natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Where necessary, the procedure could result in the supervisory authority replacing the executive of La Poste to take the decisions needed for the payment of its debts using the establishment’s resources.
Rezultat tega postopka bi lahko bil, da bi nadzorni organ nadomestil izvršilni organ podjetja La Poste pri sprejemanju odločitev, potrebnih za plačilo njegovih dolgov iz sredstev osebe javnega prava.
The Commission notes that the French authorities’ expert accepts that it is not certain that the absence in the Finance Act of authorisation for an implied guarantee means that the guarantee lapses in respect of debts contracted before 1 January 2005.
Komisija ugotavlja, da izvedenec francoskih organov priznava, da ni gotovo, da dejstvo, da implicitno poroštvo ni dovoljeno v zakonu o financah, povzroči neveljavnost tega poroštva za dolgove, nastale pred 1. januarjem 2005.
More fundamentally, the Commission believes that, in order to determine whether or not the implied guarantee given by the State to La Poste has lapsed as a result of the Organic Law governing the Finance Act, what has to be considered is not the dates on which the debts were contracted by La Poste, but the date from which La Poste has enjoyed the guarantee.
Z bolj temeljnega vidika Komisija meni, da je treba za ugotovitev, ali je implicitno poroštvo države za podjetje La Poste z LOLF postalo neveljavno ali ne, preučiti, od kdaj je podjetje La Poste upravičeno do tega implicitnega poroštva, ne pa datumov nastanka dolgov podjetja La Poste.
The existence of this second category outside the scope of Article 34 of the Organic Law on the Finance Act explains why the rule established by the case law on guarantees given by concessionaires has continued beyond 2001.
Dejstvo, da obstoj te druge kategorije ne spada na področje člena 34 LOLF, pojasnjuje, da sodna praksa o poroštvu zaradi koncesionarjev vztraja še po letu 2001.
It also explains why when the State is a shareholder or partner in a company or grouping whose debts are covered under the Commercial Code by an unlimited guarantee, the State is not required to specify that fact in a Finance Act.
Pojasnjuje tudi, da vsakokrat, ko je država delničarka ali družbenica družbe ali skupine, za katero poroštvo za dolgove ni omejeno s trgovinskim zakonikom, državi tega ni treba določiti v zakonu o financah.
In their memorandum of 27 October 2009 the French authorities deny that it is ‘impossible’ for La Poste to mobilise its own capital and reserves. As regards the sale of assets, the State is free to determine at its discretion whether an asset is ‘indispensable’ for the provision of the public service. Even if it does object to a sale, it does not thereby incur any obligation to compensate via a guarantee mechanism.
Francoski organi v obvestilu z dne 27. oktobra 2009 izpodbijajo „nezmožnost“ zagotovitve lastnih sredstev za podjetje La Poste:
As a matter of fact the State never has objected to a sale of assets under Article 23 of the Law of 2 July 1990, which has in any event fallen into desuetude since 2005, when La Poste transferred almost all of its immovable property assets (including post offices) to a subsidiary that was not subject to this system of prior authorisation. As regards increases in charges for the universal postal service, ARCEP, the postal regulator, does not decide prices, and sets a price cap only for La Poste’s regulated activities, below which prices can be determined freely (with the exception of the prices of stamps, which are laid down by the Minister responsible for posts, who must stay within the price cap).
kar zadeva prodajo premoženja, lahko država po lastnem preudarku presodi, ali določeno premoženje šteje za „nepogrešljivo“ ali ne za izvajanje javne službe; poleg tega, tudi če taki prodaji nasprotuje, to ne pomeni, da jo mora izravnati z mehanizmi poroštva; nazadnje, država dejansko ni nikoli nasprotovala prodaji premoženja na podlagi člena 23 zakona z dne 2. julija 1990, ki je poleg tega postal zastarel, potem ko je podjetje La Poste leta 2005 skoraj vse svoje nepremičninsko premoženje (vključno s poštnimi uradi) preneslo na hčerinsko podjetje, za katero ta sistem predhodnega dovoljenja ne velja,
It is reasonable to suppose that ARCEP would have difficulty refusing an increase in rates that was indispensable to the survival of La Poste and the public service functions it provides. The price cap applies only to the regulated sector, which accounts for less than half of the La Poste group’s operating profit.
kar zadeva povišanje tarif za storitve univerzalne poštne storitve, francoski organi navajajo, da ARCEP ne sprejema tarif, ampak določi price cap samo za regulirane dejavnosti podjetja La Poste, pod katerim se tarife podjetja La Poste prosto spreminjajo (razen cene znamke, ki jo z odlokom določi minister, pristojen za pošto, ob upoštevanju price cap); poleg tega si lahko mislimo, da bi ARCEP težko zavrnil povišanje tarif, ki bi bilo nepogrešljivo za preživetje subjekta in nalog javne službe, ki jih zagotavlja; nazadnje, ta price cap se nanaša samo na regulirani sektor, ki predstavlja manj kot polovico poslovnega rezultata skupine La Poste.
