natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The complainant considers that, in these fields, Axens is in direct competition with other market operators despite not having to cover its R & D costs insofar as it is the exclusive distributor of the technologies developed by IFP with the financial support of the State.
Pritožnik ocenjuje, da je na teh področjih družba Axens neposredna konkurenca drugim nosilcem dejavnosti na trgu, ne da bi krila stroške za raziskave in razvoj, če je Axens izključni distributer tehnoloških postopkov, ki jih razvije skupina IFP na podlagi državne pomoči.
Moreover, according to the complainant, the IFP/Axens entity is in a position to carry on R & D activities which would be unprofitable for non-subsidised operators.
Poleg tega pritožnik meni, da lahko združenje IFP/Axens izvaja dejavnosti R & R, ki ne bi bile donosne za nosilce dejavnosti, ki ne prejemajo subvencij.
The complainant considers that State aid elements are identifiable in the direct State subsidy for IFP, the creation and capitalisation by IFP of its commercial subsidiary Axens, the financing of IFP’s refining and petrochemicals section, the exclusive distributor for which is Axens, and the exclusive licences which IFP grants Axens for its technologies.
Pritožnik ocenjuje, da je mogoče elemente državne pomoči ugotoviti pri neposredni subvenciji države za skupino IFP, ustanovitvi in kapitalizaciji gospodarske hčerinske družbe Axens s strani skupine IFP, financiranju sektorja za rafiniranje in petrokemijo skupine IFP, katerega izključni distributer je Axens, ter izključnih licencah, ki jih podeli skupina IFP družbi Axens na področju tehnoloških postopkov.
The complainant takes the view that the current financing of the activities of IFP and Axens by the State, which has not been notified to the Commission and is not covered by any of the Commission’s earlier decisions, constitutes unlawful State aid.
Pritožnik meni, da je sedanje državno financiranje dejavnosti skupine IFP in družbe Axens, ki ni bilo priglašeno Komisiji in ni zajeto v nobeni od prejšnjih odločb Komisije, nezakonita državna pomoč.
It stresses in this connection the factual differences between the findings of the Commission’s earlier decisions and the current situation in which IFP and Axens find themselves:
V zvezi s tem pritožnik izpostavlja dejanske razlike med sklepi prejšnjih odločb Komisije ter sedanjim stanjem skupine IFP in družbe Axens:
the subsidiary Axens is a commercial entity,
hčerinska družba Axens je gospodarski subjekt,
Axens has exclusive or preferential access to IFP’s services and research results,
Axens ima izključen ali prednostni dostop do storitev ali rezultatov raziskav skupine IFP,
IFP holds 100 % of Axens’s share capital,
skupina IFP ima v lasti 100 % kapitala družbe Axens,
in the market for technologies, most operators, including the complainant, are unsubsidised.
na trgu tehnoloških postopkov večina nosilcev dejavnosti, vključno s pritožnikom, ne prejema subvencij.
The subsidised activities of the IFP/Axens entity lead to price distortion.
Subvencionirane dejavnosti združenja IFP/Axens povzročajo izkrivljanje cen.
The complainant thus considers that IFP departs significantly from the model of a public non-profit-making research establishment, as referred to in point 2.4 of the 1996 R & D framework, in the area of the commercial activities of its subsidiary Axens.
Zato pritožnik ocenjuje, da se skupina IFP močno razlikuje od modela javne neprofitne raziskovalne ustanove iz točke 2.4 okvira za R & R iz leta 1996, kar zadeva gospodarske dejavnosti njene hčerinske družbe Axens.
On the contrary, in its view IFP and Axens constitute a single economic entity which acts in the market in direct competition with other operators.
Pritožnik nasprotno meni, da sta skupina IFP in družba Axens en gospodarski subjekt, ki deluje na trgu, pri čemer je neposredna konkurenca drugim nosilcem dejavnosti.
