natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Absence of overcompensation
Odsotnost čezmernega nadomestila
The damage suffered by Terni was compounded by the sharp increase, over the years, of electricity prices.
Škoda, ki jo je utrpela družba Terni, je zaradi visoke rasti cen električne energije v preteklosti še večja.
The still incomplete process of liberalization of the energy markets has not yet delivered results in terms of competitive electricity prices, and therefore the need to continue compensating Terni persists.
Proces liberalizacije energetskih trgov, ki še vedno ni končan, še ni prinesel rezultatov v smislu konkurenčnih cen električne energije, zato je treba družbi Terni še vedno izplačevati nadomestilo.
The Terni companies are currently paying a price (between 40 and 72 EUR/MWh) which is largely in line with electricity prices paid by companies with an equivalent consumption profile in the EU.
Podjetja Terni električno energijo trenutno plačujejo po ceni (med 40 in 72 EUR/MWh), ki večinoma ustreza cenam, po katerih električno energijo plačujejo podjetja v EU z enako porabo.
Italy has submitted a ‘study’ carried out by the private consultant Energy Advisor S.r.l. on behalf on the Terni companies.
Italija je predložila „študijo“, ki jo je v imenu podjetij Terni opravilo zasebno svetovalno podjetje Energy Advisor S.r.l.
The study, which is perhaps better described as simple ‘calculation’, since it consists of one table with a few pages of methodological explanations, aims to assess the value of the electricity assets and compare this figure with the cumulative tariff advantage enjoyed by Terni.
Cilj študije, ki bi jo morda raje imenovali kar preprost „izračun“, saj je sestavljena iz ene tabele in nekaj strani metodoloških pojasnil, je oceniti vrednost električne infrastrukture in jo primerjati s skupno cenovno ugodnostjo, ki jo uživa družba Terni.
The study takes the book value of the electricity assets and actualizes it to 2006 in line with inflation.
Študija temelji na knjigovodski vrednosti električne infrastrukture, ki je v skladu z inflacijo aktualizirana na vrednost v letu 2006.
The study then calculates the net tariff advantage for Terni.
Na podlagi te vrednosti je v študiji izračunana neto cenovna ugodnost za družbo Terni.
For the period 1963-1999, the study considers the difference between the annual electricity costs of a comparable customer (Alternative 2) and the actual annual costs sustained by Terni on the ‘own production costs’ basis (Alternative 1).
Za obdobje od leta 1963 do leta 1999 je v študiji upoštevana razlika med letnimi stroški električne energije primerljivega odjemalca (alternativa 2) in dejanskimi letnimi stroški, ki so družbi Terni ostali na podlagi „lastnih proizvodnih stroškov“ (alternativa 1).
For the purpose of this calculation, a comparable customer is a self-producer of electricity (exempted, inter alia, from payment of the sovrapprezzo termico).
Za namen tega izračuna je primerljivi odjemalec samoproizvajalec električne energije (ki mu med drugim ni treba plačevati dodatka za proizvodnjo toplote).
For the period 2000-2006, the tariff advantage is calculated as the difference between the annual cost Terni would have sustained if the tariff was calculated on the basis of its own production costs (Alternative 1-no longer possible after the reform of the tariff) and the actual cost sustained by Terni on the basis of the ‘comparable customer’ method (Alternative 2).
Za obdobje od leta 2000 do leta 2006 je cenovna ugodnost izračunana kot razlika med letnimi stroški, ki bi družbi Terni ostali, če bi bila cena izračunana na podlagi njenih proizvodnih stroškov (alternativa 1, ki po reformi cene ni več mogoča), in dejanskimi stroški, ki so ostali družbi Terni na podlagi metode „primerljivega odjemalca“ (alternativa 2).
The results of the study are outlined below:
Rezultati študije so navedeni spodaj:
Actualised value (2006) of Terni’s assets: EUR 1687745045,19;
aktualizirana vrednost (2006) infrastrukture družbe Terni: 1687745045,19 EUR
Tariff advantage (also actualized to 2006): EUR 1400895446,90.
