natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Austrian authorities state that SCA GmbH is Vienna airport’s schedules facilitator or airport coordinator within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 793/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports [29].
Avstrijski organi navajajo, da naj bi bil SCA GmbH na letališču Dunaj usklajevalec reda letenja ali letališki koordinator v smislu Uredbe (ES) 793/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. aprila 2004 o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 95/93 o skupnih pravilih dodeljevanja slotov na letališčih Skupnosti [29].
The activities of SCA GmbH are determined by Regulation (EC) No 793/2004 to such an extent that a single shareholder can exercise no influence whatsoever over slot allocation.
Dejavnosti SCA GmbH naj bi bile z Uredbo (ES) 793/2004 tako določene, da naj posamezni delničar sploh ne bi mogel vplivati na dodeljevanje slotov.
Robin Hood Aviation alleged that the rescue aid was used to finance displacement competition on the Graz-Stuttgart route.
Robin Hood Aviation je navedel, da je bila pomoč za reševanje uporabljena za financiranje izrinjenja konkurence na progi Gradec–Stuttgart.
The Austrian authorities dispute this.
Avstrijski organi temu ugovarjajo.
The Austrian authorities also dispute Ryanair’s assertion that Austrian Airlines would, in future, offer flights below cost in competition with low-cost airlines, arguing that these allegations are unsubstantiated.
Avstrijski organi se tudi ne strinjajo s trditvijo Ryanair, da naj Austrian Airlines v konkurenci z nizkocenovnimi prevozniki letov v prihodnosti ne bi več ponujal po cenah, s katerimi bi si lahko pokril stroške.
Moreover, the Austrian authorities are of the opinion that these concerns would essentially be examined by the Commission in merger control proceedings.
Te trditve naj ne bi imele nobene osnove. Avstrijski organi menijo, da naj bi te pomisleke sicer v glavnem preiskala Komisija pri postopku nadzora združevanja.
By letter of 22 May 2009, the Austrian authorities sent the Commission additional information on a number of points.
Avstrijski organi so z dopisom z dne 22. maja 2009 Komisiji sporočili informacije v zvezi z vrsto zadev.
In relation to the fact that ÖIAG is considered to be the controlling shareholder of Austrian Airlines, the Austrian authorities point out that ÖIAG holds 41,56 % of the shares in Austrian Airlines directly and has formed a syndicate with other institutional shareholders which holds a further 7,05 % of the shares.
Avstrijski organi glede dejstva, da naj bi bilo treba ÖIAG obravnavati kot prevladujočega delničarja Austrian Airlines, opozarjajo, da naj bi imel ÖIAG 41,56-odstotni neposredni delež v Austrian Airlines in naj bi ustanovil sindikat z drugimi institucionalnimi vlagatelji, ki naj bi imel dodatni 7,05-odstotni delež v Austrian Airlines.
The syndicate agreement entails aligned voting in Austrian Airlines’ shareholder meetings.
V sporazumu o ustanovitvi sindikata naj bi bilo predvideno enotno glasovanje na skupščinah Austrian Airlines.
A further 3,45 % of the shares in Austrian Airlines (which do not bear voting rights) are held by Austrian Airlines, while the remaining 47,94 % are held by floating shareholders.
3,45-odstotni delež (brez pravice glasovanja) v Austrian Airlines naj bi imel Austrian Airlines, preostali 47,94-odstotni delež pa lastniki delnic v prostem obtoku.
ÖIAG and the syndicate members together hold 48,61 % of the shares in Austrian Airlines and have 50,34 % of the voting rights, since the shares held by Austrian Airlines do not bear voting rights.
ÖIAG in člani sindikata naj bi imeli skupaj 48,61-odstotni delež v Austrian Airlines in 50,34 % glasovalnih pravic, ker naj delnice v lasti Austrian Airlines ne bi imele glasovalne pravice.
The authorities also clarified that floating shareholders are not bound to participate in a sale at a negative purchase price, as Austrian insolvency law does not require shareholders to contribute to the costs of insolvency.
Avstrijski organi so še pojasnili, da naj lastnikom delnic v prostem obtoku ne bi bilo treba sodelovati pri prodaji po negativni nakupni ceni, ker naj delničarjem v skladu z avstrijskim stečajnim pravom ne bi bilo treba biti udeležen pri stroških stečaja.
Their loss is limited to the loss of their capital contributions or the price at which they purchased the shares.
Njihova izguba naj bi bila omejena na izgubo njihovih prispevkov h kapitalu ali nakupno ceno, ki so jo plačali za delnice.
The floating shareholders would therefore not have to bear any costs in the event of the insolvency or liquidation of Austrian Airlines, and would not be bound to take the alternative scenarios into consideration.
