natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The application of the BP Chemicals jurisprudence shows that the two measures are to be treated as one single aid measure
Uporaba sodne prakse BP Chemicals kaže, da je treba ta dva ukrepa obravnavati kot en sam ukrep pomoči
The Danish government recalls that in Case T-11/95, BP Chemicals [36], the CFI found that the assessment as to whether it is reasonable to separate one payment from another is to be made taking into account the chronology of the injections of capital, their purpose and the company’s situation at the date when the decisions on the individual injections were made.
Danska vlada opozarja, da je v zadevi T-11/95, BP Chemicals [36], SPS ugotovilo, da mora ocena o tem, ali je smiselno ločiti eno plačilo od drugega, upoštevati časovno zaporedje kapitalskih vložkov, njihov namen in položaj podjetja v času, ko so bile sprejete odločitve o posameznih vložkih.
The two measures had the same purpose.
Namen obeh ukrepov je bil enak.
A political agreement on the reorganisation and sale of shares in Combus was entered into on 26 November 1998 when the then government reached an agreement with the opposition on the Budget for 1999) As expressly stated in the Finance Committee’s bill of 27 May 1999, the purpose of the injection of capital in 1999 was to reorganise Combus prior to selling the shares, i.e. fully privatising the company.
Političen dogovor o reorganizaciji in prodaji delnic podjetja Combus je bil sklenjen 26. novembra 1998, ko je takratna vlada z opozicijo sklenila sporazum o proračunu za leto 1999. Kot je izrecno navedeno v predlogu zakona z dne 27. maja 1999, je bil namen kapitalskega vložka leta 1999 reorganizacija podjetja Combus pred prodajo delnic, tj. popolno privatizacijo podjetja.
The reason there was a need for reorganisation with a view to privatisation because a significant deterioration had taken place in the company’s economy.
Reorganizacija je bila zaradi privatizacije potrebna, ker se je poslovanje podjetja bistveno poslabšalo.
This was how it was established that Combus’ equity capital as at 31 December 1999 would come to approx. DKK 47 million, which should be seen in relation to a requirement for equity capital of at least DKK 125 million on the part of the company’s lenders.
Tako je bilo ugotovljeno, da bi lastniški kapital podjetja Combus na dan 31. decembra 1999 znašal približno 47 milijonov DKK, pri čemer je treba upoštevati, da so posojilodajalci podjetja zahtevali lastniški kapital v višini najmanj 125 milijonov DKK.
The political agreement on privatisation could therefore only be carried out if the Danish government ensured that Combus had a sufficient capital base to continue operating until a buyer was found.
Političen sporazum o privatizaciji bi bilo torej mogoče izpolniti samo, če bi danska vlada zagotovila, da ima podjetje Combus dovolj lastnega kapitala za nadaljnje poslovanje, dokler ne bi našli kupca.
The aid in 2001 had exactly the same purpose as the injection of capital in 1999.
Pomoč v letu 2001 je imela natanko enak namen kot kapitalski vložek leta 1999.
In 2000, a potential buyer was found and the writing off of the subordinated loan from 1999 and the guarantees provided were intended as the last piece in the economic puzzle that would allow the sale of all shares in Combus.
Leta 2000 je bil najden potencialni kupec, odpisan je bil podrejen dolg iz leta 1999, zagotovljena jamstva pa naj bi bila zadnji košček gospodarske sestavljanke, ki bi omogočila prodajo vseh delnic podjetja Combus.
The measure in 2001 was therefore the final stage in making the company more saleable.
Tako je bil torej ukrep leta 2001 končen korak, da bi bilo podjetje lažje prodati.
The purpose of the two measures was therefore exactly the same: to make Combus more saleable with a view to privatisation.
Namen obeh ukrepov je bil torej povsem enak: olajšati prodajo podjetja Combus zaradi privatizacije.
There was therefore a direct and obvious connection — legally, financially and logically — between the measures in 1999 and 2001.