According to the complainant, several elements indicate that IFP and Axens are to be considered a single economic entity and hence an undertaking within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty:
Pritožnik meni, da več elementov kaže na to, da je treba skupino IFP in družbo Axens obravnavati kot en gospodarski subjekt ter torej kot podjetje v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES:
IFP behaves as an active shareholder by taking part in the definition of its subsidiaries’ strategy,
skupina IFP deluje kot aktivni delničar, ker sodeluje pri opredelitvi strategije svojih hčerinskih družb,
the staff of Axens and IFP visit potential customers together,
osebje družbe Axens in skupine IFP skupaj obiskuje potencialne stranke,
Axens uses its name in connection with IFP’s technologies (as can be seen from Axens’s logo, which incorporates that of IFP).
družba Axens uporablja svoje ime v povezavi s tehnološkimi postopki skupine IFP (kot je razvidno iz logotipa družbe Axens, ki vključuje logotip skupine IFP).
The resources granted by the French State to the IFP/Axens entity in order to finance research in the fields of refining, gas treatment and petrochemicals technologies constitute State resources.
Sredstva, ki jih dodeli Francija združenju IFP/Axens za financiranje raziskav na področjih tehnoloških postopkov rafiniranja, predelave plina in petrokemije, so državna.
According to the complainant’s estimates, IFP’s R & D expenditure in these fields comes to about EUR 100 million, whereas Axens reimburses no more than half of these costs to its parent company.
Pritožnik ocenjuje, da odhodki za R & R skupine IFP na teh področjih znašajo okrog 100 milijonov EUR, medtem ko družba Axens svoji matični družbi povrne le polovico teh stroškov.
The complainant accordingly estimates the aid in favour of the IFP/Axens entity at EUR 50 million a year.
Pritožnik zato ocenjuje, da pomoč združenju IFP/Axens znaša 50 milijonov EUR na leto.
The competitive advantage stems, according to the complainant, from the fact that the IFP/Axens entity does not have to cover all of its R & D costs and that it can, in consequence, exert downward pressure on market prices in the fields concerned.
Pritožnik meni, da konkurenčna prednost temelji na dejstvu, da subjekt IFP/Axens ne krije v celoti stroškov za raziskave in razvoj, s čimer lahko znižuje cene na trgu na zadevnih področjih.
The complainant considers that such an advantage introduces the risk of a foreclosure effect to the detriment of other market operators.
Pritožnik ocenjuje, da je taka prednost povezana s tveganjem izpodrinjenja drugih nosilcev dejavnosti na trgu.
According to the complainant, the technologies market is a worldwide, or at the very least, European market.
Pritožnik meni, da je trg tehnoloških postopkov svetovni ali vsaj evropski trg.
The State support for the IFP/Axens entity therefore affects intra-Community trade.
Državna pomoč za združenje IFP/Axens torej ogroža trgovino znotraj Skupnosti.
Consequently, the complainant considers that the State support for the IFP/Axens entity constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Zato pritožnik meni, da je državna pomoč za združenje IFP/Axens državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
The complainant stresses that, even if the activities of the IFP/Axens entity were to be considered pre-competitive development activities, the aid would exceed the permissible ceiling laid down in the 1996 R & D framework for such activities, which is 25 %, and could also exceed the ceiling of 50 % laid down for industrial research.
Pritožnik poudarja, da bi pomoč, tudi če bi se dejavnosti združenja IFP/Axens obravnavale kot predkonkurenčne razvojne dejavnosti, presegala dopusten prag iz okvira za R & R iz leta 1996 za take dejavnosti, ki znaša 25 %, in bi lahko prav tako presegala prag 50 % za industrijsko raziskovanje.
Should it be found that research and development activities as defined in the 1996 R & D framework are involved, the complainant considers that the incentive effect of the aid is questionable.
Če bi se upoštevalo, da so to dejavnosti na področju raziskav in razvoja iz okvira za R & R iz leta 1996, pritožnik ocenjuje, da je spodbujevalni učinek pomoči sporen.
