natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Thus, the Commission accepts that in 2007 the company could not restore viability without public support and that it had financial difficulties also on the basis of point 9 of the R&R Guidelines.
Tako se Komisija strinja, da leta 2007 družba ne bi mogla obnoviti sposobnosti preživetja brez državne pomoči in da je imela finančne težave tudi na podlagi točke 9 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
The Commission considers the State guarantees of 2007 and 2008 to be rescue aid.
Komisija meni, da državni poroštvi iz let 2007 in 2008 pomenita pomoč za reševanje.
Indeed, the former was intended to address Varvaressos’s financial problem in the short run, by giving it a breathing space through the 2-year freeze on loan instalments.
Državno poroštvo iz leta 2007 je bilo namenjeno kratkoročnemu reševanju finančnih težav družbe Varvaressos, tako da bi z zamrznitvijo obročnih posojil za dve leti družba pridobila nekaj časa.
The latter aimed at keeping the company afloat until a restructuring plan was submitted.
Državno poroštvo iz leta 2008 je bilo namenjeno preživetju družbe do predložitve načrta za prestrukturiranje.
However, the Commission has also to assess the compatibility of the aid measure on all other possible grounds.
Vendar mora Komisija oceniti tudi združljivost ukrepa pomoči na podlagi vseh drugih mogočih razlogov.
Point 20 of the R&R Guidelines limits the grounds to those stipulated under the rescue and restructuring guidelines.
Točka 20 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje omejuje razloge na tiste, ki so določeni v smernicah za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
That would still leave the possibility of the rescue aid qualifying as restructuring aid, i.e. as part of a restructuring continuum (see also Case C 11/2007, Ottana Energia [23]).
Tako bi še vedno obstajala možnost, da bi se pomoč za reševanje štela za pomoč za prestrukturiranje, tj. kot del nepretrganega prestrukturiranja (glej tudi zadevo C 11/2007, Ottana Energia) [23].
In this context and as regards the question whether the three measures under scrutiny form a restructuring continuum, the Commission considers that indeed they do.
V tem okviru Komisija meni, da trije ukrepi, ki so predmet preiskave, predstavljajo nepretrgano prestrukturiranje.
This consideration stems from the following:
To mnenje temelji na naslednjem:
Firstly, all three measures were directed at the same purpose, i.e. to address the problem arising from the company’s past high loan obligations.
Cilj vseh treh ukrepov je bil enak, in sicer obravnavati težave, ki so posledica visokih posojil družbe v preteklosti.
Furthermore, the 2007 and 2008 guarantees were not enough to provide the company with the financial resources needed for its restructuring (equal to at least its total loans, i.e. EUR 25,4 million at the end of 2006), as the latter could be achieved only through the combination of the three measures, as three tranches of one single restructuring process.
Poleg tega poroštvi iz let 2007 in 2008 nista zadoščali, da bi se družbi zagotovila finančna sredstva, potrebna za njeno prestrukturiranje (ki so enaka vsaj skupnim posojilom družbe, tj. 25,4 milijona EUR ob koncu leta 2006), saj bi bilo prestrukturiranje mogoče izvesti le s kombinacijo vseh treh ukrepov kot treh delov enega samega postopka prestrukturiranja.
In addition, the restructuring plan of 2009 is the same as the recovery plan already submitted by the company to the Greek authorities in 2006 (see recitals 11-12 above), with certain amendments in the context of its assessment.
Načrt za prestrukturiranje iz leta 2009 pa je enak kot sanacijski načrt, ki ga je družba že predložila grškim organom leta 2006 (glej uvodni izjavi 11 in 12 zgoraj), z nekaterimi spremembami v okviru njegove ocene.
Thus, the Commission concludes that the aid measures under scrutiny are tranches of the same restructuring, granted in order to facilitate the implementation of a single restructuring plan.
Tako Komisija ugotavlja, da obravnavani ukrepi pomoči pomenijo tranše istega prestrukturiranja, odobrene za spodbuditev izvajanja enotnega načrta za prestrukturiranje.
Thus, the ‘one time, last time’ principle is not infringed.
Načelo enkratnosti pomoči torej ni kršeno.
On the basis of the above, the Commission will assess the compatibility of the three aid measures as a restructuring continuum.
Na podlagi navedenega bo Komisija ocenila združljivost treh ukrepov pomoči kot nepretrganega prestrukturiranja.
The Commission is of the view that the measures provided for in the restructuring plan are indeed tackling the exact sources of the company’s difficulties.
Komisija meni, da ukrepi iz načrta za prestrukturiranje dejansko obravnavajo prave vire težav družbe.
