programme submitted to the Commission.
V skladu s Smernicami iz leta 1994 mora pomoč za prestrukturiranje spremljati izvedljiv program prestrukturiranja/ponovne vzpostavitev rentabilnosti, ki se predloži Komisiji.
The Czech Republic and GECB argue that the Commission may not demand a complete and comprehensive restructuring plan since at the time the measures were adopted it was not foreseeable that the EU State aid rules would be applied.
Češka republika in GECB trdita, da Komisija ne sme zahtevati popolnega in izčrpnega načrta prestrukturiranja, saj ob sprejemu ukrepov ni bilo mogoče predvideti, da se bodo uporabljala pravila EU za državno pomoč.
In addition, also in other cases, notably in the former East Germany, this requirement was not applied strictly.
Poleg tega se v drugih primerih, zlasti v nekdanji Vzhodni Nemčiji, ta zahteva ni dosledno uporabljala.
The restructuring plan submitted as part of the notification is dated December 2003.
Načrt prestrukturiranja, ki je bil predložen v okviru priglasitve, ima datum december 2003.
In 1996, when the Czech authorities first started implementing interventions with regard to AGB, a comprehensive concept for the restructuring of AGB did not exist.
Leta 1996, ko so češki organi začeli izvajati ukrepe v zvezi z AGB, ni bilo celovite zamisli za prestrukturiranje AGB.
The Commission therefore concludes that this formal requirement of the 1994 Guidelines was not fulfilled.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da ta formalna zahteva iz Smernic iz leta 1994 ni bila izpolnjena.
At the same time it should be stressed that the aid on which proceedings were opened relates to the sale of AGB1 to GECB.
Hkrati je treba poudariti, da se pomoč, v zvezi s katero je bil sprožen postopek, nanaša na prodajo banke AGB1 banki GECB.
It should be recalled in this context that the Commission traditionally regards the transfer of an undertaking in difficulty under the control of a private investor as a central element for solving the difficulties of the past and enabling the positive economic development of that undertaking (or its business).
V tem okviru je treba opozoriti, da Komisija po navadi obravnava prehod podjetja v težavah pod nadzor zasebnega vlagatelja kot osrednji element reševanja težav iz preteklosti, ki omogoči ugoden gospodarski razvoj zadevnega podjetja (ali njegovega poslovanja).
Indeed, it can be assumed that a company is more likely to become durably viable if it comes under the control of a new, private owner with sufficient resources to make a substantial contribution to its restructuring.
Dejansko je mogoče predpostaviti, da je verjetneje, da bo podjetje postalo trajno rentabilno, če pride pod nadzor novega, zasebnega lastnika, ki ima dovolj sredstev, da veliko prispeva za njegovo prestrukturiranje.
Therefore, although no restructuring plan in the strict sense was available when the sale took place in June 1998 (and a fortiori in 1996), it is clear that the forecasts made by GE for its own purpose and the restructuring measures foreseen in this context were such as to ensure the viability of AGB in the long run.
Čeprav ob prodaji junija 1998 (še manj pa leta 1996) ni bilo na voljo načrta prestrukturiranja v pravem pomenu besede, je očitno, da so bile napovedi, ki jih je dala GE za svoje namene, in ukrepi, predvideni v tem okviru, taki, da bi zagotovili dolgoročno rentabilnost AGB.
Although GECB/GECIH, as the ultimate owner of AGB1’s banking business, was not itself an undertaking in difficulty, GECB was not the owner of AGB1 when it encountered difficulties and was not responsible for the deterioration of AGB1; rather, GECB’s purchase of the business enabled it to be restructured, but this would not have happened had GECB’s/GECIH’s own restructuring efforts not also been backed by the measures comprised in the Indemnity Agreement and the Put Option.
Čeprav banka GECB/GECIH, kot končna lastnica bančnega poslovanja AGB1, sama ni bila podjetje v težavah, GECB ni bila lastnica AGB1, ko se je ta srečala s težavami, in ni bila odgovorna za poslabšanje njenega stanja; S tem ko je banka GECB kupila njeno poslovanje, ji je omogočila prestrukturiranje, kar pa se ne bi zgodilo, če prizadevanja GECB/GECIH za prestrukturiranje ne bi bila podprta z ukrepi, ki jih vsebujeta Sporazum o garanciji in prodajna opcija.