Cenovna ugodnost (prav tako aktualizirana na vrednost v letu 2006): 1400895446,90 EUR
The study therefore contends that there has been no overcompensation of Terni’s losses.
Študija zato vztraja pri tem, da družbi Terni za njeno izgubo ni bilo plačano čezmerno nadomestilo.
A prospective calculation of the tariff advantage accruing to Terni until 2010 would also show the absence of overcompensation.
Tudi vnaprejšnji izračun cenovne ugodnosti za družbo Terni za obdobje do leta 2010 bi pokazal, da izplačano nadomestilo ne bi bilo čezmerno.
Irrelevance of the ECSC Decision and the ECJ Ruling concerning Terni
Nepomembnost odločbe ESPJ in sodbe SES o družbi Terni
The ECSC Decision referred to the compatibility of of State aid granted in the form of reimbursement of a component of the tariff, the sovrapprezzo termico to the plant belonging to Terni’s steelmaking branch, but located in Lovere, in Lombardy, not in the Terni area.
Odločba ESPJ zadeva združljivost državne pomoči, ki je bila s povračilom sestavnega dela cene, namreč toplotnega dodatka (sovrapprezzo termico), odobrena tovarni, ki je del jeklarske panoge družbe Terni, a ima sedež v mestu Lovere v deželi Lombardija in ne na območju Terni.
This aid could be granted only to private steelmakers.
To pomoč je mogoče odobriti samo zasebnim proizvajalcem jekla.
The ECSC Decision ruled that, since Terni was State-owned, the Lovere plant could not benefit from the aid.
Na podlagi odločbe ESPJ tovarna v mestu Lovere ne bi mogla biti prejemnica pomoči, saj je bila družba Terni v državni lasti.
The preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice concerned the issue of possible discrimination between private and State-owned producers.
Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti je v predhodnem odločanju obravnavalo mogočo diskriminacijo med zasebnimi in državnimi proizvajalci.
It confirmed the ECSC Decision in that it stated that it was not discriminatory to envisage different aid measures for private versus State-owned producers.
Sodišče je potrdilo odločbo ESPJ, ko je ugotovilo, da predvidevanje različnih ukrepov pomoči za zasebne in državne proizvajalce ni diskriminacijsko obravnavanje.
Therefore, the Terni group submits that both the ECSC Decision and the Court ruling are irrelevant to the case at hand, in that they concern the sovrapprezzo termico paid by the Lovere plant, not the special global tariff granted to the three plants in the Terni area.
Zato skupina Terni trdi, da odločba ESPJ in sodba Sodišča nista pomembni za zadevni primer, saj se nanašata na dodatek, ki ga je plačala tovarna v mestu Lovere, in ne na posebno globalno ceno, ki je bila odobrena trem tovarnam na območju Terni.
New investments planned by ThyssenKrupp in the Terni area
Nova vlaganja, ki jih podjetje ThyssenKrupp načrtuje na območju Terni
Italy also underlines that the contested extension of the tariff laid down in Article 11, paragraph 11 of Law 80/2005 is linked to a wide-ranging program of investments which ThyssenKrupp is carrying out in the Terni-Narni industrial area.
Italija poudarja tudi, da je sporno podaljšanje veljavnosti cene, ki je določeno v odstavku 11 člena 11 zakona št. 80/2005, povezano z obsežnim programom vlaganj, ki ga podjetje ThyssenKrupp izvaja na industrijskem območju Terni-Narni.
Under this action plan, new generating capacity will be developed in the area.
V skladu s tem akcijskim načrtom bodo na območju vzpostavljene nove proizvodne zmogljivosti.
The tariff is therefore meant as temporary solution until such generating capacity is in place, and its abolition would jeopardise the investments currently underway.
Cena je zato mišljena kot začasna rešitev, dokler ne bodo vzpostavljene te proizvodne zmogljivosti, in njena ukinitev bi ogrozila sedanja vlaganja.
