natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Against this background, France considers that the 2001 letters constitute notifications for the purposes of Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
V tem smislu Francija meni, da sta dopisa iz leta 2001 obvestili v smislu člena 88(3) Pogodbe ES.
The letter sent on 5 March 2001 contained an information memo, a completed notification form [17] and five technical annexes, including the industrial research agreement and the licensing agreements.
Trdi, da je dopis z dne 5. marca 2001 vključeval obvestilo, izpolnjen obrazec za priglasitev [17] in pet tehničnih prilog, med katerimi so bili konvencija o industrijskih raziskavah in licenčni sporazumi.
Consequently, France considers that letter D/52473 dated 19 June 2001, in which the Commission indicated that IFP’s reorganisation plan as submitted was in keeping with the conditions laid down in its decision of 4 February 1998 on the renewal for the period 1998-2002 of the parafiscal charge levied on certain petroleum products, created a situation of legitimate expectation.
Zato je Francija menila, da je dopis D/52473 Komisije z dne 19. junija 2001, v katerem Komisija navaja, da je predstavljeni projekt reorganizacije skupine IFP v skladu s pogoji iz odločbe z dne 4. februarja 1998 o podaljšanju zaračunavanja davkom podobne dajatve za nekatere naftne derivate za obdobje 1998–2002, povzročil utemeljeno pričakovanje.
It recalls that, in that letter, the Commission took the view that the reorganisation plan modified neither the nature of IFP’s activities nor the position of French enterprises vis-à-vis other Community enterprises as regards process marketing activities and raised no objection to the draft agreements, and in particular to the right of first refusal of which it had nevertheless had cognisance during the exchanges with France since 5 March 2001.
Poudarja, da je Komisija v tem dopisu ocenila, da se s projektom reorganizacije nista spremenila narava dejavnosti skupine IFP in položaj francoskih podjetij v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji v Skupnosti v zvezi z dejavnostmi trženja postopkov, ter da ni vložila nobenega ugovora na osnutke konvencije, zlasti na pravico do prve zavrnitve, s katero je bila seznanjena med izmenjavo mnenj s Francijo od 5. marca 2001.
In France’s opinion, it could legitimately consider that the creation of Axens and the signature of the agreements between IFP and Axens would not lead to the existence of State aid.
Francija meni, da je lahko torej upravičeno obravnavala, da ustanovitev družbe Axens in podpis konvencij med skupino IFP in družbo Axens ne bi pomenila državne pomoči.
France maintains that the creation of Axens and the signature of the agreements between IFP and Axens took place in accordance with the draft submitted to the Commission in March 2001.
Francija trdi, da sta ustanovitev družbe Axens in podpis konvencij med skupino IFP in družbo Axens potekala v skladu z načrtom, ki je bil predložen Komisiji marca 2001.
Regarding the changes introduced subsequently of which the Commission was not informed, France provides the following information.
Francija v zvezi z naknadnimi spremembami, o katerih Komisija ni bila obveščena, navaja naslednje podatke.
First, according to France, the 100 % takeover of Prosernat and Axens by IFP at the end of 2001 could not be attributed to a choice on the part of IFP insofar as it was the deed of independent players.
Na eni strani Francija meni, da 100-odstotnega prevzema nadzora skupine IFP v družbah Prosernat in Axens konec leta 2001 ne bi mogli pripisati odločitvi skupine IFP, če so ta prevzem izvedli neodvisni udeleženci.
France points out, moreover, that, in its letter D/52473 of 19 June 2001, the Commission considered as a guarantee of non-discrimination the fact that IFP holds at least the majority of the shares in the new entity.
Poleg tega Francija ugotavlja, da je Komisija v dopisu D/52473 z dne 19. junija 2001 menila, da je dejstvo, da ima skupina IFP vsaj večinski delež v novem subjektu, zagotovilo za nediskriminacijo.
Secondly, France maintains that, the agreements between IFP and Prosernat being similar to the agreements between IFP and Axens, it did not deem it necessary to forward them to the Commission.
Na drugi strani Francija trdi, da konvencij med skupino IFP in družbo Prosernat, ki so podobne konvencijam med skupino IFP in družbo Axens, ni treba predložiti Komisiji.
Lastly, France felt it was unnecessary to transmit to the Commission the agreement between IFP and Beicip-Franlab insofar as it provided for total coverage of IFP’s costs.
Nazadnje je Francija ocenila, da konvencije med skupino IFP in družbo Beicip-Franlab ni treba predložiti Komisiji, če ta konvencija predvideva, da skupina IFP krije vse stroške.
