natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Only 51 % of the advantage (reduction of the interest rates charged and of the guarantee premiums charged) granted by ETVA and the State to HSY was returning to them in the form of an increase of the value of HSY.
Banki ETVA in državi se je povečanje vrednosti podjetja HSY povrnilo samo iz naslova 51-odstotne prednosti (zmanjšanje zaračunane obrestne mere in zaračunanih poroštvenih premij), ki sta jo omogočili podjetju HSY.
No market economy investor would have accepted to make such a gift to the other shareholders of HSY.
Takšnega darila drugim delničarjem podjetja HSY ne bi dal noben vlagatelj iz tržnega gospodarstva.
In order to avoid losing money in favour of these other shareholders, a market economy investor would have charged an interest rate similar to the one charged by (non affiliated) private banks.
Da bi preprečil izgubo denarja v korist teh drugih delničarjev, bi vlagatelj iz tržnega gospodarstva zaračunal obrestno mero, podobno tisti, ki jo zaračunavajo (nepovezane) zasebne banke.
The first claim of the Greek authorities is therefore unfounded.
Prva trditev grških organov je zato neutemeljena.
As regards the period after 30 June 1999, at a time when no private bank would have provided financing to HSY because the risk of bankruptcy was too high, the same reasoning applies.
Enako velja tudi za obdobje po 30. juniju 1999, torej v času, ko nobena zasebna banka ne bi odobrila finančnih sredstev podjetju HSY, ker je bilo tveganje stečaja previsoko.
In particular, a rational investor holding only 51 % of a firm would have at least asked the other shareholders to provide financing in proportion to their shareholding in HSY.
Razumen vlagatelj, ki bi imel v lasti samo 51-odstotni delež podjetja, bi zlasti od drugih delničarjev zahteval, da zagotovijo finančna sredstva, sorazmerna njihovemu deležu v podjetju HSY.
If these other shareholders did not have the resources to provide this financing, a rational investor would have at least negotiated the provision of financing to HSY against a higher shareholding in HSY.
Če ti drugi delničarji ne bi imeli sredstev, s katerimi bi zagotovili financiranje, bi se razumni vlagatelj vsaj pogajal o zagotovitvi finančnih sredstev za podjetje HSY v zameno za višji delež v podjetju HSY.
Providing significant financing to HSY without co-financing or without concessions by the other shareholders was similar to put one’s own money at high risk to save the value of the shares held by someone else.
Če bi se visoka finančna sredstva podjetju HSY zagotovila brez sofinanciranja ali koncesij s strani drugih delničarjev, bi to bilo tako, kot če bi nekdo svoj lasten denar izpostavil visokemu tveganju, da bi rešil vrednost delnic, ki so v lasti nekoga drugega.
No market economy investor in similar circumstances would have accepted to make such a gift to the other shareholders.
Takšnega darila drugim delničarjem v podobnih okoliščinah ne bi dal noben vlagatelj iz tržnega gospodarstva.
The second claim of the Greece authorities has therefore to be rejected.
Drugo trditev grških organov je zato treba zavrniti.
Horizontal issue 2: Imputability of ETVA’s behaviour to the State
horizontalno vprašanje: Pripisovanje ravnanja banke ETVA državi
Several of the 16 measures analysed in the present decision were not granted directly by the State.
Nekatere izmed šestnajstih ukrepov, analiziranih v tej odločbi, država ni odobrila neposredno.
They were granted by the State-owned bank ETVA.
Odobrila jih je namreč državna banka ETVA.
Since Greece, HSY and TKMS/GNSH contest the imputability to the State of these measures while Elefsis and Piraeus Bank confirm it, this issue has to be analysed.
Ker Grčija, podjetje HSY ter podjetji TKMS/GNSH zanikajo, da je te ukrepe mogoče pripisati državi, medtem ko podjetje Elefsis in banka Piraeus Bank to potrjujeta, je treba to vprašanje proučiti.
ETVA, whose initials stand for Industrial Development Bank of Greece, was founded in 1964 following the merger of three organisations (the Industrial Development Organisation, the Economic Development Financing Organisation and the Tourist Credit Organisation).
