natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Aid recipients must make a significant contribution to the restructuring plan from their own resources, including the sale of assets that are not essential to the firm’s survival, or from external financing on market conditions.
Upravičenci do pomoči morajo prispevati pomemben delež k načrtu prestrukturiranja iz lastnih virov, tudi s prodajo sredstev, ki niso bistvena za preživetje podjetja, ali iz zunanjega financiranja po tržnih pogojih.
Financed by:
Financirano iz:
Aid recipient’s own share
lastnega stroška upravičenca
Shareholder contribution
delniškega vložka
State aid
pomoči države
In paragraph 44 of the opening decision, the Commission raised two points regarding these data.
Komisija v odstavku 44 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka navaja dva dvoma v zvezi s temi podatki.
Firstly, it asked the French authorities to explain why they had not included the aid reimbursement in the restructuring costs.
Po eni strani Komisija od francoskih organov zahteva, naj utemeljijo, zakaj niso med stroške prestrukturiranja vključili vračila pomoči.
Secondly, it asked for an explanation as to the nature of the ‘recipient’s own share’.
Po drugi strani zahteva pojasnilo glede narave „lastnega stroška upravičenca“.
The French authorities answered the second point by stating that the ‘recipient’s own share’ consisted of bank loans raised by FagorBrandt on the market.
Francoski organi so v odgovor na ta drugi dvom navedli, da „lastni strošek upravičenca“ sestavljajo bančna posojila, ki jih je podjetje FagorBrandt najelo na trgu.
Specifically, the company had contracted bank loans amounting to EUR [25-30] million in 2006, increased to EUR [30-35] million in 2007 [38].
Kot pojasnjujejo, je podjetje leta 2006 sklenilo bančna posojila v vrednosti [25–30] milijonov EUR, leta 2007 pa so se povečala na [30–35] milijonov EUR [38].
The bank loans had been secured by stocks of finished products.
Zavarovana so bila z zalogami končnih proizvodov.
The Commission considers that this amounts to ‘external financing at market conditions’ as referred to in point 43 of the restructuring guidelines and hence constitutes a valid contribution.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je to „zunanje financiranje po tržnih pogojih“, kot je opredeljeno v odstavku 43 smernic za prestrukturiranje, torej veljaven prispevek.
In reply to the Commission’s first point, the French authorities stated that the reimbursement of incompatible aid could not, on the face of it, be classed as a restructuring cost (or as an own share of the recipient firm within the meaning of points 43 and 44 of the restructuring guidelines).
Francoski organi v zvezi s prvim dvomom Komisije navajajo, da se vračilo nezdružljive pomoči ne more vnaprej šteti za strošek prestrukturiranja (niti za lastni strošek podjetja, ki prejema pomoč, v smislu odstavkov 43 in 44 smernic za prestrukturiranje).
It was for that reason that they had not counted it among the restructuring costs.
Zato ga niso šteli med stroške prestrukturiranja.
However, the reimbursement — estimated at approximately EUR [25-30] million (including interest) — was, of course, included in the business plan attached to the notification just like any other normal financial expenditure.
Kljub temu navajajo, da je to vračilo, ocenjeno na približno [25–30] milijonov EUR (z obrestmi), kot kateri koli drug običajen finančni izdatek seveda vključeno v poslovni načrt, priložen priglasitvi.
The Commission considers it essential that the reimbursement be taken into account in the business plan, as is the case here [39].
Komisija meni, da je treba vračilo nujno upoštevati v poslovnem načrtu, kar se je v tem primeru zgodilo [39].
As to whether the reimbursement must be formally considered a restructuring cost within the meaning of point 43 of the restructuring guidelines, the Commission would observe that, even if that were the case, it would not have the effect of reducing the aid recipient’s own contribution to below the 50 % required by point 44 of the restructuring guidelines.
Glede vprašanja, ali je treba to vračilo formalno šteti za strošek prestrukturiranja v smislu odstavka 43 smernic za prestrukturiranje, Komisija opozarja, da tudi v takem primeru lastni prispevek upravičenca ne bi bil manjši od 50 %, kot se zahteva v odstavku 44 smernic za prestrukturiranje.