Role of Cassa Conguaglio and involvement of State resources
Vloga sklada Cassa Conguaglio in vključitev državnih sredstev
On the nature and role of Cassa Conguaglio, Italy submits that it is a mere technical intermediary, whose role is confined to collecting and redirecting monetary flows.
V zvezi z značajem in vlogo sklada Cassa Conguaglio Italija trdi, da je sklad zgolj tehnični posrednik, njegova vloga pa je omejena na zbiranje in preusmerjanje denarnih tokov.
Cassa Conguaglio has no margin of manoeuvre in fixing the tariff and has no control over the funds.
Sklad Cassa Conguaglio pri določanju cene nima manevrskega prostora in ne nadzira sredstev.
Therefore, according to Italy, (a) the resources handled by Cassa Conguaglio do not constitute State resources in the light of the case-law of the Court of Justice [20] and (b) the changes made to the administration of the special tariffs with the intervention of Cassa Conguaglio in 2004 have no impact on the compensatory nature of the tariff.
Zato kot pravi Italija, (a) sredstva, ki jih upravlja Cassa Conguaglio, niso državna sredstva v smislu sodne prakse Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti [20] in (b) spremembe, ki so se zaradi posredovanja sklada Cassa Conguaglio leta 2004 zgodile pri upravljanju posebnih cen, ne vplivajo na kompenzacijski značaj cene.
On the Deggendorf case-law, Italy informs the Commission that it is carrying out the pending recovery order in respect of ThyssenKrupp, and that the company has set aside EUR 865538,00 on a blocked account in view of final recovery, subject to agreement being found on the amount.
V zvezi s sodno prakso Deggendorf je Italija obvestila Komisijo, da izvaja nerešeni nalog za povračilo, ki ga je dala podjetju ThyssenKrupp, in da je podjetje na blokiran račun dalo na stran 865538 EUR za končno vračilo na podlagi dogovora, ki bo sklenjen o znesku.
ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURE
OCENA UKREPA V SKLADU S SMERNICAMI
Compensation granted by the State for an expropriation of assets does not normally qualify as State aid.
Nadomestilo, ki ga država za razlastitev infrastrukture odobri podjetjem, se običajno ne šteje za državno pomoč.
In the assessment of this measure, it is therefore necessary to ascertain first of all whether the transfer of Società Terni’s hydropower assets to ENEL gave rise to an obligation to provide compensation, or whether it should be construed as a mere reorganisation of public assets.
Pri oceni tega ukrepa je treba zato najprej ugotoviti, ali je prenos hidroelektrične infrastrukture družbe Società Terni na podjetje ENEL sploh povzročil obveznost izplačila nadomestila ali pa ga je treba razlagati le kot reorganizacijo javne lastnine.
If the answer is that compensation was justified, the Commission must then determine until what date and/or what amount the Terni preferential tariff can be considered a commensurate compensatory measure.
Če je odgovor na to vprašanje, da je bilo nadomestilo upravičeno, mora Komisija nato odločiti, do kdaj in/ali do katere višine se ugodnejša cena Terni lahko šteje za sorazmeren kompenzacijski ukrep.
Qualification as an expropriation and entitlement to compensation
Ugotavljanje izpolnjevanja pogojev za razlastitev in upravičenost do nadomestila
In 1962, when its hydropower assets were transferred to ENEL, Società Terni was a State owned company, controlled by an ente pubblico economico.
Leta 1962, ko se je hidroelektrična infrastruktura družbe Società Terni prenesla na podjetje ENEL, je bila družba Società Terni podjetje v državni lasti, ki ga je nadzirala javna ustanova za izvajanje gospodarskih storitev.
According to the Italian authorities, such entities had to be managed according to market principles.
Kot pravijo italijanski organi, je bilo taka podjetja treba upravljati v skladu s tržnimi načeli.
The State was the majority shareholder in Società Terni, but part of the capital was also held by private investors and the company was quoted on the Stock exchange.