The Commission draws the following conclusions: In the event of a shortage of funds, French legislation authorises or indeed encourages the State to provide capital to publicly owned establishments, rather than expecting them to secure conventional bank loans. Access to these resources is in no way conditional on prior compliance with the rules governing State aid.
Komisija ugotavlja, da:
The judgment delivered by a division of the Council of State on 18 November 2005 in Société fermière de Campoloro, No 271898, found as follows: ‘In the event of a failure on the part of a local or regional authority to ensure the application of a judgment no longer open to appeal, after proper notice, the legislature here sets out to give the representative of the State the power to step into the shoes of that authority, in order to release or create the resources that will allow the judgment to be enforced in its entirety.
Najprej je treba opozoriti na načelno uvodno izjavo iz sodbe sodišča Conseil d’Etat de Section z dne 18. novembra 2005 v zadevi Société fermière de Campoloro, št. 271898:
The representative of the State consequently has a duty, subject to judicial review, to take the measures necessary in the light of the situation of the authority and the requirements of the public interest. Such measures include the possibility of selling assets belonging to the authority, provided they are not indispensable to the proper operation of the public services for which the authority is responsible. If the prefect refuses or neglects to exercise the prerogatives conferred on him by law, a creditor of the authority is entitled to bring an action against the State in case of serious fault committed in the exercise of the supervisory power. In addition, if, having regard to the situation of the local or regional authority, and in particular to an insufficiency in its assets, or by reason of requirements of the public interest, the prefect legitimately refuses to take certain measures with a view to ensuring that the judgment is enforced in full, the State as holder of public authority may be liable for any injury caused to a creditor of the local or regional authority if the injury is of an abnormal and specific kind’.
„zakonodajalec je s temi določbami nameraval predstavnika države pooblastiti, da nadomesti organe ozemeljske skupnosti, če ta ne bi zagotovila izvršitve pravnomočne sodne odločbe in po opominu v zvezi s tem, da bi zagotovil ali ustvaril sredstva, ki bi omogočala izvršitev te sodne odločbe v celoti; zato mora pod nadzorom sodišča ter ob upoštevanju položaja skupnosti in nujnih razlogov v splošnem interesu sprejeti potrebne ukrepe; ti vključujejo možnost prodaje premoženja skupnosti, če to ni nepogrešljivo za dobro delovanje javnih služb, za katere je pristojna; če prefekt ne uporabi posebnih pravic, ki so mu podeljene z zakonom, ali jih zanemari, ima upnik ozemeljske skupnosti pravico, da v primeru resne napake pri izvajanju pooblastila nadzora uveljavlja odgovornost države; poleg tega, če je glede na položaj skupnosti, zlasti glede na nezadostnost sredstev, ali zaradi nujnih razlogov v splošnem interesu prefekt lahko zakonito zavrnil sprejetje nekaterih ukrepov, s katerimi bi zagotovil izvršitev sodne odločbe v celoti, se lahko za škodo, ki za upnika izhaja iz ozemeljske skupnosti, uveljavlja odgovornost javne oblasti, če je ta škoda neobičajna in posebna“.
‘That is why no arrangements to soften the blow have been made under national law to confront a situation of default on the part of the commune’; ‘The State cannot offload its obligation to implement judicial decisions by invoking the absence of funds or the autonomy of regional or local authorities — an autonomy that it has not been able to guarantee to date, since the commune is in no position to pay its debts. The applicants therefore denounce the State’s incapacity to adopt positive measures that would have enabled the commune to contribute in accordance with its obligation’.
„Tako ni v notranjem pravu določeno nobeno zasilno sredstvo za spoprijem s položajem ustavitve plačil občine“; „država se ne more rešiti svoje obveznosti izvršitve sodnih odločb s sklicevanjem na neobstoj sredstev ali samostojnost lokalnih skupnosti, ki je do tega dne ni mogla zagotoviti, saj občina ni sposobna plačati svojih dolgov.
the strict liability scheme is, for its part, based on two scenarios,
sistem nekrivdne odgovornosti pa temelji na dveh predpostavkah:
in the first scenario, the prefect refuses to take certain measures because of requirements of the public interest: these might include the need to preserve not only the existence of the regional or local authority but also the public service task.
