natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Concerning the non-submission of annual reports on the implementation of the investment plan, Greece considers that this fact is not of sufficient importance to prevent the modification of the plan.
V zvezi z nepredložitvijo letnih poročil o izvajanju naložbenega načrta Grčija meni, da to dejstvo ni toliko pomembno, da bi preprečilo spremembo načrta.
Article 296 of the Treaty
Člen 296 Pogodbe
Before undertaking an assessment of the compatibility under Article 87 and 88 of the Treaty, the applicability of Article 296 Treaty needs to be considered.
Pred ocenjevanjem združljivosti na podlagi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe je treba proučiti uporabo člena 296 Pogodbe.
In this respect, the Commission observes the following elements.
V zvezi s tem Komisija ugotavlja naslednje.
First, the investment aid had been notified by Greece in 1997 in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Prvič, Grčija je naložbeno pomoč priglasila leta 1997 v skladu s postopkom, določenim v členu 88(3) Pogodbe.
By notifying the aid, Greece acknowledged that the investment plan was mainly related to the civil activities of HSY (i.e. ship repair and ship building), because if the plan had been related to military activities and had been important for national security, Greece could have invoked Article 296 of the Treaty at the time and would not have had to notify this investment aid.
S priglasitvijo pomoči je Grčija priznala, da se naložbeni načrt v glavnem nanaša na civilne dejavnosti podjetja HSY (tj. popravilo in gradnja ladij), kajti če bi se nanašal na vojaške dejavnosti in bi bil pomemben za državno varnost, bi se Grčija lahko v tistem času sklicevala na člen 296 Pogodbe ES in ji naložbene pomoči ne bi bilo treba priglasiti.
Moreover, Greece did not contest the approval decision in which the Commission assessed the notified aid under the State aid rules.
Poleg tega Grčija ni izpodbijala odločbe o odobritvi, v kateri je Komisija priglašeno pomoč ocenila na podlagi pravil od državni pomoči.
Finally, Greece has not invoked Article 296 in its reaction to the opening decision.
Grčija se v svojem odzivu na odločbo o sprožitvi postopka tudi ni sklicevala na člen 296.
The prior elements are sufficient to conclude that the investment plan did not affect the security interests of Greece and any aid financing the investment plan can be dealt with under State aid rules laid down in Article 87 and 88 of the Treaty.
Na podlagi navedenih elementov je že mogoče sklepati, da naložbeni načrt ni vplival na varnostne interese Grčije in da je vsako pomoč za financiranje naložbenega načrta mogoče obravnavati na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči, določenih v členih 87 in 88 Pogodbe.
Existence of a misuse of the aid
Dokaz zlorabe pomoči
The three doubts raised in the opening decision will be analysed successively.
Trije pomisleki, izraženi v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka, bodo analizirani eden za drugim.
As regards the breach of the condition that loans have to be raised at market rates and without State guarantees, the Commission considers that this breach affects the compatibility of the latter measures and not the compatibility of the investment aid.
Kar zadeva kršitev pogoja, da je treba posojila najeti po tržnih obrestnih merah in brez državnih poroštev, Komisija meni, da ta kršitev vpliva na združljivost slednjih ukrepov in ne na združljivost naložbene pomoči.
Indeed, the purpose of such a condition is to avoid the granting of additional aid in favour of the investment programme (i.e. to avoid the accumulation of aid above the intensity laid down in the decision N 401/97).
Namen tega pogoja je dejansko preprečiti odobritev dodatne pomoči v korist naložbenega načrta (tj. preprečiti kopičenje pomoči nad intenzivnostjo, določeno v odločbi N 401/97).
Anyway, as will be explained later in the present decision, the Commission finds on the basis of other legal grounds that the State guarantee granted to HSY constitutes incompatible aid that has to be recovered.
V vsakem primeru, kot bo pojasnjeno kasneje v tej odločbi, Komisija na podlagi drugih pravnih razlogov ugotavlja, da državno poroštvo, odobreno podjetju HSY, pomeni nezdružljivo pomoč, ki jo je treba povrniti.