Banka ETVA, katere začetnice pomenijo Grška banka za industrijski razvoj, je bila ustanovljena leta 1964 po združitvi treh organizacij (Organizacije za industrijski razvoj, Organizacije za financiranje gospodarskega razvoja in Organizacije za počitniška posojila).
It was converted into a corporation by Law 1369/1973.
Z zakonom 1369/1973 je bila preoblikovana v korporacijo.
Since 1973 it has therefore operated as a State-owned bank.
Od leta 1973 torej posluje kot državna banka.
According to Greece, ‘The main purpose stated in the statue of ETVA as a development bank was promotion of the development of the country through the financing of production activities in the Greek economy (tourism, industrial production, etc.)’.
V skladu z izjavo Grčije je „[g]lavni namen, naveden v statutu banke ETVA kot razvojne banke, […] bil spodbujanje razvoja države s pomočjo financiranja proizvodnih dejavnosti v grškem gospodarstvu (turizem, industrijska proizvodnja itd.)“.
ETVA was the only development bank in Greece.
Banka ETVA je bila edina razvojna država v Grčiji.
ETVA therefore endeavoured to play a decisive role in the economic and regional development of the country by financing enterprises, developing the regional infrastructure of the country, providing venture capital and participating in undertakings with strategic importance for the Greek economy.
Zato si je prizadevala, da bi imela odločilno vlogo na področju gospodarskega in regionalnega razvoja države s financiranjem podjetij, razvijanjem regionalne infrastrukture države, zagotavljanjem rizičnega kapitala in udeležbo v podjetjih strateškega pomena za grško gospodarstvo.
In 1995, following financial difficulties resulting from these activities, the recapitalisation, restructuring and modernisation of the bank became a top priority of the Greek government.
Leta 1995, po finančnih težavah, ki so bile posledica teh dejavnosti, so rekapitalizacija, prestrukturiranje in modernizacija banke postale glavne prednostne naloge grške vlade.
This was done on the basis of a five-year programme within the framework of Law 2359/95.
To je bilo storjeno na podlagi petletnega programa v okviru zakona 2359/95.
In addition to the provision of GRD 427 billion of capital by the government, the aim of the restructuring was to implement a new strategic orientation, change the organisational structure and formulate modern business procedures which respond to present-day conditions of competition.
Poleg tega, da je vlada zagotovila kapital v višini 427 milijard GRD, je bilo prestrukturiranje usmerjeno v izvedbo nove strateške usmeritve, spremembo organizacijske strukture in oblikovanje sodobnih poslovnih postopkov, ki ustrezajo današnjim pogojem konkurence.
Consequently, ‘In addition to its development activity, ETVA developed commercial banking services, in particular from 1997 onwards’.
Zaradi tega je „[p]oleg svoje razvojne dejavnosti […] banka ETVA razvila komercialne bančne storitve, zlasti po letu 1997.“.
In 1999, the State, which held 100 % of ETVA’s shares, decided to proceed with the bank’s listing on the Athens Stock Exchange, offering 24 % of its share capital to the public.
Leta 1999 je država, ki je imela v lasti 100-odstotni delež banke ETVA, sklenila, da bo nadaljevala s kotacijo banke na atenski borzi in javnosti ponudila 24 % svojega osnovnega kapitala.
The State decided to proceed even further with the bank’s privatisation and reduce the State’s participation to below 50 %.
Država se je poleg tega odločila še za nadaljevanje privatizacije banke in zmanjšanje udeležbe države pod 50 %.
A call for tender was conducted and Piraeus Bank was chosen.
Opravljen je bil javni razpis, na katerem je bila izbrana banka Piraeus Bank.
On 20 March 2002, shares representing 57,7 % of ETVA’s capital were transferred to Piraeus Bank.
Delnice, ki so predstavljale 57,7 % kapitala banke ETVA, so bile 20. marca 2002 prenesene na banko Piraeus Bank.