Torej je med ukrepoma v letih 1999 in 2001 obstajala neposredna in očitna povezava – pravna, finančna in logična.
The two measures have a close chronological connection.
Oba ukrepa sta časovno tesno povezana.
As a result of the political agreement on the privatisation of Combus, the Finance Committee’s bill of 27 May 1999 was passed.
Zaradi političnega sporazuma o privatizaciji podjetja Combus je bil sprejet predlog zakona finančnega odbora z dne 27. maja 1999.
The Danish government hereby injected capital amounting to a total of DKK 300 million, DKK 100 million of which was subordinated loan capital.
Danska vlada je ob tem vložila kapital v skupni višini 300 milijonov DKK, od česar je bilo 100 milijonov DKK podrejenega dolga.
The subordinated loan capital was established through a loan agreement of 30 May 1999.
Podrejeni dolg je bil pridobljen na podlagi kreditne pogodbe z dne 30. maja 1999.
The Finance Committee’s bill of 13 December 2000 authorised the Ministry of Transport to sell all shares in the public limited company, Combus, which was fully owned by the Danish State.
Predlog zakona finančnega odbora z dne 13. decembra 2000 je Ministrstvo za promet pooblaščal, da proda vse delnice delniške družbe Combus, ki je bila v celotni lasti danske države.
The Minister of Transport was also authorised to provide a number of guarantees to buyers in connection with the conclusion of a sales agreement.
Minister za promet je bil pooblaščen tudi za izdajo več jamstev kupcem v zvezi s sklenitvijo prodajne pogodbe.
The guarantees, mentioned in the bill, were part of the basis of the sales agreement of 15 January 2001.
Jamstva, ki so bila navedena v predlogu zakona, so bila del osnove prodajne pogodbe z dne 15. januarja 2001.
The Danish Parliament’s Finance Committee was informed of these guarantees in bill 190 of 25 June 2002.
Finančni odbor danskega parlamenta je bil o njih obveščen s predlogom zakona 190 z dne 25. junija 2002.
Little more than 18 months passed between the date of the decision to pay the first injection of capital and the sale of Combus.
Nekoliko več kot 18 mesecev je minilo od datuma odločitve o vplačilu prvega kapitalskega vložka in prodaji podjetja Combus.
Considering the size and importance of the company to the Danish State and the complicated procedures required to obtain tenders from interested buyers etc., the Danish government is of the opinion that the two capital injections were so closely connected chronologically that there can be no doubt that this was one — and only one — financial measure.
Danska vlada glede na velikost in pomen podjetja za dansko državo ter zapletene postopke, ki so potrebni za pridobitev ponudb od zainteresiranih kupcev itd., meni, da sta bila kapitalska vložka časovno tako tesno povezana, da ni dvoma, da gre za en – in samo en – finančni ukrep.
In the opinion of the Danish government, it must be significant that the date of the decision to implement the measure in 2001 depended solely on when the Danish government had a sufficient basis for assessing the need for a capital injection and guarantees etc. in connection with a sale.
Po mnenju danske vlade je gotovo pomembno, da je bil datum izvedbe ukrepa leta 2001 odvisen samo od tega, kdaj bo imela danska vlada zadostno osnovo, da oceni potrebo po kapitalskem vložku in jamstvih itd. v povezavi s prodajo.
The date of the measures in 2001 was therefore completely dependent on the duration and result of the sales process.
Datum ukrepa leta 2001 je bil tako povsem odvisen od trajanja in izida postopka prodaje.
In this context, the Danish government recalls also the facts of BP Chemicals, where the first injection was made on 1 October 1992, the second injection was approved by the Board on 2 December 1993 and the third injection was approved by the Board on 29 June 1994.
V zvezi s tem danska vlada opominja tudi na dejstva pri BP Chemicals, kjer je bil prvi kapitalski vložek izveden 1. oktobra 1992, drugega je uprava odobrila 2. decembra 1993, tretjega pa 29. junija 1994.