As regards the loans, the Commission also finds that the aid element has to be recovered.
Kar zadeva posojila, Komisija prav tako ugotavlja, da je treba element pomoči povrniti.
Since the aid elements will be recovered, the initial situation will be restored and the financing costs of HSY will not be lower than the market rate.
Ker bodo elementi pomoči povrnjeni, se bo obnovil začetni položaj, stroški financiranja podjetja HSY pa ne bodo nižji od tržne obrestne mere.
In other words, by means of these recoveries, the objective of the condition laid down in decision N 401/97 will be fulfilled, namely to avoid the granting of additional aid by means of financing granted to HSY below market price.
Z drugimi besedami, s temi povrnitvami bo izpolnjen namen pogoja, določenega v odločbi N 401/97, in sicer preprečiti dodatno pomoč v obliki finančnih sredstev, ki so bila podjetju HSY odobrena pod tržno ceno.
The Commission therefore rejects Elefsis’ aforementioned claim that both the aid element in the loans and guarantee and the investment aid endorsed by decision N 401/97 have to be recovered.
Komisija zato zavrača zgoraj navedeno trditev podjetja Elefsis, da je treba povrniti tako element pomoči v posojilih in poroštvu kot tudi naložbeno pomoč, ki je bila odobrena z odločbo N 401/97.
As regards the absence of yearly reporting raised in the opening decision, the Commission considers that the non-submission of yearly reports does not as such constitute a misuse of the aid.
Kar zadeva odsotnost letnega poročanja, navedenega v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka, Komisija meni, da nepredložitev letnih poročil sama po sebi ne pomeni zlorabe pomoči.
Indeed, it does not change the characteristics of the aid, its effect or the characteristics of the investment programme.
To dejansko ne spreminja značilnosti pomoči, njenega učinka ali značilnosti naložbenega načrta.
However, since Greece has not provided this information in due time and has therefore not informed the Commission about the delays at the moment when they occurred, it has prevented the Commission from adopting a decision on these issues at the appropriate moment.
Ker pa Grčija teh informacij ni predložila pravočasno in ker tudi Komisije ni pravočasno obvestila o zamudah, je Komisiji preprečila, da bi sprejela odločitev o teh vprašanjih v ustreznem času.
Consequently, this absence of reporting entails that the burden of proof falls on Greece: it is for Greece to prove that the Commission would have endorsed the successive prolongations of the period to implement the investment programme.
Zato ta odsotnost poročanja pomeni, da dokazno breme nosi Grčija: Grčija je namreč tista, ki mora dokazati, da bi Komisija odobrila več zapovrstnih podaljšanj roka za izvedbo naložbenega načrta.
As regards the delayed implementation of the investment plan, which was the main doubt raised in the opening decision, the Commission has reached the following conclusion.
Kar zadeva zamudo pri izvajanju naložbenega načrta, ki je predstavljala glavni sum, izražen v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka, je Komisija sprejela naslednji sklep.
By Decision N 401/97, the Commission authorised aid to support investments which were ‘linked to a restructuring plan’, as requested by chapter III ‘Restructuring aid’ of Directive 90/684/EEC.
Z odločbo N 104/97 je Komisija odobrila pomoč za naložbe, ki so bile „povezane z načrtom prestrukturiranja“, kot določa poglavje III „Pomoč za prestrukturiranje“ Direktive 90/684/EGS.
As indicated in the description of the business plan in Decision N 401/97, the investment plan was in fact not simply linked to the restructuring; it was itself one of the two pillars of the restructuring because the yard had made no investments in the previous years and needed to replace ‘old and obsolete equipment with new technology’ to restore its competitiveness.
