natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to the Commission’s decision of 19 June 2002 (case C 61/99, Deutsche Post AG [7]), such loss of compensation constitutes State aid incompatible with the common market.
V skladu z odločbo Komisije z dne 19. junija 2002 (zadeva C 61/99 – Deutsche Post AG [7]) taka izguba kompenzacijskih plačil pomeni državno pomoč, ki ni združljiva s skupnim trgom.
DPAG regretted that the Commission had not taken this fact, which DPAG already highlighted in its complaint of 3 December 2002, into account in these proceedings.
DPAG je obžaloval, da Komisija tega dejstva, na katerega je DPAG že opozoril v pritožbi z dne 3. decembra 2002, pri tem postopku ni upoštevala.
GLS went on to make numerous purchases in the European market.
Družba GLS je nato izvedla še številne prevzeme na evropskem trgu.
During the period 2000-2003, Royal Mail generated hardly any profits from which to finance these acquisitions.
Družba Royal Mail je v obdobju od leta 2000 do leta 2003 imela komaj kaj dobička, iz katerega bi lahko financirala te prevzeme.
If the loan financing these purchases was granted on terms which at that time were unobtainable on the market, then unlawful State aid would be involved which would have to be repaid.
Če je bilo posojilo, s katerim so se financirali ti prevzemi, odobreno pod pogoji, ki takrat na trgu niso bili dostopni, bi to pomenilo, da je bila vključena državna pomoč, ki bi jo bilo treba vrniti.
In respect of the loan facilities, DPAG considered it hard to see why Royal Mail did not finance the renewal of its postal infrastructure out of its recent years’ revenues (according to its own figures, in the 2005/2006 financial year Royal Mail booked an operating profit of GBP 355 million).
V zvezi s posojilnimi sredstvi je DPAG težko razumljivo, zakaj družba Royal Mail ni financirala obnovitve svoje poštne infrastrukture iz prihodkov zadnjih let (družba Royal je po lastnih podatkih v finančnem letu 2005/2006 iz poslovanja ustvarila 355 milijonov GBP dobička).
The regulator Postcomm had already taken the company’s universal service obligations extensively into account in its rate approvals.
Regulator Postcomm je pri odobritvah tarif že močno upošteval obveznosti univerzalne storitve podjetja.
It was therefore to be feared that the overall effect of the many support measures in the form of direct State payments, loans and approved pricing measures would be to overcompensate for the universal service costs in a way that is inadmissible under State aid rules.
Zato je obstajala bojazen, da bo skupni učinek številnih podpornih ukrepov v obliki neposrednih državnih plačil, posojil in odobrenih cenovnih ukrepov čezmerno izravnal stroške univerzalne storitve na način, ki v skladu s pravili glede državne pomoči ni dovoljen.
This could appreciably affect competition in the letter, parcel and express courier market in the UK, where DPAG achieved a turnover in excess of EUR 1000 million in 2006.
To bi lahko znatno vplivalo na konkurenco na trgu dostave pisem in paketov ter hitre pošte v Združenem kraljestvu, na katerem je DPAG v letu 2006 dosegel promet, ki presega 1000 milijonov EUR.
DPAG urged the Commission to subject the aid measures listed in the decision opening proceedings to a critical examination against the background of the numerous State support measures already approved for Royal Mail in particular.
DPAG je Komisijo pozval, naj ukrepe pomoči, navedene v odločitvi o začetku preiskave, kritično preuči v primerjavi z ozadjem številnih ukrepov državne pomoči, ki so že bili odobreni posebej za družbo Royal Mail.
In a first response to the opening of procedure, TNT Post UK Ltd (‘TNT’) fully supported the investigation as a Member of the Mail Competition Forum which had submitted a complaint on the pensions measure.
Družba TNT Post UK Ltd (v nadaljnjem besedilu: „TNT“) je v prvem odzivu na začetek postopka kot članica organa Mail Competition Forum, ki je vložil pritožbo v zvezi s pokojninskim ukrepom, preiskavo popolnoma podpirala.