Avoiding undue distortions of competition (point 3.2.2(ii) of the 1994 Guidelines)
Preprečitev nedovoljenega izkrivljanja konkurence (točka 3.2.2(ii) Smernic iz leta 1994)
Pursuant to the 1994 Guidelines it is a further condition that measures are taken to offset, as far as possible, adverse effects on competitors.
V skladu s Smernicami iz leta 1994 je dodatni pogoj se sprejem ukrepov čim bolj zmanjšati negativne učinke na konkurenco.
These measures normally consist in the reduction or closing of capacity.
Ti ukrepi po navadi vključujejo zmanjšanje ali zaprtje zmogljivosti.
However, the 1994 Guidelines state that where there is no structural excess of capacity on a relevant market served by the aid recipient, the Commission will normally not require a reduction of capacity in return for the aid.
Smernice iz leta 1994 navajajo, da če na zadevnem trgu, ki ga oskrbuje prejemnik pomoči, ni strukturnega presežka zmogljivosti, Komisija po navadi ne zahteva zmanjšanje zmogljivosti v zameno za pomoč.
The Commission is satisfied that there was no structural excess of capacity on the Czech banking market at the time the aid was granted.
Komisija se je prepričala, da na češkem bančnem trgu ob odobritvi pomoči ni bilo strukturnega presežka zmogljivosti.
The Commission also acknowledges that AGB was not left with a cash surplus which would have allowed it to expand capacity except in so far as was essential for restoring viability.
Komisija tudi priznava, da AGB ni ostal gotovinski presežek, ki bi ji omogočal povečanje zmogljivosti, razen kolikor je bil potreben za ponovno vzpostavitev rentabilnosti.
The Commission notes that the Czech Republic would have fully qualified as an assisted area at the time the aid was granted which justifies a relaxation of the criterion of the avoidance of undue distortions of competition.
Komisija pripominja, da je Češka republika ob odobritvi pomoči izpolnjevala vse pogoje za območje, upravičeno do pomoči, kar opravičuje sprostitev merila glede preprečitve nedovoljenega izkrivljanja konkurence.
Finally the Commission observes that no competitors made comments following the opening of proceedings.
Na koncu Komisija ugotavlja, da po sprožitvi postopka noben tekmec ni predložil pripomb.
The Commission therefore concludes that no conditions and obligations were necessary in the present case in order to mitigate the distortions of competition created by the aid.
Zato je Komisija sklenila, da v tem primeru ni bilo treba določiti pogojev in obveznosti za ublažitev izkrivljanja konkurence zaradi dodeljene pomoči.
Aid in proportion to the restructuring costs and benefits (point 3.2.2(iii) of the 1994 Guidelines)
Pomoč v sorazmerju s stroški prestrukturiranja in koristmi (točka 3.2.2(iii) Smernic iz leta 1994)
The amount and intensity of the aid must be limited to the strict minimum needed to allow the restructuring of the firm.
Obseg in intenzivnost pomoči morata biti omejena na najnižji znesek, potreben za prestrukturiranje podjetja.
Therefore, the aid beneficiaries are expected to make a significant contribution to the restructuring from their own resources or from external commercial financing.
Zato se od upravičencev pomoči pričakuje, da bodo za prestrukturiranje precej prispevali iz lastnih virov ali virov zunanjega tržnega financiranja.
The Czech Republic submitted that GECB had undertaken several investments and operational restructuring steps.
Češka republika trdi, da je GECB izvedla več naložb in operativnih ukrepov prestrukturiranja.
In particular, GECB paid CZK 206 million mainly for redundancy costs.
GECB je plačala 206 milijonov CZK v glavnem za stroške odpuščanja presežnih delavcev.
In addition, GECB directly invested a total of CZK 2040 million between 1998 and 2002.
Poleg tega je med letoma 1998 in 2002 neposredno vložila skupaj 2040 milijonov CZK.
These investments related to the upgrading of GECB’s information and banking systems and related hardware costs, as well as the development of an ATM and branch network.
Te naložbe so se nanašale na nadgradnjo njenega informacijskega in bančnega sistema ter s tem povezane stroške strojne opreme ter na razvoj ATM in mreže poslovalnic.
Also, GECB invested in the optimisation of the branch network, staff training, management support and transfer of know-how.
Vlagala je tudi v optimizacijo mreže poslovalnic, usposabljanje osebja, upravljavsko podporo ter prenos strokovnega znanja in izkušenj.