Kot je navedeno v opisu poslovnega načrta v odločbi N 401/97, naložbeni načrt dejansko ni bil zgolj povezan s prestrukturiranjem; sam po sebi je tvoril enega od dveh stebrov prestrukturiranja, saj ladjedelnica v predhodnih letih ni izvršila nobenih naložb in je morala za namen obnovitve konkurenčnosti „zamenjati staro in izrabljeno opremo z novo, posodobljeno tehnologijo“.
In section 2.1 of their letter of 20 October 2004, the Greek authorities confirm that the investment programme aimed at restoring the competitiveness of HSY, by means of better productivity and modernisation, in order to become a competitive firm at the national and international level.
V oddelku 2.1 dopisa z dne 20. oktobra 2004 grški organi potrjujejo, da je bil cilj naložbenega načrta obnoviti konkurenčnost podjetja HSY s pomočjo večje produktivnosti in modernizacije, da bi podjetje lahko konkuriralo tako na državni kot mednarodni ravni.
Greece also confirms that the purpose was to replace outdated and unused equipments by new equipment with modern technology.
Grčija potrjuje tudi namero po zamenjavi izrabljene in neuporabljene opreme z novo opremo s sodobno tehnologijo.
In conclusion, from decision N 401/97 itself as well as from Greece’s letters, it appears that the investment programme had a crucial role in the restructuring plan and in the restoration of viability.
Na podlagi odločbe N 401/97 kot tudi dopisov Grčije se torej zdi, da je imel naložbeni načrt ključno vlogo v načrtu prestrukturiranja in pri obnovitvi sposobnosti preživetja.
Since it was ‘linked to a restructuring plan’ and crucial for the return to viability, it is obvious that the implementation of the investment programme could not be delayed significantly.
Ker je bil „povezan z načrtom prestrukturiranja“ in ključnega pomena za obnovitev sposobnosti preživetja, je očitno, da pri njegovem izvajanju ne bi smelo priti do večjih zamud.
In fact, its implementation was urgent in order to allow restoration of viability.
Izvajanje načrta je bilo dejansko nujno, da bi se omogočila obnovitev sposobnosti preživetja.
In conclusion, the Commission authorised an aid to support an investment programme that had to be implemented in a precise period; it did not authorise an aid to support any investment project carried out in the future.
Komisija je torej odobrila pomoč za naložbeni načrt, ki bi moral biti izveden v točno določenem obdobju, ni pa odobrila pomoči za kakršne koli naložbene projekte, ki bi se izvajali v prihodnosti.
As regards the precise timing of the implementation of this investment programme, decision N 401/97 did not include the planned calendar.
Kar zadeva natančno časovno razporeditev izvajanja tega naložbenega načrta, odločba N 401/97 ni vključevala takšne razporeditve.
The Commission concludes that on the basis of decision N 401/97, the investment programme had to be completed at the latest at the end of 2000.
Komisija sklepa, da bi se moral na podlagi odločbe N 401/97 naložbeni načrt zaključiti najpozneje do konca leta 2000.
From the foregoing, the Commission concludes that respecting the date of 31 December 2000 was important to ensure the success of the restructuring plan.
Na podlagi tega Komisija ugotavlja, da je bilo upoštevanje roka 31. december 2000 pomembno za zagotovitev uspeha načrta prestrukturiranja.
In addition, any investment implemented significantly after 2000 could not be considered as linked to the restructuring plan which is described in decision N 401/97, as requested by Directive 90/684/EEC.
Poleg tega nobene naložbe, ki bi bila izvršena precej po letu 2000, ne bi bilo mogoče šteti kot naložbe, povezane z načrtom prestrukturiranja, opisanega v odločbi N 401/97, kot to zahteva Direktiva 90/684/EGS.
After this analysis of the decision N 401/97, the Commission has to determine whether it would have granted a prolongation of the period to carry out the investments if Greece had requested it and correctly informed the Commission about the delays.
Po tej analizi odločbe N 401/97 mora Komisija opredeliti, ali bi odobrila podaljšanje roka za izvedbo naložbenega načrta, če bi Grčija zanj zaprosila in Komisijo ustrezno obvestila o zamudah.