The Court referred, in paragraph 178 of the judgement, to the decisions on the three capital injections being made over a relatively short period from October 1992 to July 1994.
V točki 178 sodbe se zadevno sodišče sklicuje na odločitve o treh kapitalskih vložkih, ki so bili izvedeni v razmeroma kratkem obdobju od oktobra 1992 do julija 1994.
As regards the chronological relationship between the second and third capital injections, the Court commented that these were chronologically very close to each other.
Kar zadeva časovno razmerje med drugim in tretjim kapitalskim vložkom, je sodišče pripomnilo, da sta si bila časovno zelo blizu.
In this context, the Danish government points out that the injection of capital in 2001 could not have been made earlier as the negotiations with the buyer had to be concluded before the extent of the need for capitalisation in connection with the sale could be determined.
V zvezi s tem danska vlada izpostavlja, da kapitalskega vložka leta 2001 ni bilo mogoče izvesti prej, saj je bilo treba najprej zaključiti pogajanja s kupcem, da je bilo mogoče ugotoviti obseg potrebne kapitalizacije v povezavi s prodajo.
Combus’s situation at the dates of the capital injections.
Stanje podjetja Combus na dan kapitalskih vložkov.
The Danish government endorses the Commission’s description in recital 75 of the decision to initiate the procedure, according to which Combus was in serious financial difficulties in 1999 and 2001, which was mainly due to the company having entered into unprofitable contracts for bus transport in previous years.
Danska vlada podpira opis Komisije v uvodni izjavi 75 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka, ki pravi, da je bilo podjetje Combus v resnih težavah leta 1999 in 2001, predvsem zato, ker je sklenilo nedonosne pogodbe o storitvah avtobusnega prevoza v prejšnjih letih.
The Commission concludes that the financial situation in Combus was therefore unchanged at the stated dates.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je bilo finančno stanje podjetja Combus na navedena datuma torej nespremenjeno.
The Danish government explains furthermore that, in 1998-2000, Combus had a significant accounting deficit, which can be almost exclusively attributed to the loss-making contracts in the Copenhagen area.
Danska vlada nadalje pojasnjuje, da je v obdobju 1998–2000 podjetje Combus beležilo precejšen računovodski primanjkljaj, ki ga je mogoče skoraj izključno pripisati pogodbam na območju Kobenhavna, ki so prinašale izgubo.
In addition, in 1998 and 1999, significant amounts of DKK 65000000 and DKK 53637000 respectively were allocated to the accounts to cover future losses from the loss-making contracts.
Poleg tega sta bila na račune za pokrivanje prihodnjih izgub iz naslova zgoraj omenjenih pogodb nakazana zneska 65000000 DKK (leta 1998) in 53637000 DKK (leta 1999).
The requirement for provisions for loss-making contracts was due to the company being bound by the bus service contracts until their expiry.
Zahteva po rezervacijah za pogodbe, ki so prinašale izgubo, je bila posledica dejstva, da so podjetje pogodbe o storitvah avtobusnega prevoza zavezovale do poteka.
The Danish government considers that, when the Court in BP Chemicals states that the decision as to whether it is one and the same aid measure has to take into account the ‘situation at the date when the decisions on the individual injections were made’, this must be because it is to be investigated whether, in the period between the individual injections, changes occurred in the company’s financial situation that demonstrate that the injections — despite any chronological and relative connection — actually cover different needs.
Po mnenju danske vlade je sodišče v primeru BP Chemicals navedlo, da je treba pri ugotavljanju, ali gre za en in isti ukrep pomoči, upoštevati „stanje na dan, ko so bile sprejete odločitve o posameznih vložkih“, saj je treba raziskati, ali se je v obdobju med posameznima vložkoma spremenilo finančno stanje podjetja, ki dokazuje – kljub morebitnim časovnim in sorodnim povezavam –, da vložki dejansko pokrivajo različne potrebe.