As a market entrant, it was directly affected by any form of financing made on anything other than arms’ length, commercial terms.
Kot na udeleženko na trgu so nanjo neposredno vplivale vse oblike financiranja v zvezi z vsemi tržnimi pogoji, ki niso bili strogo poslovni.
Such financing would mean that Royal Mail is in a position to keep its prices artificially low, thus reducing TNT’s ability to compete.
Tako financiranje bi pomenilo, da lahko družba Royal Mail ohranja svoje nizke cene na umetno nizki ravni in tako zmanjša možnost družbe TNT za konkuriranje.
TNT further noted that, in a Royal Mail document dated March 2007, entitled ‘Royal Mail’s position on the interim review’, Royal Mail confirmed that re-financing was inter-dependent with settling price control and funding the pension deficit over 17 years.
Družba TNT je poleg tega opozorila, da je družba Royal Mail v dokumentu iz marca 2007 z naslovom „Stališče družbe Royal Mail do vmesnega pregleda (Royal Mail’s position on the interim review)“ potrdila, da je bilo vnovično financiranje medsebojno odvisno z ustanovitvijo nadzora cen in financiranjem pokojninskega primanjkljaja skozi 17-letno obdobje.
TNT understood this to be an unduly long period and, if the financing were shown to be on non-commercial investor or lender terms then it would indicate this recovery period to be too long.
Družba TNT je menila, da je to neupravičeno dolgo obdobje, in če bi se pokazalo, da financiranje ni bilo izvedeno pod tržnimi naložbenimi ali posojilnimi pogoji, bi to kazalo, da je to obdobje okrevanja predolgo.
Consequently, the price control caps set by the postal regulator Postcomm would have been set at too low a level.
Posledično naj bi bile zgornje meje za nadzor cen, ki jih je določil poštni regulator Postcomm, postavljene prenizko.
As a competitor, TNT said it was directly impacted by price caps on business mail which were set at a level assuming government financing and an unduly long recovery period for the pension fund deficit.
Družba TNT je kot konkurentka trdila, da so nanjo neposredno vplivale zgornje meje cen za poslovno pošto, določene na stopnji, pri kateri sta bili upoštevani vladno financiranje in nerazumno dolgo obdobje okrevanja za odpravo primanjkljaja v pokojninskem skladu.
TNT made a further submission which arrived well after the official deadline for comments but which the Commission has nonetheless taken into account.
Družba TNT je predložila še en dokument, ki je prispel veliko po uradnem roku za oddajo pripomb, vendar ga je Komisija kljub temu upoštevala.
TNT had undertaken analysis of the two sources of government funding made available to Royal Mail, namely (i) loan financing and (ii) the release of government controlled reserves to an escrow account accessible by the Royal Mail pension fund trustees.
Družba TNT je analizirala dva vira vladnega financiranja, ki sta bila na voljo družbi Royal Mail, in sicer (i) financiranja posojil ter (ii) sprostitve rezerv pod vladnim nadzorom na depozitni račun, do katerega so lahko dostopali skrbniki pokojninskega sklada družbe Royal Mail.
TNT’s conclusion was that both sources of funding would not have been made by a commercial investor.
Družba TNT je sklenila, da tržni vlagatelj ne bi ponudil nobenega od virov financiranja.
Concerning the 2001 loans, these were granted as unsecured loans in February 2001 with a duration close to, on average, 21 years and a fixed interest rate of, on average, 5,84 %.
Posojila iz leta 2001 so bila februarja 2001 dodeljena kot nezavarovana posojila s povprečnim trajanjem približno 21 let in fiksno obrestno mero povprečno 5,84 %.
In the month of issuance of the loans, the 20-year swap rate (versus GBP-LIBOR) ranged between 5,87 % and 6,12 %.
V mesecu izdaje posojila se je 20-letna menjalna obrestna mera (v nasprotju z Liborjem za GBP) gibala med 5,87 % in 6,12 %.
From this, it could be derived that the State loans must have been concluded at a discount from the prevailing inter-bank rates while under normal circumstances corporate unsecured debt pays a credit spread above the inter-bank rates.