In September 1999, an earthquake partially damaged the following of the yard’s facilities: walls, roofs, windows, structure of three buildings, tubes, electrical networks, piers, and cranes’ rails.
Septembra 1999 je potres delno uničil naslednje objekte ladjedelnice: zidove, strehe, okna, strukturo treh zgradb, cevi, električna omrežja, pomole in tirnice žerjavov.
Greece claims that the earthquake forced the yard to stop the investment plan and to focus on the repair of these damages.
Grčija trdi, da je morala ladjedelnica zaradi potresa ustaviti izvajanje naložbenega načrta in se osredotočiti na popravilo te škode.
The Commission observes that, if it had applied paragraph 52 of the 1999 R & R guidelines, it would not have approved the first prolongation since the restructuring plan approved in 1997 had become clearly insufficient to restore viability in view of the situation prevailing in November 2000 and no other restructuring plan allowing a return to viability was available at that time.
Komisija ugotavlja, da ob uporabi odstavka 52 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje iz leta 1999 prvega podaljšanja roka ne bi odobrila, saj načrt prestrukturiranja, ki je bil odobren leta 1997, glede na prevladujoč položaj v novembru 2000 očitno ni več zadostoval za obnovitev sposobnosti preživetja, v tistem trenutku pa ni bilo na voljo nobenega drugega načrta prestrukturiranja, ki bi omogočil obnovitev sposobnosti preživetja.
However, the Commission doubts that it would have applied paragraph 52 of the 1999 R & R guidelines since the aid had not been approved on the basis of these guidelines, since there was no ‘amendment’ of the content of the plan but only a delay of the date to complete the investments, and since there were not clear provisions regarding the modification of the date for completing the investments in decision N 401/97 and in Directive 90/684/EEC.
Vendar pa Komisija dvomi, da bi odstavek 52 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje iz leta 1999 sploh uporabila, saj pomoč ni bila odobrena na podlagi teh smernic, ker ni šlo za „spremembo“ vsebine načrta, temveč zgolj za odlog datuma za dokončanje naložbenega načrta, in ker odločba N 401/97 in Direktiva 90/684/EGS nista vsebovali nobenih jasnih določb v zvezi s spremembo datuma za izvedbo naložbenega načrta.
In addition, since a severe earthquake is an event beyond responsibility of the yard and of the Greek authorities, which is exceptional and not related to the economy and the business, the Commission would have probably considered that it can justify some months of delay.
Ker ladjedelnica in grški organi ne morejo biti odgovorni za potres, ki je izjemen dogodek ter ni povezan z gospodarstvom in poslovanjem, bi Komisija verjetno presodila, da lahko upraviči nekaj mesecev zamude.
In addition, the implementation of an investment plan is something difficult, which may necessitate some additional months.
Poleg tega je izvajanje naložbenega načrta težka naloga, ki bi lahko zahtevala nekaj dodatnih mesecev.
Consequently, even if one year is a long delay, it is reasonable to consider that the Commission might have accepted the prolongation.
Zato je kljub dejstvu, da je eno leto velika zamuda, smiselno upoštevati, da bi Komisija podaljšanje roka mogoče odobrila.
Regarding the second prolongation granted by the Greek authorities, Greece and HSY justified it by the privatisation of the yard during which the investment plan was frozen.
Drugo podaljšanje, ki so ga odobrili grški organi, sta Grčija in podjetje HSY opravičila s privatizacijo ladjedelnice, med katero je bil naložbeni načrt zamrznjen.
In other words, the delay in the implementation of the investment programme resulted from a conscious decision to suspend the implementation.
Z drugimi besedami, zamuda pri izvajanju naložbenega načrta je bila posledica zavestne odločitve o začasni prekinitvi izvajanja.
The Commission can certainly not authorise a prolongation of the period to implement the investment programme when it was consciously decided to stop the implementation during several quarters of a year.
Komisija zagotovo ne more odobriti podaljšanja roka za izvedbo naložbenega načrta, če je bila sprejeta zavestna odločitev, da se to izvajanje ustavi za več trimesečij leta.
