natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
An international organisation, as referred to in paragraph 2, shall be authorised by the Administrative Committee to take on responsibility for the effective organisation and functioning of an international guarantee system provided that it accepts this responsibility.
Upravni odbor pooblasti mednarodno organizacijo iz odstavka 2, da prevzame odgovornost za učinkovito organizacijo in delovanje mednarodnega garancijskega sistema, pod pogojem, da ta to odgovornost sprejme.
concerning the conclusion of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of South Africa, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union
o sklenitvi Dodatnega protokola k Sporazumu o trgovini, razvoju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Republiko Južno Afriko na drugi zaradi upoštevanja pristopa Republike Bolgarije in Romunije k Evropski uniji
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 310 thereof, in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 300(2), first subparagraph, and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti člena 310 Pogodbe v povezavi z drugim stavkom prvega pododstavka člena 300(2) ter z drugim pododstavkom člena 300(3) Pogodbe,
The Additional Protocol to the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of South Africa, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union (hereafter referred to as the Additional Protocol), was signed on behalf of the Community and the Member States on 10 October 2007 in accordance with Council Decision 2008/74/EC of 9 October 2007 on the signing and provisional application of an Additional Protocol to the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of South Africa, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union [2].
Dodatni protokol k Sporazumu o trgovini, razvoju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Republiko Južno Afriko na drugi zaradi upoštevanja pristopa Republike Bolgarije in Romunije k Evropski uniji (v nadaljnjem besedilu „Dodatni protokol“) je bil podpisan v imenu Skupnosti in držav članic 10. oktobra 2007 v skladu s Sklepom Sveta 2008/74/ES z dne 9. oktobra 2007 o podpisu in začasni uporabi Dodatnega protokola k Sporazumu o trgovini, razvoju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Republiko Južno Afriko na drugi zaradi upoštevanja pristopa Republike Bolgarije in Romunije k Evropski uniji [2].
The Additional Protocol should be approved,
Dodatni protokol bi bilo treba odobriti –
The Additional Protocol is hereby approved on behalf of the Community and its Member States.
Dodatni protokol se odobri v imenu Skupnosti in njenih držav članic.
The text of the Additional Protocol is attached to this Decision [3].Article 2
Besedilo Dodatnega protokola je priloženo temu sklepu [3].Člen 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to deposit on behalf of the European Community and its Member States the instrument of approval provided for in Article 6.2 of the Additional Protocol, in order to express the consent of the Community and its Member States to be bound.
Predsednik Sveta je pooblaščen, da imenuje osebo(-e), pooblaščeno(-e), da v imenu Evropske skupnosti in njenih držav članic deponira listino o odobritvi, predvideno v členu 6.2 Dodatnega protokola, s čimer se izrazi soglasje Skupnosti in njenih držav članic za tako zavezo.
Assent of 10 March 2009 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
Soglasje z dne 10. marca 2009 (še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu).
OJ L 22, 25.1.2008, p. 11.
UL L 22, 25.1.2008, str. 11.
OJ L 22, 25.1.2008, p. 13.
UL L 22, 25.1.2008, str. 13.
on State aid C 44/07 (ex N 460/07) which France is planning to implement for FagorBrandt
o državni pomoči C 44/07 (ex N 460/07) ki jo Francija namerava izvajati za podjetje FagorBrandt
(notified under document number C(2008) 5995)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2008) 5995)
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above [1] and having regard to their comments,
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi členi [1], in ob upoštevanju teh pripomb,
By letter dated 6 August 2007, France notified the Commission of restructuring aid for the FagorBrandt group.
Francija je z dopisom z dne 6. avgusta 2007 Komisiji priglasila pomoč za prestrukturiranje za skupino FagorBrandt.
By letter dated 10 October 2007, the Commission informed France of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 10. oktobra 2007 Francijo obvestila o odločitvi, da v zvezi s priglašeno pomočjo sproži postopek na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
The Commission’s decision to initiate the procedure (hereinafter the opening decision) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2].
Odločitev Komisije, da sproži postopek (v nadaljnjem besedilu: odločitev o sprožitvi postopka), je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2].
The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Komisija je pozvala vse zainteresirane strani, naj predložijo pripombe o zadevni pomoči.
The Commission received comments from three interested parties, namely two competitors and the aid recipient.
Komisija je prejela pripombe treh zainteresiranih strani, in sicer dveh konkurentov in upravičenca do pomoči.
By letter dated 13 November 2007, France submitted to the Commission its comments on the opening decision.