France states that it informed the Commission of the change in the method of financing IFP by letter dated 27 November 2002.
Francija poudarja, da je z dopisom z dne 27. novembra 2002 Komisijo obvestila o spremembi načina financiranja skupine IFP.
On IFP’s compliance with Directive 80/723/EEC
Upoštevanje Direktive 80/723/EGS s strani skupine IFP
France considers that the principle of the separation of accounts by activity, embodied in Article 1 of Directive 80/723/EEC, is respected.
Francija ocenjuje, da se upošteva načelo ločevanja računovodskih evidenc po dejavnostih iz člena 1 Direktive 80/723/EGS.
It points out in this connection that IFP’s budget is organised along the lines of a breakdown between five results centres, an ‘Information’ task and an ‘Exploratory Research’ item which makes it possible to distinguish between IFP’s various activities.
V zvezi s tem trdi, da je proračun skupine IFP organiziran v skladu z razdelitvijo na pet centrov za rezultate, nalogo „obveščanja“ in postavko „pionirske raziskave“, na podlagi česar je mogoče razlikovati med različnimi dejavnostmi skupine IFP.
France describes the method of classifying projects within the results centres as follows:
Poleg tega Francija opisuje način razvrščanja projektov v okviru centrov za rezultate:
competency acquisition projects, often carried out in collaboration with other research institutes, are designed to seek out new ideas;
cilj projektov pridobivanja znanja, ki se pogosto razvijejo v sodelovanju z drugimi raziskovalnimi inštituti, je oblikovanje novih zamisli;
industrial research projects are carried out by IFP with or without the collaboration of third parties.
projekte industrijskega raziskovanja izvaja skupina IFP v sodelovanju s tretjimi strankami ali brez njihovega sodelovanja.
In the case of the ‘Exploration-Production’ results centre, they involve the search for solutions which may lead to methodologies, software, chemical additives, equipment, processes and expertise.
Kar zadeva center za rezultate „raziskave in proizvodnja“, so ti projekti povezani z iskanjem rešitev, na podlagi katerih bi se lahko razvili metodologija, programska oprema, kemični dodatki, oprema, postopki in strokovno znanje.
In the case of the ‘Refining-Petrochemicals’ results centre, they concern the development of processes and products for the production of fuels and petrochemical intermediates from all accessible carbon sources;
Kar zadeva center za rezultate „rafiniranje in petrokemija“, so ti projekti povezani z razvojem postopkov in izdelkov za proizvodnjo goriva in petrokemičnih vmesnih izdelkov iz vseh dostopnih virov ogljika;
‘trade equipment’ projects concern the development of test benches, testing equipment, experimental testing facilities and test loops, together with the implementation of specific software and the management of databases;
projekti na področju „strokovne opreme“ so povezani z razvojem preskuševalnih mest, testnih naprav, poskusnih naprav in opreme, zmogljivosti za testiranje ter razvojem posebne programske opreme in upravljanjem zbirk podatkov;
‘support activities’ projects comprise quality measures, post-programme follow-up and management of intellectual property rights.
projekti na področju „dejavnosti podpore“ so povezani s postopki na področju kakovosti, spremljanjem programa in upravljanjem pravic intelektualne lastnine.
Lastly, France provides information on IFP’s analytical accounting system, which allows an allocation of (non-State-budgetary-allowance) income and expenditure by project within each results centre.
Na koncu je Francija predložila informacije v zvezi z analitičnim računovodskim sistemom skupine IFP, ki omogoča razporeditev prihodka (brez državnih proračunskih sredstev) in stroškov po projektih znotraj vsakega centra za rezultate.
On the distinction between IFP and its subsidiaries
Razlikovanje med skupino IFP in njenimi hčerinskimi družbami
France disputes the Commission’s analysis that IFP and Axens constitute a single economic entity.
Francija se ne strinja z analizo Komisije, ki skupino IFP in družbo Axens obravnava kot enoten gospodarski subjekt.
It considers that IFP and its subsidiaries are separate entities whose tasks are different in nature.
Ocenjuje, da so skupina IFP in njene hčerinske družbe ločeni subjekti z različnimi nalogami.
First, France considers that IFP’s research activity is a general interest mission forming part of an approach — recognised at national, Community and world level — aimed at ensuring long-term security of supply in hydrocarbons.
Francija zlasti ocenjuje, da so raziskovalne dejavnosti skupine IFP naloga splošnega interesa, ki je del usmeritve, priznane na nacionalni ravni, ravni Skupnosti in svetovni ravni, da se dolgoročno zagotovi varnost oskrbe z ogljikovodiki.