As concluded previously, the respect of the calendar set for the implementation of the restructuring plan was crucial.
Kot je bilo ugotovljeno prej, je bilo upoštevanje časovne razporeditve, določene za izvajanje načrta prestrukturiranja, ključnega pomena.
The Commission has authorised aid to support a precise restructuring plan implemented at a precise moment.
Komisija je odobrila pomoč za točno določen načrt prestrukturiranja, ki ga je treba izvesti v točno določenem času.
Moreover, significant restructuring measures were implemented in 2001–2002, which were new and not included in the restructuring plan described in decision N 401/97 (for instance, an additional reduction of the workforce).
Poleg tega so se v letih 2001–2002 izvajali pomembni ukrepi na področju prestrukturiranja, ki so bili novi in niso bili vključeni v načrt prestrukturiranja, ki je opisan v odločbi N 401/97 (na primer, dodatno zmanjšanje delovne sile).
In view of the foregoing considerations, the Commission considers that it would not have endorsed a prolongation of the investment period after 31 December 2001.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno Komisija meni, da podaljšanja roka za izvedbo naložbenega načrta po 31. decembru 2001 ne bi odobrila.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that any aid supporting investment expenses incurred after 31 December 2001 fall outside the scope of decision N 401/97.
Komisija torej meni, da vse pomoči za stroške naložb, ki so nastali po 31. decembru 2001, ne spadajo na področje uporabe odločbe N 401/97.
Therefore, any aid granted to the firm, and especially aid supporting the modernisation of obsolete equipment, should have been considered as restructuring aid.
Zato bi se morala vsaka pomoč, odobrena podjetju, in zlasti pomoč za modernizacijo izrabljene opreme, šteti kot pomoč za prestrukturiranje.
Paragraph 48 of the 1999 R & R guidelines allows an exemption from the ‘one time, last time’ condition in ‘exceptional and unforeseeable circumstances’.
Odstavek 48 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje iz leta 1999 določa izjemo pri pogoju „prvič in zadnjič“ v primeru „izjemnih in nepredvidljivih okoliščin“.
Greece claims that the ‘one time, last time’ condition would not be breached since the aid would take place in the adaptation of an existing restructuring plan.
Grčija trdi, da načelo „prvič in zadnjič“ ne bi bilo kršeno, saj bi bila pomoč del prilagoditve obstoječega načrta prestrukturiranja.
As has been extensively explained, the Commission considers that the investment implemented after 31 December 2001 are not part of the investment programme described in decision N 401/97.
Kot je bilo že v veliki meri pojasnjeno, Komisija meni, da naložbe, ki so bile opravljene po 31. decembru 2001, niso del naložbenega načrta, opisanega v odločbi N 401/97.
In addition, paragraph 52 of the 1999 R & R guidelines indicates that ‘the revised plan must still show a return to viability within a reasonable timescale’.
Poleg tega je v odstavku 52 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje iz leta 1999 navedeno, da „mora biti iz prenovljenega načrta še vedno razvidna obnovitev sposobnosti preživetja v ustreznem časovnem okviru“.
Finally, the Commission observes that accepting such a long prolongation of the restructuring period would be similar to a circumvention of the ‘one time, last time’ condition.
Komisija torej ugotavlja, da bi bila odobritev tako dolgega podaljšanja obdobja prestrukturiranja podobna izogibanju pogoja „prvič in zadnjič“.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that aid in favour of the investment expenses incurred until 31 December 2001 and related to the investment programme described in decision N 401/97 can be considered to be covered by decision N 401/97.
Komisija torej meni, da se lahko šteje, da je pomoč za stroške naložb, ki so nastali po 31. decembru 2001 in ki so povezani z naložbenim načrtom, opisanim v odločbi N 401/97, zajeta v odločbi N 401/97.
Any other aid does not fall within the scope of decision N 401/97.