Država je bila večinski delničar družbe Società Terni, vendar pa je bil del kapitala tudi v rokah zasebnih vlagateljev in podjetje je kotiralo na borzi.
The nationalization law did not foresee compensation for enti pubblici‘strictu sensu’, but did so for enti pubblici economici such as Società Terni.
Z zakonom o nacionalizaciji ni bilo predvideno nadomestilo za javne ustanove v ožjem smislu, vendar pa je bilo predvideno za javne ustanove, ki izvajajo gospodarske storitve, kot je družba Società Terni.
This reflects the different principles which govern the functioning of these entities.
To izraža različna načela, ki določajo delovanje takih podjetij.
Moreover, other ‘pure’ electricity producers were expropriated during the same period and also received compensation (although on the basis of different criteria).
Poleg tega so bili tudi drugi „čisti“ proizvajalci električne energije razlaščeni v istem obdobju in so prav tako prejeli nadomestilo (čeprav na podlagi drugačnih kriterijev).
The Commission notes that the removal of Società Terni’s assets without compensation would have damaged the interests of the company, and in particular those of its private shareholders.
Komisija ugotavlja, da bi prenos infrastrukture družbe Società Terni, ne da bi se ji za to izplačalo nadomestilo, škodil njenim interesom in še zlasti interesom njenih zasebnih delničarjev.
In the light of the principle of equality of treatment between private and public undertakings, and also in view of the need to protect the constitutional rights of Società Terni’s private shareholders to receive compensation, the Commission considers that Italy’s decision to treat Terni in the same way as a privately-owned company in the same position, and to grant it compensation for the removal of its assets, can be considered justified.
V skladu z načelom enakega obravnavanja zasebnih in državnih podjetij in tudi glede na potrebno zaščito ustavnih pravic zasebnih delničarjev družbe Società Terni, da prejmejo nadomestilo, je po mnenju Komisije odločitev Italije, da bo družbo Terni obravnavala enako kot zasebno podjetje v enakem položaju in ji izplačala nadomestilo za prenos njene infrastrukture, lahko šteje za upravičeno.
Compensatory nature of the tariff
Kompenzacijski značaj cene
The original compensatory arrangement
Prvotni dogovor o nadomestilu
In 1962, Italy decided not to compensate Società Terni up to a fixed amount based on the market value of the expropriated assets (contrary to what was done in the case of ‘pure’ electricity producers).
Leta 1962 se je Italija odločila, da družbi Società Terni ne bo izplačala nadomestila v fiksnem znesku na podlagi tržne vrednosti razlaščene infrastrukture (kar je storila pri „čistih“ proizvajalcih električne energije).
Instead, the compensation took the form of the provision of a fixed amount of electricity at the price the company would have paid if it had retained its generating assets.
Namesto tega se je odločila za nadomestilo z zagotavljanjem fiksne količine električne energije po ceni, ki bi jo podjetje plačevalo, če bi obdržalo svojo električno infrastrukturo.
It should be noted that this method made economic sense: the treatment of Società Terni as a ‘virtual self-producer’ of electricity had the advantage of neutralising the risk of additional damage that might have arisen to Terni, over the years, in case of an increase in energy prices, for example.
Pripomniti je treba, da je bila ta metoda gospodarsko smiselna: obravnavanje družbe Società Terni kot „navideznega samoproizvajalca“ električne energije je preprečilo tveganje dodatne škode, ki bi lahko nastala družbi Terni v naslednjih letih, na primer v primeru zvišanja cen električne energije.
The Commission can accept the principle of this method.
Komisija se lahko strinja z načelom te metode.
However, compensation for an expropriation cannot consist in an open-ended arrangement, but must be clearly and predictably established at the time of the expropriation, subject to the possibility for the expropriated company to challenge the proposed amount.
Vendar pa nadomestila za razlastitev ni mogoče določiti na podlagi odprtega dogovora, ampak ga je treba jasno in na predvidljiv način določiti ob razlastitvi in razlaščenemu podjetju dati možnost, da ugovarja predlaganemu znesku.