Iz tega bi bilo mogoče sklepati, da so bila državna posojila dogovorjena po nižji ceni od prevladujočih medbančnih obrestnih mer, medtem ko bi bil v običajnih okoliščinah kreditni razmik pri plačevanju nezavarovanega dolga podjetja višji od medbančnih obrestnih mer.
That this also holds for Royal Mail is proven by the credit spread of 0,25 % above LIBOR that commercial banks charged to Royal Mail for the loans with a much shorter duration.
Da to drži tudi za družbo Royal Mail, dokazuje kreditni razmik v višini 0,25 % nad obrestno mero Libor, ki so ga komercialne banke zaračunale družbi Royal Mail za posojila za veliko krajša obdobja.
TNT also noted that credit spreads increase significantly for longer maturities.
Družba TNT je opozorila tudi, da se kreditni razmiki znatno povečajo, če je rok zapadlosti daljši.
Based on the information available, they would conclude that a commercial party would not have entered into the GBP 500 million of loans with Royal Mail on the conditions published.
Na podlagi dostopnih informacij menijo, da komercialna stranka pod objavljenimi pogoji družbi Royal Mail ne bi odobrila za 500 milijonov GBP posojil.
In fact, a loan granted on arm’s length market terms would have yielded a substantially higher interest rate.
Pravzaprav bi posojilo, dodeljeno pod prostimi tržnimi pogoji, imelo znatno višjo obrestno mero.
With regard to the bonds issued in 2003 (that is, the loan facilities), TNT viewed the situation somewhat differently since it appeared that the bonds were secured by assets of Royal Mail.
V zvezi z obveznicami, izdanimi leta 2003 (tj. posojilnimi sredstvi), je družba TNT položaj razumela nekoliko drugače, saj se je zdelo, da so bile obveznice zavarovane s sredstvi družbe Royal Mail.
Depending on the strength of such assets (which, based on the information available, seemed to be rather strong) the spread over LIBOR would be expected to be reduced.
Glede na vrednost takih sredstev (ki je po razpoložljivih informacijah precej velika) bi se pričakovalo, da se bo razmik do obrestne mere Libor zmanjšal.
Only the amount of such reduction would be questionable but since it was not clear to TNT what rate Royal Mail was actually paying, it was difficult to determine whether from a commercial perspective this can be justified by both Royal Mail and the UK Government.
Vprašljiva bi bila le višina takega zmanjšanja, a ker družba TNT ni vedela, kakšno obrestno mero družba Royal Mail pravzaprav plačuje, je bilo težko ugotoviti, ali lahko družba Royal Mail in vlada Združenega kraljestva s komercialnega stališča to utemeljita.
With regard to the loans issued in 2007, TNT noted that it was not possible to determine the commerciality of the terms because they were not public knowledge and, also, because the lending was apparently connected to the escrow account and existing loan facility.
V zvezi s posojili, dodeljenimi leta 2007, je družba TNT opozorila, da ni bilo mogoče oceniti poslovnosti pogojev, ker niso bili javno znani, pa tudi ker je bilo posojilo očitno povezano z depozitnim računom in obstoječimi posojilnimi sredstvi.
However, waiving default clauses under existing facilities (as was confirmed by the Royal Mail half-year regulatory accounts [8], at note 3 on page 18 ‘Royal Mail Group plc has net liabilities as at 24 September 2006, primarily as a result of the pension deficit within its main pension plan, the Royal Mail Pension Plan.
Vendar pa je bilo opuščanje običajnih določb pri obstoječih sredstvih (kot je bilo potrjeno v polletnih regulativnih računovodskih izkazih [8] v opombi 3 na strani 18 družbe Royal Mail, „družba Royal Mail Group plc ima dne 24. septembra 2006 neto obveznosti predvsem zaradi pokojninskega primanjkljaja v svoji glavni pokojninski shemi Royal Mail Pension Plan.