On the basis of the information provided by GECB, the Commission acknowledges that these costs relate to AGB1’s restructuring.
Na podlagi informacij, ki jih je predložila GECB, Komisija priznava, da se ti stroški nanašajo na prestrukturiranje AGB1.
It is extremely difficult to quantify the gross grant equivalent of the aid measures contained in the Deed of Warranties and the Indemnity Agreement, as well as in the Put Option (especially taking into consideration the triggering events).
Izredno težko je določiti bruto ekvivalent dotacije ukrepov pomoči iz Sporazuma o jamstvih in garancijah, Sporazuma o garanciji in prodajne opcije (zlasti ob upoštevanju sprožitvenih dogodkov).
The probability of claims being brought seems to be extremely low if not nil in some cases (for instance environmental matters) and higher for others (see for instance Table 1 Clause No 9).
V nekaterih primerih se zdi verjetnost vloženih zahtevkov izredno majhna ali pa jo morda sploh ni (na primer pri okoljskih zadevah), v drugih pa je večja (na primer razpredelnica 1 določbe št. 9).
It should nevertheless be recalled that AGB1 was sold via on open, unconditional and transparent tender procedure which does not exclude in the present case the existence of aid but which normally ensures that the aid granted was the minimum necessary in order to allow the sale and consequently the continuation of the business.
Kljub temu je treba opozoriti, da je bila AGB1 prodana po odprtem, brezpogojnem in preglednem postopku javnega razpisa, ki v tem primeru ne izključuje obstoja pomoči, vendar po navadi zagotavlja, da je odobrena pomoč najmanjša možna, ki je potrebna, da se omogočita prodaja in posledično nadaljnje poslovanje.
In any event, GECIH was the only bidder to make an offer for buying AGB1.
Vsekakor je bila GECIH edina, ki je dala ponudbo za nakup AGB1.
Therefore, a sale to GECB/GECIH subject to the measures at issue appeared to be the most sensible way of restructuring AGB1.
Zato je videti, da je bila prodaja GECB/GECIH ob uporabi spornih ukrepov najpametnejši način prestrukturiranja AGB1.
The Commission also acknowledges that the high capital adequacy ratios achieved by GECB are not caused by the Warranties and Indemnities or the Put Option as these measures do not have any effect on the bank’s own capital.
Komisija tudi priznava, da visoki količniki kapitalske ustreznosti, ki jih je dosegla GECB, niso posledica jamstev in garancij ter prodajne opcije, saj ti ukrepi niso imeli učinka na lasten kapital banke.
Conclusion as regards the 1994 Guidelines
Sklepne ugotovitve v zvezi s Smernicami iz leta 1994
The Commission concludes at this stage that although the criteria of the 1994 Guidelines are not fulfilled, the spirit of the 1994 Guidelines was substantially respected in the present case: the sale to a private new owner clearly aimed at restoring the long term viability of the bank; there was no need to impose specific conditions and obligations; the aid granted at the time of the sale was indeed the minimum necessary in order to achieve the restructuring in view that it took place within an open, transparent and unconditional tender procedure.
Komisija v tej fazi ugotavlja, da čeprav merila iz Smernic iz leta 1994 niso bila izpolnjena, se je v tem primeru precej upoštevalo duh Smernic iz leta 1994: cilj prodaje novemu zasebnemu lastniku je bil očitno ponovno vzpostaviti dolgoročno rentabilnost banke; ni bilo treba določiti posebnih pogoje in obveznosti; znesek pomoči, odobren ob prodaji, je bil dejansko najnižji, ki je še omogočil prestrukturiranje, saj je prodaja potekala po odprtem, preglednem in brezpogojnem postopku javnega razpisa.
Nevertheless, in particular some formal criteria of the 1994 Guidelines, which are also reflected in the 1999 Guidelines, are not fulfilled.
Vendar pa nekatera merila niso bila izpolnjena, predvsem nekatera formalna merila iz Smernic iz leta 1994, ki so izražena tudi v Smernicah iz leta 1999.
It is therefore appropriate to assess the aid by reference to other provisions of Community law, in order to conclude on its compatibility.
Zato je pri presoji združljivosti pomoči ustrezno uporabiti druge določbe zakonodaje Skupnosti.