Once accepted, a compensatory package cannot be reopened at a later stage.
Ko je dogovor o nadomestilu sklenjen, ga pozneje ni več mogoče ponovno začenjati.
In the case at hand, the overall amount of compensation depended on the duration of the tariff.
V zadevnem primeru je bil skupni znesek nadomestila odvisen od obdobja veljavnosti cene.
The original compensatory package offered by the Italian authorities foresaw that the tariff would last thirty years and thus end in 1992.
V prvotnem kompenzacijskem paketu, ki so ga italijanski organi oblasti ponudili družbi, je bilo predvideno, da bi bila cena veljavna trideset let, torej do leta 1992.
Società Terni could have challenged this mechanism under the nationalization law if it had considered it inadequate [21], but chose not to do so.
Če bi se družbi Società Terni ta mehanizem zdel neprimeren [21], bi mu v skladu z zakonom o nacionalizaciji lahko ugovarjala, vendar se za to ni odločila.
The Commission has assessed whether, in view of its mechanism and duration, the original compensatory arrangement could be considered adequate.
Komisija je ocenjevala, ali bi se prvotni dogovor o nadomestilu glede na svoj mehanizem in obdobje veljavnosti lahko štel za ustreznega.
In Italy, the operation of a hydropower plant is subject to a concession, the duration of which is such as to allow the company to amortize the investment.
V Italiji je za obratovanje hidroelektrarne potrebna koncesija, ki jo država da za toliko časa, da lahko podjetje odplača naložbo.
When the concession expires, the company loses, in principle, the right to exploit its assets.
Ob izteku veljavnosti koncesije podjetje načeloma izgubi pravico do uporabe svoje infrastrukture.
Considering Terni’s compensatory method, it made economic sense that the provision of electricity at production cost should not overrun the residual duration of the company’s concession.
Če upoštevamo metode za nadomestilo za družbo Terni, je bilo gospodarsko smiselno, da obdobje, v katerem se družbi električna energija zagotavlja po proizvodni ceni, ne sme biti daljše od preostalega obdobja veljavnosti koncesije družbe.
And, indeed, this appears to be the rationale of the original provision of Italian law limiting the duration of the preferential tariff to 1992.
In res se zdi, da je bil to razlog za prvotno določbo italijanskega zakona, ki je veljavnost ugodnejše cene omejevala do leta 1992.
While Terni’s own concession would have expired already a few years earlier, it is conceivable that the Italian authorities intended to align the expiry of the Terni tariff with the general expiry of hydroelectric concessions in Italy in 1992.
Čeprav bi družbi Terni koncesija potekla že nekaj let prej, so italijanski organi oblasti potek veljavnosti cene Terni verjetno nameravali prilagoditi splošnemu poteku veljavnosti hidroelektričnih koncesij v Italiji leta 1992.
Moreover, Società Terni had been granted a particularly long concession (60 years instead of 30), and therefore, at the time of expropriation, the company had already had thirty years to amortize its investment.
Poleg tega je država družbi Società Terni odobrila še posebno dolgo koncesijo (za 60 let namesto za 30), in je imela družba zato ob razlastitvi na voljo že trideset let za odplačevanje svoje naložbe.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that the original compensatory package was commensurate and by no means penalized for the company.
Komisija torej meni, da je bil prvotni kompenzacijski paket ustrezen in nikakor ni oškodoval podjetja.
The crucial issue here is whether the repeated extensions of this tariff arrangement can still be considered part and parcel of the compensation.
Odločilno vprašanje pri tej zadevi je, ali je ponavljajoča podaljšanja veljavnosti tega dogovora o ceni še mogoče šteti za sestavni del nadomestila.
The Commission takes the view that this cannot be the case.
Komisija meni, da ne.
When the State expropriates, it establishes ex-ante either an absolute amount of compensation or, as in the case at hand, a compensatory mechanism.