V prvi predpostavki prefekt ne sprejme nekaterih ukrepov zaradi nujnih razlogov v splošnem interesu: to je lahko potreba po ohranitvi obstoja ozemeljske skupnosti, pa tudi po ohranitvi naloge javne službe.
The French authorities’ expert emphasises that continuity is required only of the service and not of the establishment that manages the service.
Izvedenec francoskih organov poudarja, da zahteva po kontinuiteti velja samo za službo, ne pa tudi za osebo javnega prava, ki jo upravlja.
It nonetheless remains the case that, in the short term and until such time as the public service task is conceivably transferred to an establishment capable of taking over that task, the continuity of public service may involve the prefect’s taking a number of measures, for example measures to preserve the assets necessary to the public service task or to increase the resources required to pay the claim.
Vseeno ostaja dejstvo, da lahko kratkoročno v pričakovanju morebitnega prenosa naloge javne službe na osebo javnega prava, ki jo je sposobna prevzeti, ohranitev kontinuitete javne službe za prefekta pomeni, da mora sprejeti nekatere ukrepe, na primer ohranitev sredstev, potrebnih za nalogo javne službe, ali povečanje sredstev za plačilo terjatve.
Moreover, the French authorities recognise that the representative of the State is required to preserve the continuity of public service in implementing the procedure introduced by the Law of 16 July 1980;
Poleg tega francoski organi priznavajo, da mora predstavnik države pri izvajanju postopka, uvedenega z zakonom z dne 16. julija 1980, zagotavljati kontinuiteto javne službe.
in the second scenario, the strict liability scheme can be invoked if, having regard to the situation of the local or regional authority, and in particular to an insufficiency in its assets, […] the prefect legitimately refuses to take certain measures with a view to ensuring that the judgment is enforced in full, the State as holder of public authority may be liable for any injury caused to a creditor of the local or regional authority if the injury is of an abnormal and specific kind.
V drugi predpostavki se lahko nekrivdna odgovornost uveljavlja, „če je glede na položaj skupnosti, zlasti glede na nezadostnost sredstev, […] prefekt lahko zakonito zavrnil sprejetje nekaterih ukrepov, s katerimi bi zagotovil izvršitev sodne odločbe v celoti, se lahko za škodo, ki za upnika izhaja iz ozemeljske skupnosti, uveljavlja odgovornost javnega organa, če je ta škoda neobičajna in posebna“.
Therefore, if a guarantee existed before 2006, its existence and the possibility of activating it were not rendered null and void by the Commission letter dated 26 February 2006.
Če je poroštvo obstajalo pred letom 2006, njegov obstoj in možnost njegovega aktiviranja nista razveljavljena z dopisom Komisije z dne 26. februarja 2006.
That would be possible only by the annulment of the guarantee itself, either by France or the Commission on the basis of an act with binding legal effect.
To bi bilo mogoče samo, če bi bodisi Francija bodisi Komisija poroštvo ukinila na podlagi akta z zavezujočimi pravnimi učinki.
As pointed out above, Fitch based its decision on the fact that ‘La Poste’s legal status as a public operator no longer justifies its ratings being automatically aligned with the sovereign rating’.
Kot je bilo navedeno zgoraj, je agencija Fitch odločitev oprla na dejstvo, da „status javnega izvajalca, ki ga ima podjetje La Poste, ne upravičuje več, da so njegove ocene samodejno usklajene z državo“.
Fitch explains that La Poste’s ratings are now based on the support from the parent company, i.e. the State, to its subsidiary, La Poste.
Fitch pojasnjuje, da bodo ocene podjetja La Poste odslej temeljile na razmerju podpore med matičnim podjetjem, v tem primeru državo, in njegovim hčerinskim podjetjem, to je podjetjem La Poste.
In this regard, the Commission would refer to the S & P analysis dated 22 November 2004 on the influence of government support on ratings of postal entities, the analysis dated 14 June 2006 on rating government-related entities and the 2007 study on La Poste.
V zvezi s tem se Komisija sklicuje na analizo agencije S & P z dne 22. novembra 2004 o vplivu državne podpore na bonitetno oceno poštnih subjektov, na analizo z dne 14. junija 2006 o bonitetni oceni subjektov, povezanih z državo, in študijo iz leta 2007 o podjetju La Poste.