Secondly, it considers that the reference to the concept of linked enterprises, as set out in Annex I to the Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (the ‘SME Recommendation’) [21], is not relevant to this case.
Drugič, ocenjuje, da sklicevanje na pojem povezanih podjetij iz priloge I priporočil Komisije z dne 6. maja 2003 o opredelitvi mikro, majhnih in srednje velikih podjetij [21] („priporočilo MSP“) v tem primeru ni ustrezno.
France recalls, moreover, the Community case law according to which the fact that 100 % of the shares in a subsidiary are held by its parent company does not suffice to demonstrate the existence of control by the latter.
Francija poleg tega poudarja sodno prakso Skupnosti, v skladu s katero dejstvo, da je hčerinska družba v 100-odstotni lasti matične družbe, ne zadostuje za dokaz o nadzoru te družbe.
France points out, furthermore, that the existence of an exclusive agreement is not a feature of an absence of autonomy, as otherwise Article 81 of the Treaty, which refers to such agreements between independent enterprises, would be otiose.
Poleg tega Francija navaja, da izključni sporazum ne določa odsotnosti neodvisnosti, sicer bi bil člen 81 Pogodbe ES, ki predvideva take sporazume med neodvisnimi podjetji, brezpredmeten.
Lastly, France considers that the common image of IFP and Axens in the market necessarily stems from the fact that Axens distributes products resulting from the research conducted by IFP, and that this common image must be distinguished from an absence of autonomous behaviour.
Končno, Francija ocenjuje, da skupna podoba skupine IFP in družbe Axens na trgu neizogibno temelji na dejstvu, da družba Axens razširja izdelke, proizvedene na podlagi raziskav skupine IFP, in da je treba to skupno podobo ločevati od neodvisnosti pri ravnanju.
Thirdly, France tenders evidence to demonstrate the autonomy of IFP’s subsidiaries.
Tretjič, Francija navaja dokazila o neodvisnosti hčerinskih družb skupine IFP.
Each subsidiary devises its own strategy and has it validated by its management board, which is not composed solely of IFP representatives.
Navaja, da vsaka hčerinska družba pripravi svojo strategijo, ki jo potrdi upravni odbor, v katerem ne sodelujejo le predstavniki skupine IFP.
Contracts between IFP and its subsidiaries respect the ordinary-law rules on regulated agreements, hence the IFP representative does not take part in the voting on matters pertaining to the said contracts. Each subsidiary has its own committees and enjoys complete managerial autonomy subject to shareholder control, which is exercised through standard reporting mechanisms.
Dodaja, da se pri pogodbah, sklenjenih med skupino IFP in njenimi hčerinskimi družbami, spoštujejo pravila skupne zakonodaje na področju urejenih konvencij in da zato predstavnik skupine IFP ne sodeluje pri glasovanju o vprašanjih, povezanih z navedenimi pogodbami; navaja, da ima vsaka hčerinska družba svoje odbore ter da je njeno upravljanje popolnoma neodvisno in pod nadzorom delničarjev ter da se izvaja na podlagi običajnega poročanja.
In addition, IFP and its subsidiaries have hierarchically and geographically independent financial and accounting departments with different information and management systems.
Poleg tega Francija pojasnjuje, da imajo skupina IFP in njene hčerinske družbe na voljo finančne in računovodske službe, ki so hierarhično in geografsko neodvisne ter uporabljajo različne informacijske sisteme in sisteme upravljanja.
Lastly, IFP’s subsidiaries decide freely on the products and services they market.
Končno, Francija navaja dejstvo, da se hčerinske družbe skupine IFP svobodno odločijo, katere izdelke in storitve bodo tržile.
In this respect, Axens is free to accept or refuse the work presented by IFP, and France gives several examples of processes where Axens supplements its research requirements with other contractual relationships.
V zvezi s tem Francija navaja, da lahko družba Axens sprejme ali zavrne delo, ki ga ponudi skupina IFP, in opisuje več primerov postopkov, pri katerih družba Axens izpolnjuje svoje potrebe na področju raziskav na podlagi drugih pogodbenih razmerij.
On the existence of State aid
Obstoj državne pomoči
France considers that, pursuant to the first subparagraph of point 2.4 of the 1966 R & D framework, the financing of IFP, a non-profit-making body, does not constitute State aid.
Francija meni, da financiranje neprofitne organizacije IFP v skladu s prvim pododstavkom točke 2.4 okvira za R & R iz leta 1996 ni državna pomoč.
First, France points out that, according to the second subparagraph of point 2.4 of the 1996 R & D framework, ‘where the results of publicly financed R & D projects are made available to Community industry on a non-discriminatory basis, the Commission will assume that State aid within the meaning of Article 92 (now 87) of the EC Treaty is not normally involved’.