Kadar država razlasti podjetje, vnaprej določi absolutni znesek nadomestila, ali kot v zadevnem primeru, določi kompenzacijski mehanizem.
Any ex-post revision of the amounts or the mechanism necessarily changes the nature of the measure, which can no longer be considered compensatory insofar as it departs from the original arrangement.
Vsakršno naknadno popravljanje zneskov ali mehanizma neizogibno spremeni značaj ukrepa, in ta se ne more več šteti za nadomestilo, saj ne temelji na prvotnem dogovoru.
To admit the contrary would result in the exclusion of this type of measures from the scope of State aid control.
Če bi dopustili, da se tak ukrep še vedno šteje za nadomestilo, bi s tem to vrsto ukrepov izključili s področja uporabe nadzora državnih pomoči.
A Member State may, however, notify the Commission of its intention to grant further advantages to an expropriated company.
Kljub temu pa država članica lahko uradno obvesti Komisijo, da namerava razlaščenemu podjetju odobriti dodatne ugodnosti.
Such notification will be examined by the Commission on its merits in the light of the State aid rules and taking into account the specific circumstances invoked.
Komisija ob upoštevanju pravil o državni pomoči in posebnih okoliščin, na katere se v obvestilu sklicuje država članica, preuči ustreznost takega uradnega obvestila.
The ‘study’
„Študija“
The study referred to in paragraph (63) purports to show that the compensation granted to Società Terni and its successor companies over the years did not fully cover the market value of the expropriated assets, and that therefore there was no overcompensation and the beneficiaries never de facto enjoyed an advantage.
Namen študije iz odstavka (63) je pokazati, da nadomestilo, ki so ga družba Società Terni in podjetja, ki so jo nasledila, prejemala v preteklosti, ni v celoti pokrilo tržne vrednosti razlaščene infrastrukture, in zato ni bilo čezmernega nadomestila in prejemnice ugodnosti de facto nikoli niso imele prednosti.
As a preliminary remark, the Commission would like to underline that an analysis of the adequacy of the compensatory agreement can only be carried out ex ante, that is, at the time of expropriation.
Uvodoma bi Komisija rada poudarila, da je analizo ustreznosti dogovora o nadomestilu mogoče izvesti samo ex ante, torej ob razlastitvi.
In that context, it should be noted that the mechanism chosen by the Italian authorities aimed to put Società Terni in the same position as if its power plant had not been expropriated, by granting it access to electricity at cost price throughout the duration of its concession.
V zvezi s tem je treba omeniti, da je bil namen mehanizma, ki so ga izbrali italijanski organi oblasti, družbi Società Terni zagotoviti enak položaj, kot bi ga imela, če njena elektrarna ne bi bila razlaščena, tako da ji je bil med veljavnostjo koncesije odobren dostop do električne energije po lastni ceni.
Therefore, the argument that, under this arrangement, the Terni companies may have obtained less that what they were legitimately entitled to is difficult to follow.
Zato je utemeljitev, da so v skladu s tem dogovorom podjetja Terni morda dobila manj, kot je bila njihova zakonska pravica, težko razumljiva.
Besides, the Commission contends that, even if the findings of the study were substantiated (which is not the case, as demonstrated in points (88) to (92), that circumstance would be irrelevant for the purpose of establishing whether the tariff gave the beneficiaries an advantage.
Poleg tega Komisija vztraja pri tem, da bi bili rezultati študije, tudi če bi bili utemeljeni (kar niso, kot je opisano v točkah od (87) do (91)), nebistveni pri ugotavljanju, ali so bile prejemnice ugodnosti zaradi cene v prednostnem položaju.
It should be recalled that, at the time of the expropriation, Italy could have chosen to compensate Terni by paying a fixed financial amount based on the value of the expropriated assets.
Treba je opozoriti, da bi ob razlastitvi Italija družbi Terni nadomestilo lahko izplačala s fiksnim denarnim zneskom na podlagi vrednosti razlaščene infrastrukture.