According to these analyses, the rating of an undertaking that enjoys strong state support is derived from the sovereign rating; however, it may be downgraded by two categories (or 6 notches) where the financial links between the undertaking in question and the State may change in the medium or long term.
Glede na te analize bonitetna ocena podjetja, ki ima močno državno podporo, izhaja iz bonitetne ocene, dodeljene državi; vseeno pa se lahko zniža za dve kategoriji (ali za 6 notches), ker se lahko finančne vezi med navedenim podjetjem in državo srednjeročno ali dolgoročno spremenijo.
In support of that statement, France refers to the S & P analysis dated 3 April 2007.
Francija se v podporo tej trditvi sklicuje na analizo agencije S & P z dne 3. aprila 2007.
As pointed out above, S & P states in the analysis that La Poste’s rating was unaffected after the Commission announced its letter recommending the end of the guarantee, because S & P considers that a change in La Poste’s status would not necessarily reflect a decrease in the strong state support that underpins La Poste’s ratings and that has been reaffirmed by recent government decisions.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno zgoraj, S & P v tej analizi navaja, da je po napovedi iz dopisa Komisije, da bo priporočila ukinitev poroštva, bonitetna ocena podjetja La Poste ostala nespremenjena, ker je S & P menila, da sprememba statusa podjetja La Poste ne bi nujno izražala zmanjšanja močne državne podpore, na kateri temelji ocena podjetja La Poste in ki je bila potrjena z nedavnimi vladnimi odločitvami.
It should be noted here that, pursuant to Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service, as amended by Directives 2002/39/EC and 2008/6/EC (‘the Postal Directive’), all postal services will have to be subject to competition in France by 1 January 2011.
V zvezi s tem je treba pripomniti, da morajo biti na podlagi Direktive 97/67/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 15. decembra 1997 o skupnih pravilih za razvoj notranjega trga poštnih storitev v Skupnosti in za izboljšanje kakovosti storitve, kakor je bila spremenjena z direktivama 2002/39/ES in 2008/6/ES (v nadaljnjem besedilu: poštna direktiva), vse poštne storitve v Franciji izpostavljene konkurenci najpozneje do 1. januarja 2011.
In these circumstances, the existence of an unlimited guarantee in favour of La Poste is liable to distort competition and affect trade within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
V teh okoliščinah lahko obstoj neomejenega državnega poroštva v korist podjetja La Poste izkrivlja konkurenco in vpliva na trgovino v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
On 4 October 2006, in accordance with Article 18 of the Procedural Regulation, the Commission asked that the unlimited guarantee be withdrawn by 31 December 2008.
Komisija je 4. oktobra 2006 v skladu s členom 18 postopkovne uredbe zahtevala, naj se neomejeno poroštvo ukine najpozneje do 31. decembra 2008.
In view, however, of the circumstances of the case, the fact that the discussions with the French authorities lasted until October 2009 and the time needed to approve the legal instruments terminating the guarantee, the Commission considers it reasonable to ask the French authorities to effectively withdraw the unlimited guarantee by 31 March 2010,
Vendar ob upoštevanju okoliščin primera in dejstva, da so se pogovori s francoskimi organi zavlekli do oktobra 2009, ter časa, potrebnega za odobritev pravnih aktov, s katerimi bo to poroštvo ukinjeno, Komisija meni, da je razumno od francoskih organov zahtevati, naj neomejeno poroštvo dejansko ukinejo najpozneje do 31. marca 2010 –
In France, besides the public authorities themselves such as central and local government, there are two main categories of legal person governed by public law, namely publicly owned establishments and public interest groups, which were created by Law No 82-610 of 15 July 1982.
V Franciji obstajata poleg organov javne uprave, kot so država in lokalne skupnosti, dve glavni kategoriji pravnih oseb javnega prava: osebe javnega prava in skupine javnega interesa, ki so bile ustanovljene z zakonom št. 82-610 z dne 15. julija 1982.
Within the publicly owned establishment category, a distinction can be drawn between publicly owned establishments of an administrative character (EPAs), which perform the tasks normally associated with an administrative authority, and publicly owned establishments of an industrial and commercial character (EPICs), which pursue economic activities.
V okviru „oseb javnega prava“ je mogoče načelno razlikovati med osebami javnega prava upravne narave (établissements publics à caractère administratif – EPA), ki zagotavljajo tradicionalne naloge uprave, ter osebami javnega prava industrijske in komercialne narave (Etablissements publics à caractère industriel et commercial – EPIC), ki opravljajo dejavnosti gospodarske narave.