Regarding the possibility for the State to control ETVA, the Commission observes that until the end of 1999 ETVA was fully owned by the Greek State.
Ker je imela država možnost, da nadzoruje banko ETVA, Komisija ugotavlja, da je bila do konca leta 1999 banka ETVA v celoti last grške države.
This illustrates that the relation between ETVA and HSY has from the outset been a relation of State support in favour of a company which was important — in terms of employment and of activities — for the Greek government.
Iz tega je razvidno, da je šlo v razmerju med banko ETVA in podjetjem HSY že od samega začetka za zagotavljanje državne podpore podjetju, ki je bilo – v smislu zaposlovanja in dejavnosti – pomembno za grško vlado.
The second major decision was the sale by ETVA of 49 % of HSY’s capital to the employees, which was decided by Law 2367/1995.
Druga večja odločitev je bila prodaja 49 % kapitala podjetja HSY s strani banke ETVA zaposlenim, kar je bilo odločeno z zakonom 2367/1995.
In addition, this Law imposes significant restructuring measures on HSY (and grants very large aid amounts to the yard).
Poleg tega ta zakon podjetju HSY nalaga pomembne ukrepe za namene prestrukturiranja (ladjedelnici pa omogoča zelo visoke zneske pomoči).
The third major event was the privatisation of HSY in 2001–2002 (i.e. ETVA had to sell its remaining 51 % shareholding in HSY).
Tretji večji dogodek je bila privatizacija podjetja HSY v obdobju 2001–2002 (tj. banka ETVA je morala prodati preostali 51-odstotni delež v podjetju HSY).
This privatisation was decided by decision No 14/3-1-2001 of the relevant Inter-ministerial Privatisation Committee and took place within the framework of the Greek Privatisation Law 2000/2091.
Privatizacija je bila odločena z odločbo št. 14/3-1-2001 ustreznega Medresorskega odbora za privatizacijo, izvršena pa je bila v okviru grškega zakona o privatizaciji 2000/91.
This was constantly repeated in the tender documents submitted to the interested investors/bidders by Alpha Finance, which was the bank organising the sale of HSY on behalf of the State and of the Sellers (ETVA and the employees).
To je bilo večkrat ponovljeno v razpisni dokumentaciji, ki je bila zainteresiranim vlagateljem/ponudnikom predložena s strani banke Alpha Finance, ki je organizirala prodajo podjetja HSY v imenu države in prodajalcev (banke ETVA in zaposlenih).
In addition to its direct involvement at these three occasions, the State granted very large amounts of aid during the period 1995 to 2002.
Poleg tega, da je bila neposredno vključena v vseh teh treh primerih, je država v obdobju 1995–2002 odobrila zelo visoke zneske pomoči.
The State wrote off GRD 54,52 billion (EUR 160 million) of debts related to civil activities — this waiver was approved by decision C 10/94 — and GRD 46,35 (EUR 136 million) of debts related to military activities.
Država je odpisala dolg v višini 54,52 milijarde GRD (160 milijonov EUR), povezan s civilnimi dejavnostmi – ta odpis je bil odobren z odločbo C 10/94 – in dolg v višini 46,35 milijarde GRD (136 milijonov EUR), povezan z vojaškimi dejavnostmi.
As indicated in decision N 401/97, the State also intended to grant GRD 7,8 billion (EUR 22,9 million) of investment aid.
Kot je navedeno v odločbi N 401/97, je država nameravala odobriti še 7,8 milijarde GRD (22,9 milijona EUR) naložbene pomoči.
During the bidding process in 2001, the Greek State enacted law 2941/2001, which contained a large amount of financial support aimed at facilitating the privatisation of HSY (see recital 33 of the present decision).
V postopku oddaje ponudb leta 2001 je grška država sprejela zakon 2941/2001, ki je vključeval visok znesek finančne podpore, namenjene za pospešitev privatizacije podjetja HSY (glej uvodno izjavo 33 te odločbe).
As the Commission indicated in decision N 513/01, the State committed for instance to pay EUR 118 million as incentives to encourage employees to voluntarily leave the company.