Consequently, Royal Mail is in breach of its borrowing facilities with Government, but has received formal waivers from the Department of Trade and Industry, in its capacity as lender’) and granting additional loan finance was something a commercial party would not under normal circumstances do.
Zato je družba Royal Mail kršila obveznosti do vlade v zvezi s posojilnimi sredstvi, vendar je od ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo v vlogi posojilodajalca prejela uradne oprostitve obveznosti.“) in odobritev dodatnih posojilnih sredstev nekaj, česar komercialna stranka v običajnih okoliščinah ne bi naredila.
With respect to the pensions measure, TNT questioned whether, at the incorporation of Royal Mail in March 2001, the transfer of the non-business assets and related equity known as the ‘mails reserves’ was commercial.
Družba TNT je v zvezi s pokojninskim ukrepom dvomila, ali je bil prenos neposlovnih sredstev in s tem povezanega kapitala, znanega pod imenom „poštne rezerve“, ob registraciji družbe Royal Mail marca 2001 tržen.
According to TNT, a commercial shareholder would very probably not have established a company which included a loan asset (where the debtor was the shareholder) and then provide a similar contribution in equity.
Po mnenju družbe TNT tržni delničar zelo verjetno ne bi ustanovil podjetja, ki bi vključevalo sposojena sredstva (pri čemer je upnik delničar), nato pa mu dodelil podoben prispevek v kapitalu.
TNT commented that when Netherlands operator KPN was ‘privatised’ in 1989, a similar arrangement had been in place but KPN’s opening balance sheet in 1989 as a Dutch NV did not contain either the associated assets or reserves.
Družba TNT je pripomnila, da so bili ob „privatizaciji“ nizozemskega operaterja KPN leta 1989 uporabljeni podobni postopki, vendar pa začetno bilančno stanje podjetja KPN v letu 1989 kot nizozemskega NV ni vključevala pripadajočih sredstev ali rezerv.
According to TNT, the transfer into the escrow account by the UK authorities acts as a guarantee towards the pension trust, of which the benefit to Royal Mail would be that it is able to recover the deficit over a longer funding period and to use their own funds to strengthen their business.
Po mnenju družbe TNT sredstva, ki so jih organi Združenega kraljestva prenesli na depozitni račun, delujejo kot jamstvo za pokojninski sklad, od katerega bi imela družba Royal Mail to korist, da bi lahko v daljšem obdobju financiranja odpravila primanjkljaj, lastna sredstva pa uporabila za krepitev poslovanja.
If Royal Mail had had to fund the deficit at once, depending on whether the pension liability in the balance sheet would already have reflected such deficit, they would have been confronted with a substantial loss and reduction of equity and, perhaps more importantly, a reduction of funds.
Če bi morala družba Royal Mail primanjkljaj odpraviti takoj, če bi pokojninska obveznost v bilančnem stanju že odražala tak primanjkljaj, bi se spopadla z znatno izgubo in zmanjšanjem lastniškega deleža, in kar je mogoče še pomembneje, zmanjšanjem sredstev.
In normal market conditions, if a company needs funds, it can borrow from the debt market or raise additional capital in the equity markets.
Pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji si podjetje kapital, če ga potrebuje, lahko sposodi na dolžniškem trgu ali zbere dodatni kapital na trgu lastniških vrednostnih papirjev.
In Royal Mail’s case, it appeared there was third possibility, namely, agreeing to a more lenient price cap in its price control with the regulator.
V primeru družbe Royal Mail je očitno obstajala tretja možnost, in sicer da se z regulatorjem dogovori o milejših zgornjih cenah storitev pri nadzoru cen.
Prices could increase by a substantial level without reaching abusively high levels.
Cene bi se lahko znatno povišale, ne da bi dosegle neprimerno visoko raven.
As Royal Mail’s consent was required to give effect to the price control, this was a matter within the power of Royal Mail and an option which was known to its shareholder.
Ker je bilo za veljavnost nadzora cen potrebno soglasje družbe Royal Mail, je bila ta zadeva v okviru pooblastil družbe Royal Mail in možnost, ki je bila znana njenemu delničarju.