Zato lastnikom delnic v prostem obtoku v primeru stečaja ali likvidacije Austrian Airlines ne bi bilo treba nositi stroškov in upoštevati drugih mogočih scenarijev.
Furthermore, floating shareholders do not have to accept a negative purchase price.
Poleg tega lastnikom delnic v prostem obtoku ne bi bilo treba sprejeti negativne nakupne cene.
On the contrary, in transactions involving a change of control of the company, the Austrian Takeover Act stipulates that the takeover price must equal the six-month volume-weighted average stock price, which need bear no relationship to the economic value of their stake.
Nasprotno, v avstrijskem zakonu o prevzemih naj bi bilo glede transakcij, ki naj bi zadevale menjavo nadzora nad podjetjem, predvideno, da naj bi prevzemna cena ustrezala borznemu tečaju zadnjih šestih mesecev, ponderiranemu v skladu z obsegom trgovanja, kar naj ne bi moralo biti nujno povezano z gospodarsko vrednostjo deležev obsega trgovanja.
The stock price may be driven — as in the case of Austrian Airlines — by market expectations of a takeover and rarely reflects the fundamental value of the company.
Podlaga za delniški tečaj bi bila lahko kot v primeru Austrian Airlines pričakovanja trga o prevzemu, tako da naj bi redko odseval temeljno vrednost podjetja.
Similarly, the floating shareholders do not have to share in liquidation and insolvency costs and do not have to contribute to a negative purchase price.
Lastniki delnic v prostem obtoku tudi ne bi morali biti udeleženi pri stroških likvidacije in stečaja in jim ne bi bilo treba prispevati k negativni nakupni ceni.
This ‘free-rider phenomenon’ is the result of the protection afforded to floating shareholders under Austrian corporate and insolvency law and within the legal framework for takeovers under European law.
Ta „pojav neupravičenega okoriščanja“ naj bi bil rezultat varstva, ki naj bi ga lastniki delnic v prostem obtoku v skladu z evropskim pravom uživali na podlagi avstrijskega prava o družbah in stečajnega prava ter pravnega okvira za prevzeme.
The Austrian authorities state that the payment of a negative purchase price to ÖIAG is a direct consequence of the negative equity value of Austrian Airlines and, in particular, of the legal requirement for the bidder to buy out the floating shareholders at a price that does not reflect the economic value of the airline in order to obtain 100 % ownership.
Avstrijski organi navajajo, da naj bi bilo plačilo negativne nakupne cene ÖIAG neposredna posledica negativne vrednosti lastnega kapitala Austrian Airlines in zlasti pravne obveznosti ponudnika, da za pridobitev 100-odstotnega lastništva pokupi deleže lastnikov delnic v prostem obtoku, in sicer po ceni, ki naj ne bi odsevala gospodarske vrednosti letalskega prevoznika.
In the opinion of the Austrian authorities, ÖIAG acted as a rational private market economy investor by assuming the entire negative purchase price associated with 100 % of Austrian Airlines’ negative equity value and the legally required positive offer price to the floating shareholders in order to fully privatise Austrian Airlines.
Avstrijski organi menijo, da se je ÖIAG vedel kot razumen zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu, s tem da naj bi za popolno privatizacijo Austrian Airlines prevzel celotno negativno nakupno ceno, ki naj bi se nanašala na 100 % negativne vrednosti lastnega kapitala Austrian Airlines in zakonsko predpisano pozitivno ponudbeno ceno za lastnike delnic v prostem obtoku.
The Austrian authorities also state that the floating shareholders did not receive State aid in the course of the privatisation process, as, firstly, the takeover bid does not involve public funds but is paid by the successful bidder, namely Lufthansa, and secondly, the price to be paid to the floating shareholders is not set by the State but determined on the basis of the compulsory rules for calculating a takeover price where a change of control is involved, as laid down in the Austrian Takeover Act.
Avstrijski organi navajajo še, da naj lastniki delnic v prostem obtoku med privatizacijo ne bi prejeli državne pomoči, saj naj, prvič, prevzemna ponudba ne bi obsegala državnih sredstev, temveč naj bi jo plačal uspešni ponudnik Lufthansa. Drugič, cene, ki jo je treba plačati lastnikom delnic v prostem obtoku, naj ne bi določila država, temveč naj bi se določila na podlagi zavezujočih predpisov za izračun prevzemne cene ob menjavi nadzora nad podjetjem iz avstrijskega zakona o prevzemih.
The Austrian authorities clarified that Austrian law does not require shareholders to assume social costs in the event of insolvency.