Decree No 81-501.
Odlok št. 81-501.
When the French authorities made their proposal, the implementing decree was Decree No 81-501 of 12 May 1981 for implementation of the Law of 16 July 1980 on penalties imposed in administrative cases and the enforcement of judgments by legal entities governed by public law and relating to the ‘Reports and Studies’ Section of the Council of State.
Ko so francoski organi pripravili predlog, je bil odlok o izvajanju odlok št. 81-501 z dne 12. maja 1981, sprejet za izvajanje zakona z dne 16. julija 1980 o denarnih kaznih, izrečenih na upravnem področju, in izvrševanju sodb s strani pravnih oseb javnega prava, in o „oddelku za poročila in študije“ pri sodišču Conseil d’Etat.
La Poste’s assets were brought under ordinary law by the Law of 11 December 2001, known as the Murcef Law.
Premoženje podjetja La Poste je bilo ponovno razvrščeno z zakonom z dne 11. decembra 2001, imenovanim zakon MURCEF.
But that law provides that ‘where the terms of a transfer of an asset to or from La Poste compromise the proper performance by La Poste of its statutory or regulatory obligations or commitments entered into in its programme contract […] the State shall object to the transfer or make it subject to the condition that it must not prejudice the proper performance of those obligations’.
Kljub temu ta zakon določa, da „kadar pogoji prodaje ali prinosa premoženja podjetju La Poste onemogočajo dobro izvajanje zakonodajnih in zakonskih obveznosti ali obvez, sprejetih na podlagi okvirne pogodbe […], država nasprotuje prodaji ali prinosu ali za njuno uresničitev določi pogoj, da ne škodujeta dobremu izvajanju navedenih obveznosti“.
Decree No 2001-1383 of 31 December 2001, winding up the Etablissement public chargé de l’aménagement des rives de l’Etang de Berre: Article 6 provides that a decree will determine the transfer to the State of the assets and liabilities remaining at the close of the liquidation account and of the rights and obligations arising from the establishment’s activities or during the winding-up period and not known about at the end of that period.
Odlok št. 2001-1383 z dne 31. decembra 2001 o razpustitvi osebe javnega prava, pristojne za urejanje obrežij Etang de Berre: v skladu s členom 6 bo z odlokom določeno, da se na državo prenesejo elementi aktive in pasive, ki ostanejo po zaprtju likvidacijskega računa, ter pravice in obveznosti, ki nastanejo pri dejavnosti ali med obdobjem likvidacije ter ob koncu tega obdobja niso znane.
Decree No 2004-234 of 17 March 2004, including a variety of provisions relating to the winding up of the public establishment responsible for land use on the banks of the Etang de Berre transfers ‘disputes arising from the establishment’s activities’ to the State.
Z odlokom št. 2004-234 z dne 17. marca 2004 o različnih določbah v zvezi z likvidacijo osebe javnega prava, pristojne za urejanje obrežij Etang de Berre, se na državo prenesejo „spori, nastali pri dejavnosti“.
Article 4 of the Decree of 29 April 2004, winding up the Syndicat mixte pour le développement de la zone industrielle et portuaire Eure-Calvados (Official Journal of the French Republic of 6 May 2004): ‘the charges remaining on the date when the Syndicat mixte is wound up shall be distributed between its members in accordance with its articles of association’.
Odlok z dne 29. aprila 2004 o razpustitvi mešanega sindikata za razvoj industrijskega in pristaniškega območja Eure-Calvados (JORF, 6.5.2004), člen 4: „Bremena, ki obstajajo na datum likvidacije mešanega sindikata, se v skladu z njegovim statutom porazdelijo med njegove člane“.
Extract from ‘International Postal Entities: Influence of government support on ratings’, Standard & Poor ' s, 22 November 2004. Original in English.
Izvleček iz „International Postal Entities: Influence of government support on ratings“ Standard and Poor’s, 22. november 2004: „La Poste’s legal status, which ensures a last-recourse sovereign guarantee, confers the ultimate statutory guarantee of the Republic of France on its obligations.“
Case E 10/2000, Anstaltslast und Gewährträgerhaftung, point 5 of the proposal for appropriate measures of 8.5.2001.
Zadeva E 10/2000, „Anstaltslast und Gewährträgerhaftung“, točka 5 predloga za koristne ukrepe z dne 8. maja 2001.
Consultable on the Commission website: http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/comp-2000/e010-00-1.pdf
Na voljo na spletni strani Komisije: http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/comp-2000/e010-00-1.pdf