Even if the reimbursement of the aid with interest were included as a restructuring cost — bringing the total to some EUR [75-100] million — this would have the effect of reducing further the share of the restructuring costs financed by aid and of increasing the share of those costs financed by the aid recipient [40] and its shareholders.
Tudi če bi bilo vračilo pomoči z obrestmi vključeno med stroške prestrukturiranja – ti bi tako znašali približno [75–100] milijonov EUR –, bi to še zmanjšalo delež stroškov prestrukturiranja, ki se financirajo iz pomoči, in povečalo delež teh stroškov, ki jih financirajo upravičenec [40] in njegovi delničarji.
Consequently, it is not necessary for the Commission to decide on this matter.
Zato ni nujno, da se Komisija opredeli do tega vprašanja.
The doubts raised by the Commission in the opening decision are therefore allayed and the Commission concludes that the ‘recipient’s own share’ and that of its shareholder is greater than 50 % of the restructuring costs, as required for large firms by point 44 of the restructuring guidelines.
Dvomi Komisije v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka so torej odpravljeni, Komisija pa sklepa, da „lastni strošek upravičenca“ in njegovega delničarja presega 50 % stroškov prestrukturiranja, kot se za velika podjetja zahteva v odstavku 44 smernic za prestrukturiranje.
As for the assertion by the competitor requesting anonymity that the aid is not limited to the minimum inasmuch as FagorBrandt can obtain financing from its shareholder and the group to which it belongs, the Commission has already answered this point in its analysis of the company’s eligibility.
Na trditev konkurenta, ki je želel ostati anonimen, da pomoč ni omejena na najmanjšo potrebno, ker bi FagorBrandt lahko financirala njegov delničar in skupina, v katero spada, je Komisija že odgovorila v analizi upravičenosti podjetja.
Finally, besides verifying compliance with the formal criterion of an own contribution greater than 50 %, the Commission has also assessed, in the light in particular of the criteria set out in point 45 of the restructuring guidelines, whether the aid is limited to the strict minimum.
Ne nazadnje je Komisija poleg preverjanja izpolnjevanja formalnega merila glede lastnega prispevka, ki mora biti večji od 50 %, tudi ocenila, ali je pomoč omejena na najmanjšo potrebno, še zlasti na podlagi meril iz odstavka 45 smernic za prestrukturiranje.
Full implementation of the plan
Popolna izvedba načrta
FagorBrandt’s restructuring plan, including all of France’s commitments, must be implemented in full [41].
Načrt prestrukturiranja podjetja FagorBrandt je treba izvesti v celoti, vključno z vsemi obveznostmi Francije [41].
The Commission would ask to be kept informed of progress with the implementation of the plan and of the related commitments.
Komisija zahteva, da se jo obvešča o napredku pri izvajanju načrta in z njim povezanih obveznostih.
The aid may be declared compatible with the common market provided all the conditions imposed are met,
Pomoč se lahko razglasi za združljivo s skupnim trgom, če se izpolnijo vsi določeni pogoji –
The aid amounting to EUR 31 million which France is planning to implement for FagorBrandt is compatible with the common market, subject to the conditions laid down in Article 2.
Pomoč Francije za FagorBrandt v znesku 31 milijonov EUR je pod pogoji iz člena 2 združljiva s skupnim trgom.
The French authorities shall suspend payment to FagorBrandt of the aid referred to in Article 1 of this Decision until such time as the recovery from FagorBrandt of the incompatible aid referred to in Decision 2004/343/EC has become effective.
Francoski organi morajo začasno odložiti izplačilo pomoči iz člena 1 te odločbe podjetju FagorBrandt, dokler se od njega dejansko ne izterja nezdružljiva pomoč, na katero se nanaša Odločba 2004/343/ES.
FagorBrandt’s restructuring plan, as communicated to the Commission by France on 6 August 2006 [42], shall be implemented in full.