According to the complainant, the aid to the IFP/Axens entity dissuades other market operators from investing in R & D in these fields insofar as their revenues are affected by the existence of State aid and are insufficient to offset their R & D costs.
Pritožnik meni, da pomoč za združenje IFP/Axens odvrača druge nosilce dejavnosti na trgu od naložb v R & R na teh področjih, če na njihov prihodek vpliva državna pomoč in ne dopušča povračila stroškov za R & R.
The complainant concludes, therefore, that the State aid in favour of the IFP/Axens entity is unlawful and incompatible with the common market.
Pritožnik zato ugotavlja, da je državna pomoč za združenje IFP/Axens nezakonita in nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
Comments submitted by Axens
Pripombe družbe Axens
First, Axens states that it was set up in 2001 to bring together in a single commercial entity IFP’s activities relating to refining and petrochemicals processes and those of the subsidiary relating to the production of catalysts.
Družba Axens najprej poudarja, da je bila ustanovljena leta 2001, da bi se v en gospodarski subjekt združile dejavnosti družbe IFP, povezane s postopki rafiniranja in petrokemije, ter postopki hčerinske družbe, ki proizvaja katalizatorje.
It possesses all of the functions (financial, legal, human resources) needed to conduct its business completely autonomously, and its day-to-day running is carried out by its management under the responsibility of its Chief Executive Officer.
Družba navaja, da ima na voljo vse službe (finančno, pravno, kadrovsko), ki omogočajo, da opravlja svojo dejavnost popolnoma neodvisno in da vsakodnevno upravljanje poteka v njenem okviru v pristojnosti generalnega direktorja.
Only very few decisions are taken as high as management board level, and its shareholder allows its top management a great deal of autonomy when it comes to commercial and industrial decision-making.
Meni, da se zelo malo odločitev sprejema na ravni upravnega odbora ter da njeni delničarji puščajo direktorjem veliko svobode pri sprejemanju gospodarskih in industrijskih odločitev.
It therefore contests the Commission’s analysis that IFP and Axens constitute a single economic entity.
Ne strinja se z analizo Komisije, ki obravnava skupino IFP in družbo Axens kot enoten gospodarski subjekt.
Secondly, Axens points out that the 2001 reorganisation was carried out in accordance with the plan explicitly approved by the Commission.
Drugič, družba Axens poudarja, da je reorganizacija leta 2001 potekala v skladu s projektom, ki ga je izrecno odobrila Komisija.
It considers it could legitimately trust in the validity of this legal and financial framework, the questioning of which would seriously hamper its development.
Ocenjuje, da bi lahko upravičeno pričakovala veljavnost tega pravnega in finančnega okvira, pri čemer je dvom v zvezi s tem okvirom resno oviral njen razvoj.
Thirdly, Axens argues that most operators in the refining and petrochemicals technologies and catalysts markets have recourse to a combination of internal and partnership research.
Tretjič, družba Axens trdi, da večina nosilcev dejavnosti na trgih tehnoloških postopkov in katalizatorjev na področju rafiniranja in petrokemije združuje notranje raziskave in raziskave v partnerstvu.
Criterion, a subsidiary of Shell, has access to the latter’s research, and ABB Lummus has agreements with Chevron and Shell, UOP with Total and other operators and Albermale with ExxonMobil.
Družba Criterion, hčerinska družba družbe Shell, ima dostop do raziskav te družbe, ABB Lummus je sklenila sporazume z družbama Chevron in Shell, UOP z družbo Total in drugimi nosilci dejavnosti, Albermale pa z družbo ExxonMobil.
Axens indicates that its collaboration with IFP is to be seen in this context and has been structured transparently through the three research and licensing agreements.
Družba Axens navaja, da njeno sodelovanje s skupino IFP spada v ta okvir in da je bilo pregledno strukturirano na podlagi treh konvencij o raziskovanju in licencah.
These are based, from the point of view of each of the parties, on a traditional commercial logic.