Francija zlasti trdi, da drugi pododstavek točke 2.4 okvira za R & R iz leta 1996 določa: „Kadar so rezultati javno financiranih raziskav in razvoja na voljo podjetjem Skupnosti na nediskriminatorni podlagi, Komisija običajno obravnava, da ne gre za državno pomoč v smislu člena 92(1) Pogodbe ES (zdaj člena 87).“
France indicates in this connection that IFP conducts a great deal of research work the results of which are made available to Community enterprises without discrimination.
V zvezi s tem Francija navaja, da skupina IFP opravi veliko raziskav, katerih rezultati so na voljo podjetjem v Skupnosti brez razlikovanja.
Among the means used to ensure the accessibility of the results of its activities are a scientific journal and the drafting of articles, the presentation of work at conferences, the publication and posting online of works, membership of scientific associations and the establishment of partnerships with other research centres and doctoral training schemes.
Eni od načinov za zagotavljanje dostopnosti rezultatov teh dejavnosti so znanstvena revija in priprava člankov, predstavitev dela na kongresih, objava del na spletu, sodelovanje v znanstvenih združenjih, vzpostavitev partnerstva z drugimi raziskovalnimi centri in doktorsko usposabljanje.
France states that three quarters of the research budget of the ‘Exploration-Production’ results centre is devoted to fundamental research the results of which are disseminated widely without discrimination.
Francija navaja, da so tri četrtine proračuna za raziskave centra za rezultate „raziskave in proizvodnja“ namenjene temeljnim raziskavam, katerih rezultati se večinoma razširjajo brez razlikovanja.
In the case of the ‘Refining-Petrochemicals’ results centre, the results of much research are also disseminated without discrimination.
Kar zadeva center za rezultate „rafiniranje in petrokemija“, Francija navaja, da se rezultati več raziskav prav tako razširjajo brez razlikovanja.
Secondly, France considers that the Commission’s reasoning in its 1996 and 1998 decisions, according to which ‘it has to be noted that, even though the IFP does not always charge the real cost of research to customers, it makes no distinction between the companies to which it transfers the findings of research carried out on its own behalf or on a collaborative basis’, is still valid.
Drugič, Francija meni, da se je potrdilo razmišljanje Komisije v odločbah iz let 1996 in 1998, ki določata: „Upoštevati je treba, da skupina IFP, čeprav ne zaračuna vedno dejanskih stroškov raziskav, ne razlikuje med podjetji, katerim predloži rezultate raziskav, ki jih opravi sama ali jih opravi na podlagi sodelovanja“.
It stresses in this connection that, in the ‘Exploration-Production’ field, IFP conducts industrial research on behalf of numerous industrial partners, either in the form of straightforward cooperation or in that of multi-client joint industrial projects in which participation is unrestricted.
V zvezi s tem poudarja, da skupina IFP na področju „raziskav in proizvodnje“ izvaja industrijske raziskave v imenu več industrijskih partnerjev v obliki preprostega sodelovanja ali skupnih industrijskih projektov (Joint Industrial Projects) z več strankami, pri katerih lahko sodelujejo vsi.
In the case of the refining and petrochemicals market, France considers that the payments made by Axens for the work placed at its disposal by IFP are equivalent to market terms and conditions.
Kar zadeva trg za rafiniranje in petrokemijo, Francija meni, da plačila družbe Axens za dela, ki jih tej družbi ponudi skupina IFP, ustrezajo tržnim pogojem.
To this financial compensation, France adds the expenditure incurred by Axens in carrying out supplementary tasks needed for the exploitation of the research work and the additional costs borne by Axens for using technologies and products other than those of IFP.
Francija doda k temu finančnemu prispevku odhodke družbe Axens v zvezi z opravljanjem dodatnih nalog, ki so potrebne za uporabo teh raziskav, in dodatne stroške družbe Axens v zvezi z uporabo tehnoloških postopkov in izdelkov, ki niso v lasti skupine IFP.
In France’s view, the high share of its turnover devoted to research activities is a strong indicator of the absence of any competitive advantage derived by Axens from the research work carried out on its behalf by IFP.
Francija meni, da velik delež prometa, namenjen raziskovalnim dejavnostim, jasno kaže na to, da družba Axens ni izkoristila konkurenčne prednosti za raziskave, ki jih v njenem imenu izvaja skupina IFP.
France provides evidence to show that the amounts spent by Axens on its research activities are much higher than the average for the sector.