Načrt prestrukturiranja za FagorBrandt, ki ga je Francija poslala Komisiji 6. avgusta 2006 [42], se izvede v celoti.
FagorBrandt shall cease marketing refrigeration, cooking and dishwashing products of the Vedette brand for a period of five years beginning at the latest seven months after the date of notification of this Decision.
FagorBrandt ustavi trženje proizvodov hladilne tehnike, kuhalnih aparatov in pomivalnih strojev blagovne znamke Vedette za petletno obdobje, ki se začne najpozneje sedem mesecev po uradnem obvestilu o tej odločbi.
In order to ensure that the conditions laid down in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article are observed, France shall inform the Commission, by means of annual reports, of progress with the restructuring of FagorBrandt, the recovery of the incompatible aid described in paragraph 1, payment of the compatible aid, and implementation of the compensatory measures.
Da se zagotovi nadzor nad izvajanjem pogojev iz odstavkov od 1 do 3 tega člena, mora Francija z letnimi poročili obveščati Komisijo o napredku pri prestrukturiranju podjetja FagorBrandt, izterjavi nezdružljive pomoči iz odstavka 1 in izvajanju izravnalnih ukrepov.
France shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Francija v dveh mesecih po uradnem obvestilu o tej odločbi obvesti Komisijo o ukrepih, sprejetih za izvajanje odločbe.
OJ C 275, 16.11.2007, p. 18.
UL C 275, 16.11.2007, str. 18.
The interested party in question had requested, by telephone and by letter dated 16 December 2007, an extension of the one-month time limit within which to submit comments. The Commission raised no objection to the request.
Zadevna zainteresirana stran je po telefonu in z dopisom z dne 16. decembra 2007 zahtevala enomesečno podaljšanje roka za predložitev pripomb, čemur Komisija ni nasprotovala.
Commission Decision 2004/343/EC of 16 December 2003 on the State aid scheme implemented by France for the takeover of firms in difficulty (OJ L 108, 16.4.2004, p. 38).
Odločba Komisije 2004/343/ES z dne 16. decembra 2003 o shemi pomoči, ki jo je Francija izvajala za prevzem podjetij v težavah (UL L 108, 16.4.2004, str. 38).
Commission Decision 2005/941/EC of 1 December 2004 on the State aid which France is planning to implement for Bull (OJ L 342, 24.12.2005, p. 81) at paragraphs 55 to 63.
Odločba Komisije 2005/941/ES z dne 1. decembra 2004 o državni pomoči Francije za Bull (UL L 342, 24.12.2005, str. 81, točke od 55 do 63).
Commission Decision 2006/747/EC of 26 April 2006 on State aid which France is planning to implement for Euromoteurs (C 1/2005 (ex N 426/2004)) (OJ L 307, 7.11.2006, p. 213) at paragraphs 30-31 and 42.
Odločba Komisije 2006/747/ES z dne 26. aprila 2006 o državni pomoči, ki jo Francija namerava izvajati za Euromoteurs (C 1/2005 (ex N 426/2004)), (UL L 307, 7.11.2006, str. 213, točke 30 in 31 ter 42).
Information covered by business secrecy.
Podatek je poslovna skrivnost.
La Tribune, 14 April 2005.
Dnevnik La Tribune z dne 14. aprila 2005.
Read ‘increased significantly’.
Beri: „precej povečali“.
Commission Decision 91/391/EEC of 26 March 1991 on aid granted by the German Government to Deggendorf GmbH, a producer of polyamide and polyester yarns located in Deggendorf (Bavaria) (OJ L 215, 2.8.1991, p. 16).
Odločba Komisije 91/391/EGS z dne 26. marca 1991 o pomoči Nemčije za Deggendorf GmbH, proizvajalca poliamidnih in poliestrskih prej s sedežem v Deggendorfu (Bavarska), (UL L 215, 2.8.1991, str. 16).
Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-355/95 P TWD v Commission [1997] ECR I-2549 (the Deggendorf judgment), at paragraphs 25-26.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 15. maja 1997 v zadevi TWD proti Komisiji, C-355/95 P, Recueil, str. I-2549, točki 25 in 26 (sodba „Deggendorf“).