Te konvencije po mnenju posameznih strank temeljijo na običajni trgovinski usmeritvi.
Axens considers that the fact that the portion of its turnover that is devoted to research expenditure is comparable to the outlay expended by its competitors is further proof that it derives no advantage from its relationship with IFP.
Družba Axens ocenjuje, da je dejstvo, da je delež prihodka, namenjen stroškom za raziskave, primerljiv s prizadevanjem njenih tekmic, dodaten dokaz, da družba Axens nima nobene prednosti zaradi odnosa s skupino IFP.
Lastly, Axens stresses that it faces competition from very powerful operators who are often actively supported by their countries of origin.
Na koncu družba Axens poudarja, da se je spopadla z zelo močno konkurenco nosilcev dejavnosti, ki pogosto dobivajo zelo močno podporo od njihove države izvora.
In the United States, the Department of Energy devotes a budget of several hundred million dollars to project support.
V Združenih državah ministrstvo za energetiko (Department of Energy) nameni več sto milijonov dolarjev za podporo teh projektov.
Comments submitted by UOP
Pripombe družbe UOP
The registered office of UOP Limited is in the United Kingdom.
Sedež družbe UOP Limited je v Združenem kraljestvu.
The company has two production sites, one in the United Kingdom and one in Italy, and is active in 17 Member States.
Družba ima dva proizvodna obrata, in sicer v Združenem kraljestvu in Italiji, ter je dejavna v 17 državah članicah.
UOP and the IFP/Axens entity are competitors in the fields of petroleum production and desulphurisation technologies, aromatics production and extraction technologies and catalysts for a wide range of clean fuel production processes.
Družba UOP in združenje IFP/Axens sta tekmeca na področju tehnologij proizvodnje in razžveplanja bencina, proizvodnje in pridobivanja aromatskih ogljikovodikov ter tudi na področju katalizatorjev za številne postopke proizvodnje čistih goriv.
UOP is in favour of initiating the formal investigation procedure in respect of the aid paid to IFP and agrees with most of the Commission’s conclusions.
Družba UOP podpira začetek formalnega postopka preiskave v zvezi s pomočjo, ki se je izplačala skupini IFP, ter se pridružuje mnenju Komisije glede njenih bistvenih ugotovitev.
First, UOP has noticed a sharp increase in IFP’s activities in recent years.
Prvič, družba UOP v zadnjih letih opaža jasen razvoj dejavnosti skupine IFP.
IFP has thus restructured one licensing activity which is relatively insignificant and open to all enterprises, so as to compete directly with private operators in the process market.
Skupina IFP bi tako preoblikovala dejavnost licenciranja, ki je sorazmerno nepomembna in odprta za vse družbe tako, da neposredno konkurira zasebnim subjektom na trgu postopkov.
UOP points out that Community case law requires that, where the State decides to act like an economic operator, it must act under the same conditions as a private operator.
Družba UOP opozarja, da mora država, če se odloči, da bo delovala kot gospodarski subjekt, glede na sodno prakso Skupnosti delovati pod enakimi pogoji kot zasebni subjekt.
UOP considers in this respect that an operating deficit of more than EUR 555 million over the past three years would be unacceptable to a normal shareholder.
Družba UOP v zvezi s tem meni, da primanjkljaj pri obratovanju v višini več kot 555 milijonov EUR v zadnjih treh letih ni sprejemljiv za običajnega delničarja.
Against this background, UOP has asked the Commission to order France to suspend the State support for IFP in accordance with Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [22].
V tem okviru družba UOP zahteva, da Komisija Franciji ukaže, naj začasno ukine javno pomoč za skupino IFP v skladu s členom 11 Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [22].
Secondly, UOP considers that the fact that the IFP/Axens entity does not have to cover all of its R & D expenditure has enabled it not only to acquire a significant share of the market in refining and petrochemicals technologies but also to threaten its competitors’ profitability.