Avstrijski organi so pojasnili, da naj delničarji v skladu z avstrijskim pravom ne bi bili zavezani nositi socialnih stroškov v primeru stečaja.
They pointed out that the Austrian Insolvency Remuneration Fund established pursuant to the Insolvency Remuneration Guarantee Act covers the following costs:
Opozorili so, da avstrijski sklad za izplačilo plač v primeru stečaja, ki naj bi bil ustanovljen v skladu z zakonom o zavarovanju plač v primeru stečaja podjetja, krije naslednje stroške:
severance payments required by law up to an amount of EUR 6030 per month,
zakonsko predpisane odpravnine v višini do 6030 EUR na mesec,
salary up to an amount of EUR 8040 per month,
plače v višini do 8040 EUR na mesec,
pension claims, limited to 24 monthly payments, calculated from the vesting amount (Unverfallbarkeitsbetrag) and capped at EUR 6000 per month,
pokojninske zahtevke, največ 24 mesečnih plačil na podlagi zneska, ki ne more propasti, in omejene na 6000 EUR na mesec, nadomestila za dopust in
The fund does not cover severance payments or monthly salaries exceeding those thresholds.
Sklad naj ne bi kril odpravnin in mesečnih plač, ki naj bi presegale te zgornje meje.
Furthermore, claims arising from collective bargaining agreements or social plans are not covered by the fund.
Poleg tega naj sklad ne bi kril zahtevkov iz kolektivnih pogodb ali socialnih načrtov.
The Austrian authorities also provided further information on whether a holding company in a similar situation to ÖIAG would take account of share price losses triggered by rating downgrades and comparable losses.
Avstrijski organi so poleg tega predložili dodatne informacije glede tega, ali bi holdinška družba v podobnem položaju kot ÖIAG upoštevala izgube vrednosti tečaja, ki nastanejo zaradi znižanja stopnje bonitete in primerljivih izgub.
PRESENCE OF AID
OBSTOJ POMOČI
Legal basis for appraisal of aid
Pravna podlaga za oceno pomoči
Under Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’.
V skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe ES „je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The concept of State aid applies to any advantage granted directly or indirectly, financed from State resources or granted by the State itself or by an intermediary body acting by virtue of powers conferred on it by the State.
Pojem državne pomoči zajema vsako neposredno ali posredno priznano prednost, ki se financira iz državnih sredstev ali jo odobri država ali posrednik po naročilu države.
The criteria laid down in Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty are cumulative.
Merila iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES so kumulativna.
is granted by the State or through State resources,
jo dodeli država ali je dodeljena iz državnih sredstev,
favours certain undertakings or the production of certain goods,
daje prednost posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga,
distorts or threatens to distort competition, and
izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco in
The Commission has carried out a close and in-depth analysis of the comments received in the course of the opening of the proceedings and the observations made by Austria.
Komisija je izvedla natančno in temeljito analizo pripomb, prispelih ob sprožitvi postopka, ter pripomb Avstrije.
The Commission has also engaged an expert (Moore Stephens) to carry out a study of the financial data and assumptions underpinning the sales transaction.
Komisija je tudi pooblastila izvedenca (Moore Stephens) za revizijo finančnih podatkov in domnev, ki so temelj prodajne transakcije.
In the present case, the Austrian authorities have argued that the notified measure does not constitute State aid because the price, which was the result of an open, transparent and non-discriminatory sales process, is the market price.
Avstrijski organi so v obravnavanem primeru navedli, da naj priglašeni ukrep ne bi pomenil državne pomoči, prvič, ker je cena, ki je rezultat odprtega, preglednega in nediskriminatorskega prodajnega postopka, tržna cena.
In the alternative, they have argued that the notified measure does not constitute State aid because ÖIAG acted as a market economy investor would have done in a similar situation, in so far as the alternative scenarios facing ÖIAG were all more expensive and ÖIAG chose the least expensive option.
Drugič, priglašeni ukrep naj ne bi pomenil državne pomoči, ker naj bi ÖIAG ravnal tako, kot bi ravnal vlagatelj v tržnem gospodarstvu v podobnem položaju, ker naj bi bili drugi mogoči scenariji, ki so se mu ponujali, vsi povezani z višjimi stroški, in naj bi ÖIAG izbral stroškovno najugodnejšo možnost.
In order to make sure that the sale did not involve State aid, the Commission must assess whether Austrian Airlines was sold at the market price.
Komisija mora, da se prepriča, da prodaja ne obsega državne pomoči, preveriti, ali je bil Austrian Airlines prodan po tržni ceni.