Francija navaja dokazila, da so zneski, ki jih porabi družba Axens za raziskovalne dejavnosti, občutno višji od povprečja v tem sektorju.
France states that, despite the right of first refusal enjoyed by Axens, several research works carried out by the ‘Refining-Petrochemicals’ results centre benefit various industrial partners from different countries.
Poleg tega Francija trdi, da kljub pravici družbe Axens do prve zavrnitve več raziskav, ki jih opravlja center za rezultate „rafiniranje in petrokemija“, poteka na podlagi različnih industrijskih partnerstev iz različnih držav.
France concludes, therefore, that the State intervention in favour of IFP does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty and that IFP’s subsidiaries derive no advantage from their access to the results of the research conducted by IFP on their behalf.
Francija torej ugotavlja, da posredovanje države v korist skupini IFP ni državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES in da hčerinske družbe skupine IFP nimajo nobene prednosti pri dostopu do rezultatov raziskav, ki jih v njihovem imenu opravi skupina IFP.
On the compatibility of any State aid with the Treaty
Združljivost morebitne državne pomoči s Pogodbo ES
France indicates that, if the State intervention in favour of IFP were to be interpreted as State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty in favour of Axens, such aid would in any case be compatible with the common market.
Francija navaja, da če bi se posredovanje države v korist skupine IFP obravnavalo kot državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES, bi bila ta pomoč v vsakem primeru združljiva s skupnim trgom.
France provides evidence to show that the aid can be considered compatible with the Treaty under the exemption provided for in Article 87(3)(c).
Francija navaja dokazila, da bi se lahko obravnavalo, da je pomoč v skladu s Pogodbo na podlagi odstopanja iz člena 87(3)(c).
Secondly, France indicates that any aid to Axens would have an incentive effect.
Drugič, Francija navaja, da bi imela morebitna pomoč za družbo Axens spodbujevalni učinek.
It furnishes in this connection statistics which show a progression both in the amount of expenditure devoted by Axens to R & D by its R & D staff and in the ratio of internal expenditure to turnover.
V zvezi s tem je predložila statistične podatke, ki kažejo na povečevanje zneska odhodkov, ki jih družba Axens nameni za R & R svoje delovne sile na področju R & R, ter razmerja med notranjimi stroški in prometom.
It furnishes, moreover, examples of Axens projects which would not have seen the light of day without help from IFP.
Poleg tega je Francija predložila primere projektov, ki jih družba Axens ne bi mogla izvajati brez pomoči skupine IFP.
It argues that all of Axens’s competitors, and in particular those in the USA, receive substantial State support.
Končno, Francija trdi, da vsi tekmeci družbe Axens, zlasti ameriški, prejemajo znatno javno pomoč.
Lastly, France points to the strategic importance of State aid to innovation and R & D, as recognised by the Commission in the context of the relaunch of the Lisbon Strategy and as reflected in the State Aid Action Plan.
Francija na koncu poudarja strateški pomen državnih pomoči za inovacije ter R & R, ki ga je Komisija priznala ob oživitvi lizbonske strategije in vključila v akcijski načrt za državne pomoči.
COMMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES
PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
Content of the complaint behind the initiation of the procedure
Vsebina prvotne pritožbe v zvezi s sprožitvijo postopka
The complainant, fearing negative commercial repercussions, does not want its identity to be divulged.
Pritožnik ne želi razkriti svoje identitete zaradi strahu, da bi to imelo negativne gospodarske posledice.
It believes its interests are directly threatened by the subsidising by France of IFP and/or its subsidiary Axens.
Pritožnik ocenjuje, da so njegovi interesi neposredno ogroženi zaradi subvencije, ki jo je Francija dodelila skupini IFP in/ali njeni hčerinski družbi Axens.
Since it was created in 2001, Axens, a competitor of the complainant, is alleged to have pursued an aggressive commercial policy in relation to the process licences developed entirely thanks to the R & D activities of its parent, IFP.
Družba Axens, ki je tekmica pritožnika, od svoje ustanovitve leta 2001 izvaja agresivno gospodarsko politiko v zvezi z licencami za tehnološke postopke, razvite v celoti na podlagi dejavnosti matične družbe IFP na področju raziskav in razvoja.
The complaint is centred on specific fields of activity of IFP, namely refining technologies and catalysts, gas treatment and petrochemicals production, and on Axens’s licensing activities in these fields.
Pritožba je osredotočena na posebna področja dejavnosti skupine IFP, tj. na tehnološke postopke in katalizatorje za rafiniranje, predelavo plina in petrokemično proizvodnjo ter dejavnost licenciranja družbe Axens na teh področjih delovanja.