This judgment confirms the judgment of the Court of First Instance in Joined Cases T-244/93 and T-486/93 TWD v Commission [1995] ECR II-2265.
Ta sodba potrjuje utemeljenost sodbe Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 13. septembra 1995 v zadevi TWD proti Komisiji, T-244/93 in T-486/93, Recueil, str. II-2265.
In this connection, the Commission Notice Towards an effective implementation of Commission decisions ordering Member States to recover unlawful and incompatible State aid (OJ C 272, 15.11.2007, p. 4) states that ‘the Commission has […] started to apply Deggendorf case law in a more systematic manner.
V zvezi s tem je v Obvestilu Komisije „Za učinkovito izvajanje odločb Komisije, ki od držav članic zahtevajo dosego vračila nezakonite in nezdružljive državne pomoči“ ( UL C 272, 15.11.2007, str. 4) navedeno, da „je Komisija […] začela bolj sistematično izvajati sodno prakso iz zadeve Deggendorf.
This case law enables the Commission, if certain conditions have been satisfied, to order Member States to suspend the payment of a new compatible aid to a company until that company has reimbursed old unlawful and incompatible aid that is subject to a recovery decision.’
Ta sodna praksa Komisiji omogoča, da, če so izpolnjeni nekateri pogoji, od držav članic zahteva prekinitev plačila nove združljive pomoči podjetju, dokler ni to podjetje povrnilo stare nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči, ki je predmet odločbe o vračilu“.
The restructuring plan provided basically for a refocusing and development targeted on high-value-added and innovative products, a rationalisation of purchasing policy and a sourcing policy (products manufactured by third parties on behalf of FagorBrandt).
V načrtu prestrukturiranja je bila v bistvu določena preusmeritev na inovativne proizvode z visoko dodano vrednostjo in njihov usmerjeni razvoj, racionalizacija nabavne politike in politika raziskave nabavnega trga (proizvode za FagorBrandt proizvedejo tretje osebe).
FagorBrandt has taken three types of restructuring measure: (a) plant closures and disposals; (b) workforce reductions; and (c) measures to help ensure the continuation of the business.
FagorBrandt je sprejel tri vrste ukrepov prestrukturiranja: (a) ukinitev dejavnosti in zaprtje obratov; (b) zmanjšanje števila zaposlenih; (c) ukrepe za okrepitev nadaljnjega obstoja podjetja.
CECED: European Committee of Domestic Equipment Manufacturers, an organisation bringing together 15 manufacturers of an at least European dimension and 26 trade associations present in several European countries (both members and non-members of the European Union).
CECED: Evropsko združenje proizvajalcev gospodinjskih aparatov, v katero je vključenih 15 proizvajalcev, ki imajo vsaj evropsko razsežnost, in 26 združenj iz tega sektorja, ki delujejo v več evropskih državah (članicah in nečlanicah Evropske unije).
GIFAM: Groupement interprofessionnel des fabricants d’appareils d’équipements ménagers, which groups together 50 or so companies present in the electrical household appliance markets.
GIFAM: Medpanožno združenje proizvajalcev gospodinjskih aparatov, v katero je vključenih približno 50 podjetij, ki so prisotna na trgih električnih gospodinjskih aparatov.
The Commission carried out an analysis of whether this increased integration of FagorBrandt in Fagor called into question the conclusions drawn in paragraph 27 of the opening decision concerning FagorBrandt’s eligibility.
Komisija je proučila, ali večje vključevanje podjetja FagorBrandt v družbo Fagor izpodbija ugotovitve iz odstavka 27 odločitve o sprožitvi postopka, kar zadeva upravičenost podjetja FagorBrandt.
It concluded that such was not the case, as the great majority of the factors mentioned in that paragraph remained valid.
Ugotovila je, da ni tako, ker je velika večina elementov, navedenih v tem odstavku, še naprej tehtnih.
This reduction is due to the impact of suspending the marketing of some products on the visibility of the Vedette brand among distributors.