Francija je z dopisom z dne 13. novembra 2007 Komisiji sporočila pripombe v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka.
On 18 March 2008, a meeting was held between the Commission’s departments, the French authorities and FagorBrandt.
Sestanek med službami Komisije, francoskimi organi in skupino FagorBrandt je bil 18. marca 2008.
The aid at issue is restructuring aid.
Zadevna pomoč je pomoč za prestrukturiranje.
It would amount to EUR 31 million, to be made available by the French Ministry of Economic Affairs, Finance and Employment.
Predvideni znesek pomoči je 31 milijonov EUR. Ta sredstva bo zagotovilo francosko ministrstvo za gospodarstvo, finance in zaposlovanje.
The aid recipient is FagorBrandt SA, which has several subsidiaries that conduct its production and marketing business.
Upravičenec do pomoči je FagorBrandt S.A., ki ima več podružnic, v katerih izvajajo dejavnosti proizvodnje in trženja.
The group (hereinafter FagorBrandt) belongs indirectly to Fagor Electrodomésticos S. Coop (hereinafter Fagor), a cooperative incorporated under Spanish law.
Ta skupina (v nadaljnjem besedilu: FagorBrandt) je v posredni lasti družbe Fagor Electrodomésticos S. Coop (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Fagor), zadruge, ustanovljene po španskem pravu.
The cooperative’s capital is divided among approximately 3500 members (worker-cooperators), none of whom may hold more than 25 %.
Kapital navedene zadruge je porazdeljen med približno 3500 članov (zaposlenih – družbenikov), od katerih nihče ne more imeti v lasti več kot 25 % kapitala zadruge.
Fagor in turn forms part of a grouping of cooperatives called Mondragón Corporación Cooperativa (hereinafter MCC), within which each cooperative retains its legal and financial autonomy.
Fagor je tudi v skupini zadrug Mondragón Corporación Cooperativa (v nadaljnjem besedilu: MCC), znotraj katere vsaka zadruga ohranja svojo pravno in finančno neodvisnost.
Fagor belongs to the ‘Household’ division of MCC’s ‘Industry’ sectoral group.
Fagor spada v oddelek „Proizvodi za dom“ sektorske skupine „Industrija“ znotraj skupine MCC.
In 2007 FagorBrandt achieved a turnover of EUR 903 million. It is present in all segments of the large electrical household appliance market, which can be broken down into three large product families: washing appliances (dishwashers, washing machines, tumble dryers, washer-dryers), refrigeration appliances (refrigerators, chest and upright freezers) and cooking appliances (conventional ovens, microwave ovens, cookers, hobs, extractor hoods).
Promet skupine FagorBrandt je v letu 2007 znašal 903 milijone EUR. Prisotna je v vseh kategorijah bele tehnike, zajema pa tri velike družine izdelkov: za pomivanje in pranje (pomivalni stroji, pralni stroji, sušilni stroji, pralno-sušilni stroji), hlajenje (hladilniki, zamrzovalne skrinje in zamrzovalne omare) in kuhanje (običajne pečice, mikrovalovne pečice, štedilniki, kuhalne plošče, nape).
In section 2.1 of the opening decision, the Commission provided further information on the aid recipient and explained the reasons for its difficulties.
Komisija je v oddelku 2.1 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka navedla več podatkov o upravičencu in pojasnila razloge za njegove težave.
The Commission expressed doubts for the following five reasons: (i) a risk of circumvention of the prohibition on restructuring aid to newly created firms; (ii) a risk of circumvention of the obligation to reimburse incompatible aid; (iii) doubt about the restoration of the company’s long-term viability; (iv) inadequacy of the compensatory measures; and (v) doubt about whether the aid was limited to the necessary minimum, and in particular about the aid recipient’s contribution.
Komisija je imela pomisleke iz naslednjih petih razlogov: (i) nevarnosti izigravanja prepovedi pomoči za prestrukturiranje za nova podjetja; (ii) nevarnosti izigravanja obveznosti vračila nezdružljive pomoči; (iii) dvoma o ponovni vzpostavitvi dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja podjetja; (iv) nezadostnosti izravnalnih ukrepov; (v) dvoma o omejitvi pomoči na najmanjšo potrebno in še zlasti o prispevku upravičenca.
Risk of circumvention of the prohibition on restructuring aid to newly created firms
Nevarnost izigravanja prepovedi pomoči za prestrukturiranje za nova podjetja
FagorBrandt was established in January 2002 and was therefore, for the purposes of point 12 of the Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (hereinafter the restructuring guidelines) [4], a newly created firm until January 2005, that is, three years after it was set up.