In this regard, the Commission has developed certain principles in relation to the privatisation of State-owned companies, which have been built up over the years from past decisions made on the basis of the examination of individual cases [30].
Komisija je za ta namen razvila nekatera načela za privatizacijo podjetij v državni lasti, ki so rezultat večletne prakse odločanja na podlagi preverjanj posameznih primerov.
Depending on the circumstances, State aid could be granted either to the buyer or to the entity being privatised.
Državna pomoč bi bila lahko odvisno od okoliščin dodeljena kupcu ali podjetju, ki naj bi se privatiziralo.
Evaluation of the sales price of Austrian Airlines
Ocena prodajne cene Austrian Airlines
In the present case, the Commission notes that Austria gave ÖIAG a privatisation mandate which, while requiring ÖIAG to conduct a transparent and non-discriminatory sales process, also imposed a number of conditions.
Komisija v obravnavanem primeru ugotavlja, da je Avstrija ÖIAG dodelila pooblastilo za privatizacijo, v skladu s katerim je moral ÖIAG sicer izvesti pregleden in nediskriminatorski prodajni postopek, vendar je bila v njem določena tudi vrsta pogojev.
Therefore, prima facie, the presumption that the transaction involves State aid cannot be ruled out.
Zato na prvi pogled ni mogoče izključiti domneve, da transakcija obsega državno pomoč.
In this regard, the Commission notes that, by imposing certain conditions on the buyer, the State, as vendor, would potentially lower the sales price and thus forego additional revenue.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da država kot prodajalec z določitvijo nekaterih pogojev za kupca lahko zniža prodajno ceno in se tako odpove dodatnim sredstvom.
Furthermore, conditions can deter potentially interested investors from submitting a bid in the first place, so that the competitive environment of the sales process is disturbed, and even the highest of the offers eventually submitted does not necessarily represent the actual market value.
Pogoji lahko morebitne zainteresirane vlagatelje poleg tega že na samem začetku odvrnejo od oddaje ponudbe, kar negativno vpliva na konkurenčno okolje prodajnega postopka, tako da niti najvišja nazadnje oddana ponudba ne pomeni nujno dejanske tržne vrednosti.
By imposing such conditions and thus accepting that it will not receive the best price for its shares or assets, the State is not acting as a market economy operator, who would try to obtain the highest possible price.
Država z določitvijo takih pogojev in s sprejetjem možnosti, da ne bo dosegla najboljše cene za deleže ali premoženje v svoji lasti, ne ravna kot udeleženka v tržnem gospodarstvu, ki skuša doseči najvišjo mogočo ceno.
Instead, the State is choosing to sell the undertaking at a price below the market value.
Namesto tega se država odloči, da bo podjetje prodala po ceni, ki je nižja od tržne vrednosti.
The Commission is of the opinion that a market economy operator would not have an economic interest in attaching comparable conditions but would sell the company to the highest bidder, who would then be free to determine the future of the acquired company or assets.
Komisija meni, da udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu ne bi imel gospodarskega interesa za določitev primerljivih pogojev, temveč bi prodal podjetje najboljšemu ponudniku, ki bi potem lahko prosto določil prihodnost pridobljenega podjetja ali premoženja.
In such circumstances, it should be determined whether an undertaking has obtained an economic advantage from the transaction, for which purpose the third subparagraph of point 43 of the 1994 Aviation Guidelines stipulates that the company ‘must be valued by an independent expert who must indicate, under normal circumstances, a going-concern value for the company […]’.
V takem primeru je treba preveriti, ali je imelo podjetje gospodarsko prednost od transakcije, glede česar je v tretjem pododstavku točke 43 Smernic za letalski sektor iz leta 1994 predvideno, da „[mora] podjetje oceni[ti] neodvisni izvedenec, ki določi knjigovodsko vrednost (going-concern value) podjetja pod običajnimi pogoji […]“.
In its ‘Stardust Marine’ judgment, the Court declared that ‘in order to examine whether or not the State has adopted the conduct of a prudent investor operating in a market economy, it is necessary to place oneself in the context of the period during which the financial support measures were taken in order to assess the economic rationality of the State’s conduct, and thus to refrain from any assessment based on a later situation’ [31].
V sodbi Stardust Marine je Sodišče odločilo, da je „[…] za preveritev vprašanja, ali je država ravnala kot preudaren vlagatelj, ki deluje pod pogoji tržnega gospodarstva, potrebna umestitev v obdobje, v katerem so bili sprejeti ukrepi finančne podpore, da se oceni gospodarska racionalnost ravnanja države in s tem prepreči kakršna koli ocena na podlagi poznejših razmer“ [31].