Drugič, družba UOP ocenjuje, da se z dejstvom, da združenju IFP/Axens ni treba kriti vseh stroškov za raziskave in razvoj, ni omogočila le pridobitev bistvenega dela trga tehnoloških postopkov rafiniranja in petrokemije, ampak se je tudi ogrozila donosnost njenih tekmecev.
It argues that the proximity to the market and the low level of the IFP/Axens entity’s R & D activities is evidence that the aid has no incentive effect.
Poleg tega družba UOP meni, da sta bližina trga in nizka raven dejavnosti raziskav in razvoja združenja IFP/Axens posledica pomanjkanja spodbujevalnega učinka za pomoč.
Lastly, it considers that any benefit to be derived from the aid would be largely offset by the risk of crowding out private operators in the relevant markets, it being its view that private operators will have to reduce their R & D expenditure in the medium term in order to remain competitive with a largely subsidised rival.
Nazadnje, družba UOP meni, da bi morebitno korist pomoči v veliki meri nadomestilo tveganje za izpodrinjenje zasebnih subjektov na zadevnih trgih, pri čemer družba UOP navaja, da bodo morali zasebni subjekti srednjeročno zmanjšati svoje stroške za raziskave in razvoj, da bi ostali konkurenčni v primerjavi s tekmecem, ki prejema precej višjo subvencijo.
Thirdly, UOP shares the Commission’s analysis that IFP and its subsidiary Axens constitute a single economic entity.
Tretjič, družba UOP se strinja z analizo Komisije, glede na katero se skupina IFP in njena hčerinska družba Axens obravnavata kot enoten gospodarski subjekt.
The capital structure, management, preferential relations and degree of economic integration of IFP and its subsidiary Axens all point to that conclusion.
Po eni strani k tej ugotovitvi prispevajo kapitalistična struktura, izobraževalno osebje, prednostni odnosi in stopnja gospodarskega vključevanja skupine IFP ter njene hčerinske družbe Axens.
UOP stresses in this respect that the economic integration of the two entities is borne out by the fact that Axens is the sole distributor of the technologies developed by IFP and the main and potentially only recipient of IFP’s findings.
V zvezi s tem družba UOP poudarja, da je gospodarsko vključevanje teh dveh subjektov zagotovljeno, dokler je hčerinska družba Axens edini distributer tehnoloških postopkov, ki jih razvije skupina IFP, ter prva in morda edina prejemnica rezultatov skupine IFP.
Such arrangements show, according to UOP, that IFP and Axens are indubitably dependent on one another, work in concert and pursue identical interests in the market.
Po mnenju družbe UOP taki sporazumi dokazujejo, da sta skupina IFP in hčerinska družba Axens nedvomno odvisni ena od druge, skupno delujeta in si prizadevata za enake interese na trgu.
UOP considers, moreover, that, as Axens’s only shareholder, IFP is in a position to determine Axens’s short- and medium-term strategy.
Po drugi strani družba UOP meni, da skupina IFP kot edina delničarka hčerinske družbe Axens lahko opredeli strategijo tega podjetja za kratkoročno in srednjeročno obdobje.
Fourthly, UOP considers, like the Commission, that, for there to be no advantage to the IFP/Axens entity, IFP’s budget devoted to R & D carried out in collaboration with or on behalf of Axens would have to be financed by revenue earned in the market.
Četrtič, družba UOP in Komisija menita, da bi se moral proračun skupine IFP za raziskave in razvoj, ki se vodijo v sodelovanju s hčerinsko družbo Axens ali v njenem imenu, financirati iz prihodkov, pridobljenih na trgu, da ne bi združenje IFP/Axens imelo prednosti.
a fundamental research stage during which new materials and process concepts are developed and tested up to proof of principle [23] demonstration;
faza osnovnih raziskav, med katero se razvijajo in preskušajo novi materiali in koncepti postopkov, dokler se ne dokaže njihovo načelo [23];
a process and material development stage during which the materials and process concepts discovered are developed for commercial application;
faza razvoja postopkov in materialov, med katero se koncepti odkritih materialov in postopkov oblikujejo za tržno uporabo;
an application development stage during which tools are built, enabling reproducible performance forecasting and materials manufacturing so as to offer the product in a competitive context.
faza razvoja uporabe, med katero se oblikujejo pripomočki, ki omogočajo predvidevanje reproduktivnih zmogljivosti in proizvodnjo materialov, da se postopek lahko ponudi v konkurenčnem okviru.