In the view of the Danish government, this is not the case here, for the following reasons:
Danska vlada meni, da to v tem primeru ne velja, in sicer zaradi naslednjih razlogov:
The injections of capital in both 1999 and 2001 were intended to cover the need for capital that had arisen because the company had entered into loss-making contracts in the period prior to 1999.
Kapitalska vložka leta 1999 in 2001 sta bila namenjena za pokrivanje potrebe po kapitalu, ki je nastala, ker je podjetje sklenilo pogodbe, ki so prinašale izgubo, pred letom 1999.
The fact that this was done in two stages is only because it was not until the conclusion of negotiations with the buyer Arriva that it became clear what the real extent of the need for capital was, although, seen objectively, this need already existed at the time of the first injection of capital in 1999.
To je bilo izvedeno v dveh fazah samo zato, ker je postalo šele po zaključku pogajanj s kupcem Arriva jasno, kakšna je bila dejanska potreba po kapitalu, čeprav je objektivno gledano ta potreba obstajala že v času prvega kapitalskega vložka leta 1999.
Conclusion: It is therefore the Danish government’s opinion that all the criteria to which importance was attached in BP Chemicals as regards the assessment of whether several chronologically separate injections of capital constitute one and the same financial measure are met.
Sklep: danska vlada torej meni, da so bila izpolnjena vsa merila, ki so bila upoštevana v primeru BP Chemicals, kar zadeva oceno, ali več časovno ločenih kapitalskih vložkov pomeni en in isti finančni ukrep.
Therefore the requirement for ‘one time, last time’ aid laid down in the restructuring guidelines is met in relation to the total injections of capital in 1999 and 2001.
Zato je zahteva po „enkratnosti“ pomoči, določena v smernicah o prestrukturiranju, izpolnjena, kar zadeva kapitalska vložka v letih 1999 in 2001 skupaj.
Economic viability of Combus
Sposobnost ekonomskega preživetja podjetja Combus
It is the opinion of the Government that, following the injections of capital in 1999 and 2001, Combus was economically viable.
Po mnenju vlade je bilo podjetje Combus po kapitalskih vložkih leta 1999 in 2001 sposobno ekonomsko preživeti.
The fact that it was not possible to achieve a profit prior to 2006 was only due to the loss-making contracts that Combus had entered into in connection with the licensing rounds.
Dobička ni bilo mogoče ustvariti pred letom 2006 le zaradi pogodb, ki so prinašale izgubo in ki jih je podjetje Combus sklenilo v povezavi z izdajo dovoljenj za linije.
The sale of all shares in Combus to Arriva is, in the opinion of the Danish government, proof that Combus was entirely viable after the provision of restructuring aid.
Prodaja delnic podjetja Combus podjetju Arriva po mnenju danske vlade dokazuje, da je bilo podjetje Combus v celoti sposobno preživeti po zagotovitvi pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
A private investor such as Arriva would not have taken the significant financial risk of buying Combus unless Arriva had, following an extensive due diligence process, found that Combus was a viable company with a satisfactory future earnings potential in relation to standard market economy terms.
Zasebni vlagatelj, kot je podjetje Arriva, ne bi prevzel velikega finančnega tveganja ob nakupu podjetja Combus, če ne bi po obsežnem skrbnem pregledu poslovanja ugotovil, da je podjetje Combus sposobno preživeti in zmožno ustvariti zadovoljive prihodke v prihodnosti v standardnih pogojih tržnega gospodarstva.
The Government notes that, in recitals 107 and 108 of the decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission raised a question regarding, firstly, the termination of contracts and, secondly, the difference between the accumulated deficit and the aid paid.
Vlada navaja, da je Komisija v uvodnih izjavah 107 in 108 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka izpostavila vprašanje, in sicer, prvič, o prekinitvi pogodb in drugič, o razliki med nabranim primanjkljajem in plačano pomočjo.
The comments of the Danish government with respect to the possibility of terminating public service contracts have already been outlined above.