Kot je Komisija navedla v odločbi N 513/01, se je država na primer zavezala, da bo plačala 118 milijonov EUR v obliki stimulacij za zaposlene, da bi prostovoljno zapustili podjetje.
By granting large and repetitive aids, the government clearly signalled that it considered the survival of HSY as politically very important.
Z odobritvijo visokih in večkratnih pomoči je vlada jasno pokazala, da je preživetje podjetja HSY zanjo politično zelo pomembno.
Finally, the Commission observes that the State awarded strategic defence contracts to HSY during these years, like for instance the construction of the submarines.
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da je država v teh letih podjetju HSY oddala strateška obrambna naročila, kot na primer naročilo za gradnjo podmornic.
Consequently, the State had a direct interest in monitoring the activities of HSY and ensuring the continuation of the operations of the yard.
Zaradi tega je imela država neposredni interes za spremljanje dejavnosti podjetja HSY in zagotovitev nadaljevanja del v ladjedelnici.
By deciding the size of the shareholding of ETVA in HSY, by giving constantly large financial support to HSY and because it granted military contracts of high importance for Greece’s security, the Greek government signalled very clearly that it attached a great importance to HSY’s activities and was monitoring the situation of the yard carefully.
Z določitvijo velikosti deleža banke ETVA v podjetju HSY, z zagotavljanjem nenehne visoke finančne podpore podjetju HSY in z oddajo vojaških naročil, ki so bila velikega pomena za varnost Grčije, je grška vlada dala zelo jasen znak, da dejavnostim podjetja HSY pripisuje zelo velik pomen in da pozorno spremlja položaj v ladjedelnici.
In this general context, the Commission consider that, until ETVA’s privatisation in March 2002, the imputability of ETVA behaviour to the State can not be questioned.
V tem splošnem okviru Komisija meni, da ni nikakršnega dvoma, da se ravnanje banke ETVA v času pred njeno privatizacijo marca 2002 lahko pripiše državi.
Indeed, in these circumstances, it was impossible for ETVA’s management to develop towards HSY a lending policy which would not have been in line with the policy of steady support adopted by the government.
V teh okoliščinah vodstvo banke ETVA dejansko ni imelo možnosti, da bi za podjetje HSY razvilo posojilno politiko, ki ne bi bila v skladu s politiko stalne podpore vlade.
In particular, it would have been impossible for ETVA to take a decision creating financial problems for HSY.
Banka ETVA zlasti ne bi mogla sprejemati odločitev, ki bi podjetju HSY povzročile finančne težave.
For instance, ETVA could not have charged a high interest rate (i.e. a high ‘spread’ above the interbank rate) on the loans granted to HSY, since this would have deteriorated HSY’s financial situation, what would have been politically unacceptable for the government.
Na primer, banka ETVA ne bi mogla zaračunati visoke obrestne mere (tj. visok „razmik“ nad medbančno obrestno mero) za posojila, odobrena podjetju HSY, saj bi to poslabšalo finančni položaj podjetja HSY, kar bi bilo za vlado politično nesprejemljivo.
Similarly, ETVA could not have refused to grant a loan demanded by HSY to finance its operations.
Banka ETVA prav tako ne bi mogla zavrniti odobritve posojila, ki ga je podjetje HSY zahtevalo za financiranje svojih dejavnosti.
In other words, ETVA had no other choice than remaining coherent with the policy of strong and continuous support toward HSY adopted by the State.
Z drugimi besedami, banka ETVA ni imela druge izbire, kot da ravna v skladu s politiko močne in stalne podpore podjetju HSY, ki jo je sprejela država.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that all the measures implemented by ETVA towards HSY (loans, guarantees, capital injections, etc.) were automatically imputable to the State, and that it is not necessary to bring forward additional evidence of the State’s involvement at the moment when each of these measure were adopted by ETVA.