Vzrok za ta upad je vpliv ustavitve trženja prejšnjih proizvodov na prepoznavnost blagovne znamke Vedette pri distributerjih.
The Commission considers, in the light of the information supplied by the French authorities, that the pessimistic scenario is unlikely to materialise.
Komisija na podlagi informacij, ki so jih predložili francoski organi, meni, da je malo verjetnosti za uresničitev pesimističnega scenarija.
The French authorities base this scenario on experience with Vedette microwave ovens.
Francoski organi so ga namreč oprli na izkušnje z mikrovalovnimi pečicami Vedette.
As will be demonstrated, however, this is a product in respect of which FagorBrandt was no longer competitive (which is why it decided to cease in-house production) and in respect of which producers from low-cost countries have achieved a high rate of penetration.
Vendar kot bo pokazano, je to proizvod, na trgu katerega podjetje FagorBrandt ni bilo več konkurenčno (razlog, da se je odločilo za ukinitev notranje proizvodnje) in za katerega je značilen močan prodor proizvajalcev iz poceni držav.
The hypothesis adopted by the French authorities whereby the whole of the decline in microwave oven sales observed over the two-year period is attributed entirely to the decision to stop marketing microwave ovens under the Vedette brand therefore seems to be an extreme one.
Trditev, ki so jo zagovarjali francoski organi, to je da je treba celotni upad prodaje mikrovalovnih pečic, evidentiran v navedenih dveh letih, pripisati izključno odločitvi za ukinitev trženja mikrovalovnih pečic pod blagovno znamko Vedette, se torej zdi pretirana.
The Commission Decision of 21 June 1994 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M458 — Electrolux/AEG) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (OJ C 187, 9.7.1994) concluded that the geographic market for large electrical household appliances was western Europe.
V Odločbi Komisije z dne 21. junija 1994, ki koncentracijo razglaša za združljivo s skupnim trgom (Primer IV/M.458 – ELECTROLUX/AEG) v skladu z Uredbo Sveta (EGS) št. 4064/89 (UL C 187, 9.7.1994), je ugotovljeno, da geografski obseg trgov bele tehnike zajema zahodno Evropo.
The Commission Decision 2000/475/EC of 24 January 1999 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case IV.F.1/36.718.CEDE) (OJ L 187, 26.7.2000, p. 47) concluded that the geographic market was the EEA.
V Odločbi Komisije 2000/475/ES z dne 24. januarja 1999 v zvezi s postopkom na podlagi člena 81 Pogodbe ES in člena 53 Sporazuma EGP, ki se nanaša na Primer IV.F.1/36.718. CECED (UL L 187, 26.7.2000, str. 47), je ugotovljeno, da geografska razsežnost zajema EGP.
The latter case concerned the washing machine sector.
V zadnjem primeru je šlo za sektor pralnih strojev.
The combined market share of FagorBrandt and Fagor Electrodomésticos is at most 8 %.
Skupni tržni delež podjetij FagorBrandt in Fagor Electrodomésticos je največ osemodstotni.
The Commission cannot accept France’s argument that FagorBrandt’s continued presence in the market has a positive effect by preventing the creation of an oligopolistic situation.
Komisija ne more sprejeti trditve Francije, da ima nadaljnja prisotnost podjetja FagorBrandt na trgu pozitiven učinek, ker preprečuje oligopolni položaj.
The French authorities have not backed up their assertion with specific evidence.
Francoski organi trditve niso natančno utemeljili.
It is contradicted, moreover, by their notification, which described a highly competitive market with diversified competition from, among others, distributor brands.
Poleg tega je ta trditev nasprotna njihovi priglasitvi, v kateri je opisan zelo konkurenčen trg z raznovrstno konkurenco, ki jo ustvarjajo zlasti distribucijske blagovne znamke.
Lastly, point 39 of the restructuring guidelines states that account will be taken of ‘a monopoly or a tight oligopolistic situation’, which is not the case here given that, counting just the majors alone, the number of competitors already comes to four.