Pripombe danske vlade o možnosti prekinitve pogodb za javna naročila storitev so bile že predstavljene zgoraj.
As regards the question of the difference between the accumulated deficit of DKK 360 million in the period 2000-2005 and the total aid of DKK 291 million paid in 2001, the Government observes that the Commission’s statement must be due to a misunderstanding.
Kar zadeva vprašanje o razliki med nabranim primanjkljajem v višini 360 milijonov DKK v obdobju 2000–2005 in skupno pomočjo v višini 291 milijonov, izplačano leta 2001, vlada ugotavlja, da je izjava Komisije verjetno posledica nesporazuma.
The amount stated for the accumulated deficit in the period 2000-2005 is correct but funds were provided to Combus in 2001 exceeding this accumulated deficit.
Znesek, naveden kot nabrani primanjkljaj v obdobju 2000–2005, je pravilen, toda sredstva, ki so bila podjetju Combus zagotovljena leta 2001, presegajo ta nabrani primanjkljaj.
As regards the funds provided by the Government, these amounted to DKK 291 million, cf. the comments that, when calculating the amount of aid paid, it is clearly the actual amount paid under the guarantees that is to be included.
V zvezi s sredstvi, ki jih je zagotovila vlada in ki so znašala 291 milijonov DKK, glej pripombe, da je treba v izračun izplačane pomoči vključiti dejanski znesek, izplačan na podlagi jamstev.
A more important consideration, however, is that the amount paid by the Government should be added to the creditor’s debt remission of DKK 100 million.
Pomembnejše pa je, da je treba znesek, ki ga je plačala vlada, prišteti k dolgu, ki so ga upniki odpisali v višini 100 milijonov DKK.
The capital provided in 2001 therefore exceeded the estimated accumulated deficit for the period 2000-2005.
Kapital, zagotovljen leta 2001, je torej presegal ocenjeni nabrani primanjkljaj za obdobje 2000–2005.
Measures for as far as possible mitigating the adverse effect of the aid on competitors
Ukrepi za čim večjo ublažitev škodljivega vpliva pomoči na konkurente
The Danish government first considers that the 1999 restructuring guidelines must be interpreted to mean that the use of measures to mitigate the competition distorting effect of the aid on competitors is optional and is only to be demanded where such measures are necessary.
Danska vlada kot prvo meni, da bi bilo treba smernice o prestrukturiranju iz leta 1999 razlagati, kot da pomenijo, da je uporaba ukrepov za blažitev učinka pomoči na konkurente v smislu izkrivljanja konkurence poljubna in se zahteva le, če so takšni ukrepi nujni.
This is emphasised by the use of the word ‘ought’ in point 35 of the guidelines and the whole of point 39 ii).
To poudarja uporaba izraza „naj bi“ v točki 35 smernic in celotna točka 39 ii).
Moreover, the Danish government points out that the Commission did not request or demand that Arriva make counter-concessions or implement measures that could mitigate potential distortion of competition in connection with the sale when adopting its initial decision.
Poleg tega danska vlada poudarja, da Komisija pri sprejetju svoje prvotne odločbe ni prosila niti zahtevala, da podjetje Arriva zagotovi protiugodnosti ali izvede ukrepe, ki bi lahko omilili morebitno izkrivljanje konkurence v povezavi s prodajo.
Secondly, the Danish government points out that there is no structural overcapacity in the bus transport sector.
Danska vlada kot drugič poudarja, da v sektorju avtobusnih prevozov ni strukturne presežne zmogljivosti.
In addition, it recalls that the Danish competition authorities have stated that there is particularly active and effective competition on the market and that the market is very accessible due to the low access barriers guaranteed by the European rules on tendering.
Poleg tega opozarja, da so danski organi, pristojni za konkurenco, izjavili, da je konkurenca na trgu zelo aktivna in učinkovita ter da je trg zelo dostopen zaradi majhnih ovir za dostop, kar zagotavljajo evropski predpisi o razpisih.