In the present case, the decisive point in time is the day (5 December 2008) on which the sale to Lufthansa of ÖIAG’s 41,56 % shareholding in Austrian Airlines was contractually agreed.
Odločilni čas v obravnavanem primeru je dan ( 5. december 2008), na katerega je bila s pogodbo določena prodaja 41,56-odstotne udeležbe ÖIAG v Austrian Airlines Lufthansi.
Going-concern value of Austrian Airlines
Vrednost delujočega Austrian Airlines (Going concern value)
As previously mentioned, Austria submitted an evaluation of Austrian Airlines’ equity value on a stand-alone basis as at 5 December 2008, which was prepared by Deloitte based on a going-concern assumption and using the discounted cash flow method (hereinafter DCF).
Kot je bilo že navedeno, je Avstrija predložila oceno vrednosti lastnega kapitala samostojnega Austrian Airlines z dne 5. decembra 2008, ki jo je pripravil Deloitte na podlagi domneve delujočega podjetja in z uporabo metode diskontiranega denarnega toka (Discounted cash flow, v nadaljnjem besedilu: DCF).
On the basis of this evaluation, including the business plan data, the Commission, assisted by its independent expert, was able to review whether the price paid by Lufthansa corresponds to the market price.
Komisija je lahko na podlagi te ocene, vključno s podatki iz poslovnega načrta, s pomočjo neodvisnega izvedenca preverila, ali je cena, ki jo je plačala Lufthansa, tržna cena.
Deloitte produced its DCF valuation in accordance with Austrian professional valuation standards, using the business plan drawn up by the management of Austrian Airlines, adjusted to reflect the change in economic climate and the cost savings the management had agreed to.
Deloitte je izvedel oceno DCF v skladu z avstrijskimi strokovnimi standardi za ocenjevanje in je pri tem uporabljal poslovni načrt uprave Austrian Airlines, ki je bil prilagojen spremenjenemu gospodarskemu ozračju in prihrankom pri stroških, ki jih je obljubila uprava.
The business plan available on 5 December 2008 had been drawn up on a stand-alone basis and does not take account of any potential synergies which might be achieved with a strategic partner.
Poslovni načrt z dne 5. decembra 2008 je temeljil na ohranitvi samostojnosti in v njem niso upoštevane morebitne sinergije, ki bi bile lahko dosežene s strateškim partnerjem.
The business plan includes optimisation measures (such as […]) totalling EUR […]. Furthermore, it is assumed that […].
Poslovni načrt obsega ukrepe za optimizacijo (kot […]) v skupni višini […] EUR. Poleg tega se predvideva, da […].
In order to determine the impact of these measures on the cash flow of Austrian Airlines, Deloitte used the following three net present value (hereinafter NPV) phases in its evaluation:
Deloitte je za določitev vpliva teh ukrepov na denarni tok Austrian Airlines za vrednost kapitala (Net present value, v nadaljnjem besedilu: NPV) v oceni uporabil naslednje tri faze:
Phase I (12/2008-12/2012), based on the management business plan as adjusted by Deloitte,
I. faza (12/2008–12/2012) na podlagi poslovnega načrta uprave po prilagoditvi, ki jo je izvedel Deloitte,
Phase II (2013 to 2021), which incorporated the […] to reflect this and assumes a growth rate of […] % per year, and
faza (2013–2021) ob vključitvi […], da se to upošteva, ter domnevi letne stopnje rasti […] % in
Phase III (2022 onwards), which is the terminal value and is based on the assumption that the business has reached its steady long-term growth rate of […] % per year.
faza (od leta 2022) kot končna vrednost na podlagi domneve, da je podjetje doseglo stalno dolgoročno letno stopnjo rasti […] %.
The Commission notes that, in this specific case, the assumptions underpinning the baseline scenario are justified, particularly with regard to the […].
Komisija ugotavlja, da so domneve, na katerih temelji osnovni scenarij, v tem posebnem primeru upravičene, zlasti glede […].
Furthermore, the average age of Austrian Airlines’ fleet is approximately […] years, which is […] compared with that of its competitors.
Povprečna starost letalskega parka Austrian Airlines je poleg tega približno […] let, kar je v primerjavi s konkurenti […].
The mix of aircraft types and ages in Austrian Airlines’ fleet is partly the result of its acquisition of two competitors (Lauda and Tyrolean). Furthermore, the fleet is very diverse in comparison with competitors of a similar size.
Razlog za neenotnost vrste in starosti letalskega parka Austrian Airlines je delno dejstvo, da je prevzela dva konkurenta (Lauda in Tyrolean), poleg tega pa je letalski park v primerjavi s konkurenti podobne velikosti zelo raznovrsten.