Ker je bilo podjetje FagorBrandt ustanovljeno januarja 2002, je v smislu odstavka 12 Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice za prestrukturiranje) [4] veljalo za novo podjetje do januarja 2005, to je do treh let po ustanovitvi.
This means that, both at the time when the company benefited from the tax exemption provided for in Article 44 septies of the French General Tax Code (hereinafter the Article 44 septies aid) and at the time when, in December 2003, the Commission declared that aid incompatible and ordered its recovery [5], FagorBrandt was a newly created firm.
To pomeni, da je bilo podjetje FagorBrandt novo podjetje ob davčni oprostitvi, ki je zanj obveljala na podlagi člena 44f splošnega davčnega zakonika (v nadaljnjem besedilu: pomoč na podlagi člena 44f), pa tudi decembra 2003, ko je Komisija navedeno pomoč razglasila za nezdružljivo in odredila njeno vračilo [5].
Pursuant to point 12 of the restructuring guidelines, it was therefore ineligible for restructuring aid.
V skladu z odstavkom 12 smernic za prestrukturiranje torej ni bilo upravičeno do pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
Consequently, the delay by France in recovering the aid declared incompatible in December 2003 until the time when the company no longer constituted a newly created firm and became eligible for restructuring aid may constitute a circumvention of the prohibition in point 12 of the restructuring guidelines.
Zato bi lahko dejstvo, da je Francija tako dolgo odlašala z izterjavo pomoči, decembra 2003 razglašene za nezdružljivo, da se podjetje ni več štelo za novo podjetje in je bilo tako upravičeno do pomoči za prestrukturiranje, pomenilo izigravanje prepovedi iz odstavka 12 smernic za prestrukturiranje.
Risk of circumvention of the obligation to reimburse incompatible aid
Nevarnost izigravanja obveznosti vračila nezdružljive pomoči
Observing that the notified aid seemed to serve largely to finance the reimbursement of the Article 44 septies aid, the Commission expressed concerns that it might constitute a circumvention of the obligation to reimburse that incompatible aid, undermining and rendering nugatory its recovery.
Z ugotovitvijo, da se zdi, da je večina priglašene pomoči namenjena financiranju vračila pomoči na podlagi člena 44f, je Komisija izrazila sum, da priglašena pomoč pomeni izigravanje obveznosti vračila navedene nezdružljive pomoči, njeni izterjavi pa jemlje bistvo in polni učinek.
Doubts about the company’s long-term viability
Dvomi o dolgoročni sposobnosti preživetja podjetja
As regards the restoration of the company’s long-term viability, the Commission expressed two concerns.
Komisija je imela glede ponovne vzpostavitve dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja podjetja dva pomisleka.
First, observing that the turnover forecast for 2007 was approximately 20 % up on the previous year, it wondered what factors that forecast was based on.
Po eni strani je ob ugotovitvi, da je bil pričakovani promet za leto 2007 za približno 20 % večji v primerjavi z letom prej, vprašala, na katerih podatkih je temeljila ta napoved.
Secondly, it noted that the restructuring plan did not indicate how FagorBrandt intended to reimburse the incompatible aid received by its Italian subsidiary.
Po drugi strani je Komisija opozorila, da v načrtu prestrukturiranja ni navedeno, kako namerava FagorBrandt vrniti nezdružljivo pomoč, ki jo je prejela njena italijanska podružnica.
Inadequacy of the compensatory measures
Nezadostnost izravnalnih ukrepov
The Commission expressed doubts as to whether the non-implementation of compensatory measures additional to those already taken as part of the restructuring plan was acceptable.
Komisija je tudi dvomila, ali je sprejemljivo, da se poleg že sprejetih izravnalnih ukrepov na podlagi načrta prestrukturiranja ne izvajajo dodatni izravnalni ukrepi.