TNT commented that to raise money in the debt market, a borrower needs a convincing argument that it is able to repay the debt from future cash flows.
Družba TNT je pripomnila, da posojilojemalec za pridobitev denarja na dolžniškem trgu potrebuje prepričljive argumente, da bo sposoben odplačati dolg iz prihodnjih denarnih tokov.
To raise money in the equity market, a company needs an even more convincing argument that it will generate a significant return for the shareholder over the invested total capital contribution.
Podjetje za pridobitev denarja na trgu lastniških vrednostnih papirjev potrebuje še boljše argumente, da bo iz vloženega skupnega kapitala za delničarja ustvarila znaten dobiček.
As the sole shareholder of Royal Mail, the UK Government should have undertaken all necessary investigations to satisfy itself that Royal Mail would be in better financial condition if it were allowed to complete its strategic plan.
Vlada Združenega kraljestva bi morala kot edina delničarka družbe Royal Mail izvesti vse potrebne preiskave, da bi se prepričala, da bi bila družba Royal Mail v boljšem finančnem položaju, če bi ji bilo dovoljeno izpolniti njen strateški načrt.
The critical issue was whether making further investment by releasing funds from reserves would make commercial sense or be tantamount to putting ‘good money after bad’.
Bistveno vprašanje je bilo, ali bi bile nadaljnje naložbe s sprostitvijo sredstev iz rezerv poslovno smiselne ali bi bilo to samo vnovično zapravljanje denarja.
A very clear analysis on the return to be derived from the additional investment would be paramount to any such decision.
Zelo natančna analiza dobička, ki bi bil pridobljen iz dodatnih naložb, bi bila za vsako tako odločitev bistvenega pomena.
In the absence of compelling evidence to demonstrate that the re-structuring plan — enabled by the release of funds from the reserves — would derive a commercial return on this investment for the shareholder, TNT believed that the decision would have been taken on non-commercial terms.
Družba TNT je menila, da bi bila taka odločitev brez trdnih dokazov, da bi načrt za prestrukturiranje – ki bi ga omogočila sprostitev sredstev iz rezerv – delničarju prinesel poslovni dobiček iz naložbe, sprejeta pod netržnimi pogoji.
In respect of the 2001 loan, the UK clarified that the origins of the loan were in 1999 when the Government endorsed Royal Mail’s strategy to make certain acquisitions in order to help the competitiveness of Royal Mail’s core business.
Združeno kraljestvo je v zvezi s posojilom iz leta 2001 pojasnilo, da začetki posojila segajo v leto 1999, ko je vlada podprla strategijo družbe Royal Mail, da izvede nekatere prevzeme, da bi pripomogla h konkurenčnosti osnovne dejavnosti družbe Royal Mail.
In agreeing to this strategy, the authorities in particular took into account the forecast return expected as Royal Mail worked towards achieving its strategic objective.
Organi so s soglašanjem s to strategijo zlasti upoštevali napovedani dobiček, pričakovan od družbe Royal Mail pri doseganju njenega strateškega cilja.
By the fifth year of its overall acquisition strategy, Royal Mail was forecasting growth in turnover of 40 % and 210 % increase in profits.
Družba Royal Mail je do petega leta izvajanja celotne prevzemne strategije napovedovala 40-odstotno rast prometa in 210-odstotno povečanje dobička.
In discussions about the acquisition funding, and in particular the acquisition of German Parcel which represented Royal Mail’s first major overseas acquisition, the UK authorities indicated that they wished Royal Mail to finance this transaction (and future transactions) by a loan from the Government’s NLF at commercial rates.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so med razpravami o financiranju prevzemov, zlasti prevzema družbe German Parcel, ki je bil prvi večji prevzem družbe Royal Mail v tujini, izrazili željo, da bi družba Royal Mail to transakcijo (in prihodnje transakcije) financirala s posojilom iz vladnega sklada NLF po tržnih obrestnih merah.
This reflected the Government’s intention to impose commercial disciplines on Royal Mail and also to ensure that it competed fairly with other postal operators in the postal sector as the market was gradually opened to competition.