Vse druge pomoči ne spadajo na področje uporabe odločbe N 401/97.
In addition, any other aid in favour of the other investment expenses that have been incurred by HSY is incompatible with the common market.
Poleg tega so vse druge pomoči za druge stroške naložb, ki jih je ustvarilo podjetje HSY, nezdružljive s skupnim trgom.
Since Greece has indicated that the investment aid has not been paid out to HSY yet, no aid has to be recovered from HSY.
Ker je Grčija navedla, da naložbena pomoč podjetju HSY še ni bila izplačana, podjetje HSY ni obvezno povrniti nobene pomoči.
GRD 4,67 billion (EUR 13,72 million) loan granted in 1999 and covered by a State guarantee (measure P2)
Posojilo v višini 4,67 milijarde GRD (13,72 milijona EUR), odobreno leta 1999 in zavarovano z državnim poroštvom (ukrep P2)
Greece indicates that this 8-year loan amounting to GRD 4,67 billion (EUR 13,72 million) was granted by ETVA to finance the investment programme.
Grčija navaja, da je to osemletno posojilo, ki znaša 4,67 milijarde GRD (13,72 milijona EUR), banka ETVA odobrila za financiranje naložbenega načrta.
By decision of 8 December 1999, the government granted a guarantee and charged an annual guarantee fee of 100 basis points.
Z odločbo z dne 8. decembra 1999 je vlada odobrila poroštvo in zaračunala letno poroštveno premijo v višini 100 bazičnih točk.
The loan was concluded on 29 December 1999 and paid to HSY in successive tranches from that date until 26 October 2000, up to a total amount of EUR 12,76 million. The interest rate was ATHIBOR (EURIBOR from 1 January 2001) plus 25 basis points.
Posojilo je bilo sklenjeno 29. decembra 1999 in podjetju HSY izplačano v zaporednih obrokih od navedenega datuma do 26. oktobra 2000 v skupnem znesku 12,76 milijona EUR. Obrestna mera je bila ATHIBOR (od 1. januarja 2001 EURIBOR), povečana za 25 bazičnih točk.
On 31 May 2002, the State guarantee and the loan were prolonged until 30 June 2009 and the interest rate increased by 100 basis points.
maja 2002 sta bila državno poroštvo in posojilo podaljšana do 30. junija 2009, obrestna mera pa se je povečala za 100 bazičnih točk.
The reimbursement of the capital started with a first payment in December 2003.
Povrnitev sredstev se je pričela s prvim plačilom decembra 2003.
The opening decision indicates that the State guarantee could constitute State aid, the compatibility of which is doubtful.
V odločbi o sprožitvi postopka je navedeno, da bi državno poroštvo lahko pomenilo državno pomoč, katere združljivost je dvomljiva.
In addition, leaving aside the qualification of aid or not, decision N 401/97 indicated that, in order to finance the investment programme, bank loans would be raised at normal market conditions without State guarantees.
Poleg tega, ne glede na to, ali gre za pomoč ali ne, je v odločbi N 401/97 navedeno, da bi se morala za namen financiranja naložbenega načrta bančna posojila najemati po običajnih tržnih pogojih brez državnih poroštev.
It seems therefore that State guarantees were per se prohibited by decision N 401/97.
Zdi se torej, da so bila državna poroštva sama po sebi z odločbo N 401/97 prepovedana.
Elefsis made the following comments concerning measures P2, P3 and P4.
Podjetje Elefsis je v zvezi z ukrepi P2, P3 in P4 dalo naslednje pripombe.
It recalls that decision N 401/97 required that the bank loans financing HSY will be obtained on normal market terms without State guarantees.
Opozarja, da je treba na podlagi zahtev iz odločbe N 401/97 bančna posojila za financiranje podjetja HSY pridobiti po običajnih tržnih pogojih in brez državnih poroštev.
It can be shown that all three loans were given upon a non-arm’s length basis.
Dokazati je mogoče, da so bila vsa tri posojila odobrena po netržnih pogojih.