UOP considers that stages (b) and (c) form an integral part of commercial development.
Družba UOP meni, da sta fazi (b) in (c) sestavni del tržnega razvoja.
Lastly, though it shares the Commission’s analysis on the economic unity of IFP and its subsidiary Axens, UOP has furnished certain additional information in the event of the Commission’s concluding at the end of the formal investigation procedure that IFP and Axens constitute two separate economic entities.
Nazadnje, čeprav se družba UOP strinja z analizo Komisije glede gospodarske enotnosti skupine IFP in njene hčerinske družbe Axens, je želela dodati nekatera dodatna dokazila za hipotezo, v kateri je Komisija po formalnem postopku preiskave sklenila, da sta skupina IFP in hčerinska družba Axens dva ločena gospodarska subjekta.
According to UOP, the process market proposes products which are not comparable.
Po mnenju družbe UOP trg postopkov ponuja izdelke, ki niso primerljivi.
Consequently, the only way to ensure that Axens pays the market price for IFP’s results would be to have recourse to a tendering procedure.
Zato bi bil edini način za zagotovitev, da hčerinska družba Axens plača tržno ceno za rezultate skupine IFP, uporaba postopka za zbiranje ponudb.
UOP thus considers that the right of first refusal constitutes in itself an advantage in that, by granting Axens a right of first refusal, IFP forgoes the opportunity of selling its results via a tendering procedure to the highest bidder.
Tako družba UOP meni, da pravica do prve zavrnitve sama po sebi predstavlja prednost, pri čemer se pravica do prve zavrnitve podeli hčerinski družbi Axens, če se skupina IFP odpove možnosti prepustitve rezultatov na podlagi postopka zbiranja ponudb subjektu z najboljšo ponudbo na trgu.
COMMENTS FROM FRANCE ON THE COMMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES
KOMENTARJI FRANCIJE NA PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI
France’s comments concern UOP’s comments and the complaint.
Komentarji Francije se nanašajo na pripombe družbe UOP in na pritožbo.
In response to UOP’s comments
Odgovor na pripombe družbe UOP
First, France contests UOP’s assertion as to the existence of a single entity in the form of IFP/Axens, pointing to Axens’s autonomy from IFP and to the fact that IFP is a research, teaching and documentation institute — a feature which distinguishes it fundamentally from its subsidiary Axens and from UOP Limited.
Prvič, Francija ugovarja trditvi družbe UOP glede enotnega subjekta IFP/Axens, pri čemer vztraja na neodvisnosti hčerinske družbe Axens glede na skupino IFP ter pri dejstvu, da je skupina IFP inštitut za raziskave, izobraževanje in dokumentacijo, v čemer se temeljno razlikuje od svoje hčerinske družbe Axens in družbe UOP Limited.
Concerning Axens’s autonomy from IFP, France states first that, according to established Community case law, the ownership structure of the capital of a subsidiary is not, by itself, a sufficient criterion for determining whether that subsidiary may or may not be regarded as enjoying economic autonomy from its parent company.
Kar zadeva neodvisnost hčerinske družbe Axens v razmerju do skupine IFP, Francija na podlagi sodne prakse Skupnosti najprej opozarja, da sama struktura deleža kapitala hčerinske družbe ne pomeni zadostnega merila, s katerim bi se ugotovilo, ali se lahko ta hčerinska družba obravnava kot gospodarsko neodvisna od matične družbe ali ne.