S tem se je odražala namera vlade, da družbo Royal Mail prisili k poslovni disciplini in tudi zagotovi, da bo družba pošteno konkurirala drugim poštnim operaterjem v poštnem sektorju, medtem ko se je trg počasi odpiral za konkurenco.
Because the NLF was not in a position to provide the loans in 1999, the UK Government agreed that Royal Mail would fund the transactions temporarily through the use of the cash reserves on its balance sheet, following UK policy that publicly owned bodies should generally not borrow from private capital markets.
Ker sklad NLF ni mogel zagotoviti posojil leta 1999, se je vlada Združenega kraljestva strinjala, da družba Royal Mail začasno financira transakcije z denarnimi rezervami iz svojega bilančnega stanja v skladu s politiko Združenega kraljestva, da si organi v javni lasti praviloma ne smejo sposojati denarja na zasebnem finančnem trgu.
The interest on the NLF loan would be applied from the dates [9] Royal Mail drew down from its cash reserves as if the loan had been in place from that point (as originally intended) to leave the company neutral to the interim financing arrangement.
Obresti od posojila sklada NLF naj bi začele veljati z datumi [9], ko bi družba Royal Mail črpala sredstva iz svojih denarnih rezerv, kot da bi bilo posojilo izplačano takrat (kot je bilo prvotno načrtovano), da bi družba ostala nevtralna do začasnega sporazuma o financiranju.
The UK provided the Commission with the letter dated 12 January 1999 by which the UK authorities gave Royal Mail their approval of the German Parcel acquisition, which specified how the financing would be provided.
Združeno kraljestvo je Komisiji poslalo dopis z dne 12. januarja 1999, s katerim so organi Združenega kraljestva družbi Royal Mail odobrili soglasje za prevzem družbe German Parcel in ki je tudi določalo, kako bo zagotovljeno financiranje.
In order to consider whether the proposed acquisitions by Royal Mail were strategically and commercially sensible, the UK authorities enlisted the assistance of an external adviser for the German Parcel acquisition.
Da bi proučili, ali bodo predlagani prevzemi družbe Royal Mail strateško in poslovno smiselni, so organi Združenega kraljestva za pomoč pri prevzemu družbe German Parcel najeli zunanjega svetovalca.
For subsequent acquisitions which were also funded by the GBP 500 million loan and requiring the consent of the UK authorities, advice was sought from Deloitte & Touche LLP (‘Deloitte’), who evaluated each acquisition on an individual basis, before the UK authorities permitted the acquisitions concerned to go ahead.
Za poznejše prevzeme, ki so se prav tako financirali iz posojila v višini 500 milijonov GBP in za katere je bilo potrebno soglasje organov Združenega kraljestva, je svetovanje zagotavljala družba Deloitte & Touche LLP (v nadaljnjem besedilu: „Deloitte“), ki je proučila vsak prevzem posebej, preden so organi Združenega kraljestva dovolili izvedbo prevzema.
Deloitte did not advise against any of the acquisitions.
Družba Deloitte ni odsvetovala nobenega prevzema.
Deloitte was also retained to help determine commercial interest rates on advances from the NLF to Royal Mail and in particular on the credit rating for Royal Mail based on assessing its creditworthiness as a standalone business, independent of Government ownership.
Družba Deloitte je bila najeta tudi, da bi pomagala določiti tržne obrestne mere za predplačila sklada NLF družbi Royal Mail in zlasti za bonitetno oceno družbe Royal Mail na podlagi ocene njene kreditne sposobnosti kot samostojnega podjetja brez lastniškega deleža države.
Deloitte assessed RM’s credit risk as a function of business and financial risks, and using comparators and financial ratios, determined a credit rating of between AA and AA.
Družba Deloitte je ocenila kreditno tveganje za družbo RM kot funkcijo poslovnega in finančnega tveganja ter je s primerjavami in finančnimi kazalniki ugotovila, da je bonitetna ocena družbe med AA in AA.