Zaradi tega Komisija ugotavlja, da je bilo mogoče vse ukrepe, ki jih je banka ETVA izvršila v zvezi s podjetjem HSY (posojila, poroštva, dokapitalizacije itd.) avtomatično pripisati državi in da ni treba predstaviti dodatnih dokazov o vključenosti države v času, ko je banka ETVA sprejemala vsakega izmed teh ukrepov.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that the different measures carried out by ETVA are imputable to the State.
Komisija torej meni, da je različne ukrepe, ki jih je izvršila banka ETVA, mogoče pripisati državi.
As subsidiary grounds, the Commission also notes the following elements confirming the imputability of ETVA’s behaviour to the State.
V dopolnilo temu Komisija opozarja tudi na naslednje elemente, ki potrjujejo, da je ravnanje banke ETVA mogoče pripisati državi.
First, in 1995 ETVA sold only 49 % — and thus not 100 % — of HSY shares to the employees.
Prvič, leta 1995 je banka ETVA zaposlenim prodala samo 49 % – torej ne 100 % – delnic podjetja HSY.
‘Greece invoked its military needs in shipbuilding to justify retaining 51 % of the yard as allowed by Article 10 of the Directive’.
„Grčija se je sklicevala na svoje vojaške potrebe na področju ladjedelništva, da bi upravičila ohranitev 51 % ladjedelnice, kot omogoča člen 10 Direktive“.
It is obvious that in this context ETVA’s management could not have developed towards HSY a relation based on commercial terms.
Očitno je, da v tem okviru vodstvo banke ETVA s podjetjem HSY ni moglo ustvariti razmerja, ki bi temeljilo na poslovnih pogojih.
Any decision regarding the provision of financing to HSY and the terms of this financing could not go against Greece’s defence interests.
Nobena odločitev v zvezi z zagotavljanjem finančnih sredstev podjetju HSY in pogoji tega financiranja ni smela biti v nasprotju z obrambnimi interesi Grčije.
In particular, the Commission fails to see how ETVA’s management could have refused to grant a financing to HSY or could have charged a high interest rate on these financings.
Komisija zlasti ne more razumeti, kako bi vodstvo banke ETVA lahko zavrnilo odobritev finančnih sredstev podjetju HSY ali kako bi lahko zaračunalo visoko obrestno mero za ta sredstva.
Moreover, if Greece’s goal was the preservation of defence interests, one can suppose that the government was in fact directly supervising any significant decision of the management of HSY and any decision of ETVA regarding financing provided to HSY.
Če je Grčija želela obvarovati obrambne interese, je mogoče predpostaviti, da je vlada dejansko neposredno nadzorovala vsako pomembno odločitev vodstva podjetja HSY in vsako odločitev banke ETVA v zvezi s finančnimi sredstvi, odobrenimi podjetju HSY.
Second, since ETVA’s mandate as ‘development bank’ was defined by the State, it can be concluded that all the activities of ETVA implemented in the framework of that mandate were imputable to the State.
Drugič, ker je pristojnosti banke ETVA kot „razvojne banke“ opredelila država, je mogoče ugotoviti, da je bilo mogoče vse dejavnosti, ki jih je banka ETVA izvajala v okviru navedenih pristojnosti, pripisati državi.
In a similar manner, the case law indicates that, in order to analyse the imputability of measures adopted by a firm ‘the nature of its activities and the exercise of the latter on the market in normal conditions of competition with private operators’ may be relevant.
Sodna praksa na podoben način navaja, da bi bila lahko pri analizi možnosti pripisovanja ukrepov, ki jih je sprejelo podjetje, pomembna tudi „narava njegovih dejavnosti in izvajanje slednjih na trgu pod normalnimi pogoji konkurence z zasebnimi izvajalci“.
In this context, the Greek authorities acknowledge that ‘ETVA from its creation onwards did not function like a usual commercial bank but as a special development credit institution mainly active in the field of long-term credits playing a decisive role in the economic and regional development of the country’.
V tem okviru grški organi potrjujejo, da „banka ETVA od svoje ustanovitve naprej ni poslovala kot običajna komercialna banka, temveč kot posebna razvojna kreditna ustanova, ki je v glavnem aktivna na področju dolgoročnih posojil, ki imajo odločilno vlogo v gospodarskem in regionalnem razvoju države“.