It bore in mind the following:
Komisija je opozorila, da:
the restructuring guidelines (points 38 to 41) oblige aid recipients fulfilling the ‘large enterprise’ criterion to take compensatory measures;
smernice za prestrukturiranje (odstavki od 38 do 41) nalagajo upravičencem, ki izpolnjujejo merilo za „veliko podjetje“, da morajo uvesti izravnalne ukrepe;
without aid, FagorBrandt would be forced out of the market, but on the other hand FagorBrandt’s competitors are for the most part European; the disappearance of FagorBrandt would accordingly enable its European competitors to increase their sales and output significantly;
bi po eni strani podjetje FagorBrandt brez pomoči zapustilo trg, po drugi strani pa so njegovi konkurenti večinoma evropska podjetja. Zaradi izginotja podjetja FagorBrandt bi lahko evropski konkurenti bistveno povečali svojo proizvodnjo in prodajo;
it would appear, in the light of point 40 of the restructuring guidelines, that not all the measures already taken can be counted as compensatory measures; and
se zdi, da vseh že izvedenih ukrepov na podlagi odstavka 40 smernic za prestrukturiranje ni mogoče šteti za izravnalne ukrepe;
the guidelines applicable when the Bull [6] and Euromoteurs [7] cases cited by France were examined did not require companies to take compensatory measures.
je sama ne nazadnje poudarila, da se s smernicami, ki so se uporabljale ob proučitvi primerov Bull [6] in Euromoteurs [7], na katera se sklicuje Francija, niso nalagale obveznosti izvajanja izravnalnih ukrepov.
There were also other major differences between those cases and the present one.
Opozorila je tudi na druge večje razlike med navedenima primeroma in tem primerom.
Doubts about the aid recipient’s contribution
Dvomi o prispevku upravičenca
Finally, the Commission expressed doubts about whether the requirements of points 43 and 44 of the restructuring guidelines were met.
Nazadnje je Komisija izrazila dvome o izpolnitvi pogojev iz členov 43 in 44 smernic za prestrukturiranje.
Firstly, the French authorities had not included the reimbursement of the Article 44 septies aid in the costs of restructuring, and secondly they had not explained where certain amounts classed as ‘recipient’s own share’ came from.
Po eni strani francoski organi vračila pomoči na podlagi člena 44f niso vključili v stroške prestrukturiranja, po drugi strani pa niso pojasnili izvora nekaterih zneskov, ki se štejejo za „lastni strošek upravičenca“.
Comments from Electrolux
Pripombe podjetja Electrolux
Electrolux states that, in order to meet the challenges of global competition, it has implemented major and very costly restructuring plans.
Electrolux navaja, da je za spopadanje z izzivi svetovne konkurence uvedel obsežne in zelo drage načrte prestrukturiranja.
To remain competitive, the company has had to take drastic measures such as closing eight plants in western Europe, the output of which has been mainly relocated to other existing plants in Europe and to new plants in Poland and Hungary.
Za ohranitev konkurenčnosti je bilo podjetje prisiljeno sprejeti drastične ukrepe, kot je zaprtje osmih tovarn v zahodni Evropi, katerih proizvodnja se je v glavnem preselila v druge že delujoče tovarne po Evropi ter nove tovarne na Poljskem in Madžarskem.
Most companies in the large electrical household appliances sector have carried out similar restructuring operations.
Večina podjetij iz sektorja bele tehnike je izvedla podobne operativne ukrepe prestrukturiranja.
Consequently, Electrolux is unhappy at the possibility of FagorBrandt receiving a subsidy to help it cope with a situation which the rest of the sector is having to manage without similar assistance.
Zato navedeno podjetje negoduje, ker bi podjetje FagorBrandt lahko prejelo podporo za reševanje iz položaja, ki ga mora preostali sektor urediti brez podobne pomoči.
The aid will distort competition at other companies’ expense.
Pomoč naj bi izkrivljala konkurenco v škodo drugih podjetij.
Comments from the second competitor
Pripombe drugega konkurenta
First of all, this competitor, which wishes to remain anonymous, considers that the planned aid will not enable the recipient to restore its long-term viability.
Prvič, ta konkurent, ki želi ostati anonimen, meni, da načrtovana pomoč podjetju ne bo omogočila ponovne vzpostavitve dolgoročne sposobnosti preživetja.
It is of the opinion that substantial industrial reorganisation is needed if the company is to survive.
Po njegovem mnenju je za zagotovitev preživetja podjetja nujno potrebna obsežna industrijska reorganizacija.
It believes FagorBrandt will have insufficient means with which to finance the necessary investment.
Vendar ta konkurent meni, da FagorBrandt nima na voljo sredstev za financiranje potrebnih naložb.
Nor will the aid enable FagorBrandt to attain the size needed to improve its position in negotiations with the major distributors, which prefer suppliers with a larger presence in the European Union.
Prav tako pomoč podjetju FagorBrandt ne bo pomagala doseči zadostne velikosti, da bi lahko izboljšalo svoj položaj v pogajanjih z velikimi distributerji, ki so bolj naklonjeni dobaviteljem z večjo prisotnostjo v Evropski uniji.