Accordingly, the Danish government considers that there was no need to mitigate the potential adverse effects of the aid as there is no evidence of such adverse effects.
Skladno s tem danska vlada meni, da ni potrebe po blažitvi morebitnih škodljivih vplivov pomoči, saj ni nobenih dokazov o takšnih škodljivih vplivih.
Thirdly, the Danish government points out that the injection of capital into Combus corresponded to the company’s negative market price, established in an entirely open round of tenders, where all interested purchasers were able to submit bids, and that the aid measure did not therefore create distortion of competition on the market.
Tretjič, danska vlada izpostavlja, da se je kapitalski vložek v podjetje Combus ujemal z negativno tržno ceno podjetja, določeno v povsem odprtem krogu razpisov, kjer so lahko vsi zainteresirani kupci predložili ponudbe, in da ukrep pomoči torej ni mogel povzročiti izkrivljanja konkurence na trgu.
Fourthly, the Danish government considers that the subsequent sale of a number of assets and liabilities to Connex constituted a measure capable of mitigating potential adverse effects on market conditions.
Četrtič, po mnenju danske vlade je poznejša prodaja številnih sredstev in obveznosti podjetju Connex bil ukrep, ki bi lahko ublažil morebitne škodljive vplive na tržne pogoje.
By selling at least 50 % of the assets in Combus to Connex, Arriva certainly offset any potential competitive advantages that the company obtained through the purchase of Combus.
S prodajo najmanj 50 % sredstev podjetja Combus podjetju Connex je podjetje Arriva zagotovo izravnalo vse morebitne konkurenčne prednosti, ki jih je pridobilo z nakupom podjetja Combus.
Through the sale to Connex, Arriva also restricted its market share in the Copenhagen area significantly.
S prodajo podjetju Connex je podjetje Arriva tudi bistveno omejilo svoj tržni delež na območju Kobenhavna.
Finally, the Danish government argues that the loss-making contracts will expire in 2006 at the latest and will subsequently be subject to public tenders open to all players on the market.
Na koncu danska vlada trdi, da bodo pogodbe, ki prinašajo izgubo, potekle najpozneje leta 2006 in se bo nato oddajale prek javnih razpisov, ki bodo odprti za vse akterje na trgu.
Even if there were to be a negative effect on competition — which in the Danish government’s opinion would in any case be minimal — it would be limited in duration.
Tudi če bi obstajal negativen vpliv na konkurenco – ki bi bil po mnenju danske vlade v vsakem primeru minimalen –, bi bilo njegovo trajanje omejeno.
Aid limited to the strict minimum necessary
Pomoč omejena na najnujnejše
The Danish government considers that the aid measures were limited to the absolute minimum and hence consistent with the relevant conditions in the 1999 restructuring guidelines.
Danska vlada meni, da so bili ukrepi pomoči omejeni na najnujnejše in torej skladni z zadevnimi pogoji iz smernic o prestrukturiranju iz leta 1999.
The amount of the capital injection in 1999 was suggested by the law firm, Kromann Münter, after a survey by KPMG was carried out in connection with the restructuring of Combus and the Danish government’s financial adviser, Alfred Berg, concurred with this assessment.
Višino kapitalskega vložka leta 1999 je predlagala odvetniška pisarna Kromann and Münter po pregledu, ki ga je opravilo podjetje KPMG v povezavi s prestrukturiranjem podjetja Combus, finančni svetovalec danske vlade, podjetje Alfred Berg, pa se je strinjal s to oceno.
As regards the injections of capital in 2001, the Danish government clarifies that the amounts were determined both by the company’s financial condition and the negotiations the Danish government had with Arriva and other potential buyers.
Kar zadeva kapitalski vložek leta 2001, danska vlada pojasnjuje, da so bili zneski določeni tako na podlagi finančnega stanja podjetja kot pogajanj med dansko vlado, podjetjem Arriva in drugimi potencialnimi kupci.