Ne nazadnje je v odstavku 39 smernic za prestrukturiranje navedeno, da se upošteva „monopolen ali hud oligopolen“ položaj, kar v tem primeru ne velja, saj so na trgu že zdaj štirje konkurenti, če upoštevamo samo največja podjetja.
If the analysis is done at world level the difference is even bigger, as groups like Electrolux and Whirlpool have very substantial business interests outside Europe.
Na podlagi analize na svetovni ravni je razlika še večja, saj imajo skupine, kot sta Electrolux in Whirlpool, zelo obsežne dejavnosti zunaj Evrope.
For example, in 2005, the combined turnover of FagorBrandt and Fagor Electrodomésticos came to less than EUR 2 billion, whereas the worldwide turnover in large electrical household appliances of Whirlpool, Electrolux, BSH and Indesit, expressed in euro, came to 11,8 billion, 10,8 billion, 7,3 billion and 3,1 billion respectively.
Na primer, leta 2005 je skupni promet podjetij FagorBrandt in Fagor Electrodomésticos znašal manj kot 2 milijardi EUR, medtem ko je svetovni promet podjetij Whirlpool, Electrolux, BSH in Indesit z belo tehniko v EUR znašal 11,8 milijarde, 10,8 milijarde, 7,3 milijarde oziroma 3,1 milijarde.
[50-80] % of FagorBrandt’s sales are made in the French market.
FagorBrandt namreč [50–80] % prodaje ustvari na francoskem trgu.
The Court of Justice has repeatedly held in this connection that ‘Where a Member State grants aid to an undertaking, domestic production may for that reason be maintained or increased with the result that undertakings established in other Member States have less chance of exporting their products to the market in that Member State.’
V zvezi s tem je Sodišče večkrat navedlo, da „kadar država članica dodeli pomoč podjetju, se domača proizvodnja zato lahko ohrani ali poveča, tako da imajo podjetja s sedežem v drugih državah članicah manj možnosti za izvoz svojih izdelkov na trg te države članice“.
See Case C-102/87 France v Commission [1988] ECR 4067, at paragraph 19; Joined Cases C-278/92, C-279/92 and C-280/92 Spain v Commission [1994] ECR I-4103, at paragraph 40; Case C-310/99 Italy v Commission [2002] ECR I-2289, at paragraphs 84-86; Case T-152/99 HAMSA v Commission [2002] ECR II-3049, at paragraphs 220-221.
Sodbe z dne 13. julija 1988 v zadevi Francija proti Komisiji (C-102/87, Recueil, str. 04067, prim. točka 19); z dne 14. septembra 1994 v zadevi Španija proti Komisiji (C-278/92, C-279/92 in C-280/92, Recueil, str. I-4103, prim. točka 40); z dne 7. marca 2002 v zadevi Italija proti Komisiji (C-310/99, Recueil, str. I-2289, prim. točke od 84 do 86); z dne 11. julija 2002 v zadevi HAMSA proti Komisiji (T-152/99, Recueil, str. II-3049, prim. točki 220 in 221).
The French press widely reported the lack of profitability of the freezer business.
V francoskem tisku je nedobičkonosnost dejavnosti proizvodnje zamrzovalnikov močno odmevala.
An article in Ouest France dated 8 July 2004 stated, for example, that ‘In 2005, ElcoBrand, the French domestic appliance group, will close its freezer manufacturing plant in Lesquin (Nord) because it is “no longer profitable”.
V članku v dnevniku Ouest France z dne 8. julija 2004 je bilo na primer navedeno: „ElcoBrandt, francoski proizvajalec električnih gospodinjskih aparatov, bo leta 2005 zaradi ‚izgube dobičkonosnosti‘ zaprl tovarno v Lesquinu (Nord), specializirano za proizvodnjo zamrzovalnikov.
Elco took over the plant from Brandt two years ago.
Elco je obrat pred dvema letoma prevzel od družbe Brandt.
The 600 employees agreed to a redundancy programme under which 150 jobs were to be maintained, but they have now been lost.
600 zaposlenih je sprejelo socialni načrt, ki je predvideval ohranitev 150 delovnih mest, ki bodo odslej ukinjena.