Secondly, it considers that the aid is not limited to the necessary minimum inasmuch as FagorBrandt could find the financing needed for its restructuring from its shareholder and from the cooperative to which its shareholder belongs (MCC, of which the bank Caja Laboral forms part).
Drugič, konkurent meni, da pomoč ni omejena na najmanjšo potrebno, saj bi lahko podjetje FagorBrandt potrebna finančna sredstva za prestrukturiranje dobilo pri svojem delničarju in v zadrugi (to je skupini MCC, katere del je banka Caja Laboral), v katero je slednji vključen.
Thirdly, it considers that the aid is likely to affect competition and trade between Member States.
Tretjič, konkurent meni, da bi pomoč lahko prizadela konkurenco in trgovino med državami članicami.
Most companies in the sector have their manufacturing base in Europe and can therefore be considered European.
Po eni strani ima večina podjetij iz tega sektorja proizvodnjo v Evropi, zato se lahko štejejo za evropska podjetja.
Asian and Turkish competitors have a significant presence only in certain product areas.
Azijski in turški konkurenti so pomembno prisotni samo pri nekaterih proizvodih.
FagorBrandt is the fifth largest operator at European level with a strong position in the French, Spanish and Polish markets.
Po drugi strani je FagorBrandt peti akter na evropski ravni in ima močan položaj na francoskem, španskem in poljskem trgu.
The competitor considers, therefore, that, in the absence of compensatory measures, the aid cannot be declared compatible by the Commission.
Zato konkurent meni, da brez izravnalnih ukrepov Komisija pomoči ne more razglasiti za združljivo.
Fourthly, the granting in the past by France and Italy of unlawful aid leads to two conclusions: firstly, FagorBrandt’s difficulties are recurring, raising the question of its viability; and secondly, the notified aid will probably be used to reimburse unlawful aid, thereby circumventing the reimbursement obligation.
Četrtič, pretekla dodelitev nezakonitih pomoči Francije in Italije vodi do dveh ugotovitev: po eni strani se težave podjetja FagorBrandt ponavljajo, kar postavlja pod vprašaj njegovo sposobnost preživetja; po drugi strani pa se bo priglašena pomoč verjetno uporabila za vračilo nezakonitih pomoči, kar bi pomenilo izigranje obveznosti vračila.
Comments from FagorBrandt
Pripombe skupine FagorBrandt
FagorBrandt’s comments are similar to those of the French authorities, which are summarised below.
Pripombe skupine FagorBrandt so podobne pripombam francoskih organov, ki so povzete v nadaljevanju.
COMMENTS FROM FRANCE
STALIŠČA FRANCIJE
Comments from France on the opening decision
Stališča Francije v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka
Regarding a possible circumvention of the prohibition on restructuring aid to newly created firms, the French authorities do not contest that, in accordance with point 12 of the restructuring guidelines, FagorBrandt was to be considered ‘a newly created firm’ during the three years following its formation.
Kar zadeva morebitno izigravanje prepovedi pomoči za prestrukturiranje za nova podjetja, francoski organi ne zanikajo, da je treba FagorBrandt v skladu z odstavkom 12 smernic za prestrukturiranje v prvih treh letih po ustanovitvi šteti za „novo podjetje“.
They point out, however, that the question of the possibility of restructuring aid to FagorBrandt started to be posed only in 2006, following the difficulties first encountered in 2004 and the company’s worsening financial situation in 2005, that is to say during the fifth year of its existence.
Vendar opozarjajo, da je vprašanje morebitne pomoči za prestrukturiranje za FagorBrandt postalo aktualno šele leta 2006, po težavah, ki so se začele leta 2004, in glede na poslabšanje njegovega finančnega položaja od leta 2005, to je v petem letu po ustanovitvi.
Regarding the possibility that the notified aid deprives the reimbursement obligation of its effectiveness, France states that the company’s difficulties are not caused only by the reimbursement of the aid.
V zvezi z možnostjo, da priglašena pomoč jemlje polni učinek obveznosti vračila, Francija opozarja, da podjetje ni v težavah samo zaradi vračila pomoči.
France concludes from this that the company is eligible on this score for restructuring aid if the other conditions for such aid are otherwise met.
Francija iz tega sklepa, da je podjetje zato upravičeno do pomoči za prestrukturiranje, če so izpolnjeni tudi drugi pogoji za tako pomoč.