Third, according to case-law, ‘the legal status of the undertaking (in the sense of its being subject to public law or ordinary company law’ may be relevant to show imputability.
Tretjič, v skladu s sodno prakso, bi bil lahko za prikaz možnosti pripisovanja pomemben tudi „pravni položaj podjetja (v smislu, da zanj velja javno pravo ali običajno pravo družb)“.
In this respect, since ETVA, as a State-owned development bank, has as its principal corporate object to further the country’s development by financing the Greek economy, it was not subject to banking directives .
Ker je bil glavni korporativni cilj banke ETVA kot razvojne banke v državni lasti spodbujanje razvoja države s financiranjem grškega gospodarstva, zanjo niso veljale direktive o bančništvu .
It is only when ETVA’s shares were listed on the Athens Stock Exchange on 12 January 2000 that ETVA became subject to the standard supervisory rules applicable to commercial banks.
Šele ko so delnice banke ETVA 12. januarja 2000 kotirale na atenski borzi, so za banko ETVA začeli veljati standardni nadzorni predpisi, ki se uporabljajo za komercialne banke.
Fourth, the Commission observes that during the period 1996–2002, the State was particularly attentive to the operations of ETVA.
Četrtič, Komisija opaža, da je v obdobju 1996–2002 država namenjala posebno pozornost poslovanju banke ETVA.
Indeed, the State adopted Law 2359/95 in order to restructure ETVA and injected hundred of billions of drachma whitin that framework.
Država je dejansko sprejela zakon 2359/95 za namen prestrukturiranja banke ETVA in v tem okviru izvršila dokapitalizacijo v višini sto milijard drahem.
In 1999, it decided to list a part of the capital on the Athens Stock Exchange.
Leta 1999 se je odločila, da bo del kapitala uvrstila na atensko borzo.
One year later, it decided to privatise the majority of the capital of ETVA.
Leto pozneje se je odločila, da bo privatizirala večino kapitala banke ETVA.
The loans and guarantees provided to HSY were of a size sufficiently large such that the granting decisions could not have been taken by ETVA’s management without endorsement or direct order of ETVA’s sole shareholder.
Posojila in poroštva, ki so bila odobrena podjetju HSY, so bila dovolj velika, da odločitve o odobritvi vodstvo banke ETVA ne bi moglo sprejeti brez potrditve ali neposredne odredbe edinega delničarja banke ETVA.
In the foregoing paragraphs the Commission has demonstrated that, in the period preceding the sale of the ETVA to Bank Piraeus in March 2002, all the measures implemented by ETVA involved State resources and all the measures implemented by ETVA towards HSY were imputable to the State.
V zgornjih odstavkih je Komisija pokazala, da so v obdobju pred prodajo banke ETVA banki Piraeus Bank marca 2002 vsi ukrepi, ki jih je izvajala banka ETVA, vključevali državna sredstva, in da je bilo vse ukrepe, ki jih je banka ETVA izvajala v zvezi s podjetjem HSY, mogoče pripisati državi.
When it will assess individually each of the measures implemented by ETVA, the Commission will therefore not demonstrate these two points anymore.
Ko bo Komisija ocenila vsakega izmed teh ukrepov, ki jih je izvedla banka ETVA, teh dveh točk torej ne bo več dokazovala.
The Commission will only discuss again these two issues in the assessment of measure E18c, because some parties claim that this measure was granted by ETVA in May 2002, i.e. after the purchase of ETVA by Piraeus Bank.
Komisija bo o teh dveh vprašanjih razpravljala ponovno samo v oceni ukrepa E18c, saj nekatere stranke trdijo, da je bil ta ukrep odobren s strani banke ETVA maja 2002, tj. potem ko je banka Piraeus Bank kupila banko ETVA.
Horizontal issue 3: aid measures partially financing the military activities of HSY
horizontalno vprašanje: ukrepi pomoči, s katerimi se delno financirajo vojaške dejavnosti podjetja HSY