ARTICLE 87(3)(C) EC TREATY AND ARTICLE 46(2) OF THE EUROPE AGREEMENT
ČLEN 87(3)(C) POGODBE ES IN ČLEN 46(2) EVROPSKEGA SPORAZUMA
Article 46(2) of the Europe Agreement which was in force when the aid was granted reads as follows:
Člen 46(2) Evropskega sporazuma, ki se je uporabljal ob odobritvi pomoči, se glasi:
‘In respect of financial services, described in Annex XVIa, this Agreement does not prejudice the right of the Parties to adopt measures necessary for the conduct of the Party’s monetary policy, or for prudential grounds in order to ensure the protection of investors, depositors, policy holders, or persons to whom a fiduciary duty is owed, or to ensure the integrity and stability of the financial system.
„Glede finančnih storitev, opisanih v Prilogi XVIa, ta sporazum ne posega v pravico pogodbenice, da sprejme ukrepe, potrebne za izvajanje njene monetarne politike, ali zaradi varnega in skrbnega poslovanja, da bi zagotovila zaščito investitorjev, vlagateljev, imetnikov polic ali oseb, ki so v fiduciarnem razmerju, ali da bi zagotovila celovitost in stabilnost finančnega sistema.
These measures shall not discriminate on grounds of nationality against companies and nationals of the other Party in comparison to its own companies and nationals.’
Ti ukrepi ne diskriminirajo gospodarskih družb in državljanov druge pogodbenice na podlagi državljanstva v primerjavi z lastnimi gospodarskimi družbami in državljani.“
This provision does not provide in itself a legal basis to consider any measure in the form of State aid taken in its context by the Czech Republic as compatible with the common market.
Ta določba sama po sebi ne zagotavlja pravne podlage, da bi se ukrepi državne pomoči, ki jih je v tem okviru sprejela Češka republika, šteli za združljive s skupnim trgom.
Nevertheless, it is a framework which, in conjunction with all the other legal and factual elements of the case, is relevant for the assessment of the compatibility of the aid with the common market.
Kljub temu pa je okvir, ki je skupaj z vsemi drugimi pravnimi elementi in dejstvi zadeve pomemben za presojo združljivosti pomoči s skupnim trgom.
It should be stressed in that regard that the present case cannot be seen in isolation.
V zvezi s tem je treba poudariti, da se tega primera ne sme obravnavati ločeno.
In fact, when the aid was granted, the Czech banking sector as a whole was facing huge difficulties and most of the banks were close to bankruptcy.
Dejansko je bil ob odobritvi pomoči celotni češki bančni sektor v velikih težavah in večina bank se je znašla na robu stečaja.
The case at hand is indeed one of the sixteen cases, all notified under the interim mechanism procedure [23], in which the Czech State had to intervene in order to avoid a complete failure of the whole banking sector in the Czech Republic.
Ta primer je dejansko eden od šestnajstih primerov, ki so bili priglašeni po postopku začasnega mehanizma [23], pri katerih je češka država morala posredovati, da bi preprečila popoln propad celotnega bančnega sektorja v Češki republiki.
They cover all the major Czech banks.
Vključujejo vse večje češke banke.
In this context, the measures concerned clearly aimed at ensuring the integrity and stability of the financial system of the Czech Republic.
V tem okviru je cilj zadevnih ukrepov očitno zagotoviti celovitost in stabilnost finančnega sistema v Češki republiki.
They were also necessary for the stability of the financial system of the Czech Republic since, without them, the banks would have disappeared.
Potrebni so bili tudi za stabilnost finančnega sistema Češke republike, saj bi brez njih banke izginile.
Indeed they were taken by the CNB in its role of supervisory authority of the financial sector.
Dejansko jih je sprejela ČNB v svoji vlogi nadzornega organa finančnega sektorja.
They cover most of the financial services mentioned in Annex XVIa of the Europe Agreement.
Vključujejo večino finančnih storitev iz Priloge XVIa Evropskega sporazuma.
They did not result in discrimination on the ground of nationality.
Ti ukrepi ne diskriminirajo na podlagi državljanstva.
It results from the above that the aid granted in the course of the sale of AGB1 forms part of the wide ranging measures systematically taken by the Czech Republic in order to avoid the collapse of its banking sector.
Iz navedenega izhaja, da je pomoč, ki je bila odobrena ob prodaji AGB1, sestavni del široko zasnovanih ukrepov, ki jih je sistematično sprejela Češka republika, da bi preprečila propad svojega bančnega sektorja.