In particular, in the Commission’s view the plan rightly identifies the following factors (external and internal) as the sources of Varvaressos’s difficulties:
Komisija zlasti meni, da načrt pravilno opredeljuje naslednje dejavnike (zunanje in notranje) kot vire težav družbe Varvaressos:
past heavy borrowing (in the period 2000-2005),
prekomerno posojanje v preteklosti (v obdobju 2000–2005),
high operating costs (drop in margin due to Asian competition and soaring input prices),
visoki stroški poslovanja (nižje marže zaradi azijske konkurence in visokih cen vložkov),
inability to respond to market development.
nezmožnost odzivanja na razvoj trga.
The proposed restructuring measures aim at remedying these problems.
Cilj predlaganih ukrepov za prestrukturiranje je odpraviti te težave.
Firstly, the plan proposes the financial restructuring of the company; secondly, it proposes concrete measures to improve the company’s profit margin by changing the earnings mix and reducing operating costs; and thirdly, it proposes management modernisation.
Prvič, v načrtu je predlagano finančno prestrukturiranje družbe; drugič, predlagani so konkretni ukrepi za povečanje stopnje dobička družbe s spremembo virov dobička in zmanjšanjem stroškov poslovanja; tretjič, predlagana je posodobitev vodenja.
The restructuring measures are broken down into 14 ‘actions’ with costs attributed to each.
Ukrepi za prestrukturiranje so razdeljeni na 14 „dejavnosti“, pri čemer so za vsako od njih predvideni stroški.
The Commission concludes that the proposed actions indeed seem to be adequately tackling the company’s fundamental problems.
Komisija ugotavlja, da predlagane dejavnosti dejansko ustrezno odpravljajo temeljne težave družbe.
With regard to the financial impact of the restructuring plan, the financial projections realistically follow the implementation of the restructuring package.
V zvezi s finančnim vplivom načrta za prestrukturiranje finančne napovedi realistično upoštevajo izvajanje svežnja za prestrukturiranje.
Both increase in turnover (about 5 % yearly) and increase in operating income (about 10 % yearly) are reasonable after the implementation of the restructuring measures (i.e. re-direction of the product mix and cost rationalisation measures).
Povečanje prometa (za približno 5 % na leto) in povečanje poslovnih prihodkov (za približno 10 % na leto) sta razumna po izvajanju ukrepov za prestrukturiranje (tj. preusmeritve ponudbe in ukrepov za racionalizacijo stroškov).
On this basis, the Commission accepts that the restructuring will enable the company to return to viability in 2011 and its shareholders will have a return on their invested capital that will be higher than or (at worst) equal to their borrowing cost, therefore at a satisfactory level.
Na podlagi tega se Komisija strinja, da bo prestrukturiranje družbi omogočilo, da leta 2011 obnovi sposobnost preživetja, pri čemer bo donos njenih delničarjev na vloženi kapital višji od stroškov izposojanja ali (v najslabšem primeru) enak tem stroškom, kar pomeni, da bo na zadovoljivi ravni.
The Commission notes that these results will be achieved within a reasonable timescale and that the expected results are based on reasonable assumptions.
Komisija ugotavlja, da bodo ti rezultati doseženi v razumnem časovnem okviru in da pričakovani rezultati temeljijo na razumnih predpostavkah.
Thus, the Commission considers that the plan meets the criteria of points 35-37 of the R&R Guidelines.
Zato Komisija meni, da načrt izpolnjuje merila iz točk 35–37 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
With regard to the proposed compensatory measures, the restructuring plan proposes: (a) withdrawal of the company from the Greek market by at least 10 %, compared to 2009 sales in Greece, for the period until the end of 2013, i.e. 2 years after the end of the restructuring; and (b) a ban on any kind of State aid to the company for the period until the end of 2013, i.e. 2 years after the end of the restructuring.
Kar zadeva predlagane izravnalne ukrepe, sta v načrtu za prestrukturiranje predlagana: (a) zmanjšanje prodaje družbe na grškem trgu za vsaj 10 % v primerjavi s prodajo v Grčiji leta 2009 v obdobju do konca leta 2013, tj. dve leti po koncu prestrukturiranja; ter (b) prepoved kakršne koli državne pomoči za družbo do konca leta 2013, tj. dve leti po koncu prestrukturiranja.
The Commission considers that the proposed 10 % withdrawal from Greece will allow competitors to enter or increase their sales in a market where the company has a strengthened presence.
Komisija meni, da bo predlagano 10-odstotno zmanjšanje prodaje v Grčiji konkurentom omogočilo, da vstopijo na trg, na katerem ima družba močno prisotnost, ali povečajo svojo prodajo na tem trgu.
Indeed, the company’s presence in Greece has increased considerably in past years, from 32 % to 42 %, unlike its EU sales, which fell from 67 % to 52 % (see recital 7 above).
Prisotnost družbe v Grčiji se je v preteklih letih dejansko zelo povečala, in sicer z 32 % na 42 %, medtem ko se je njena prodaja v EU zmanjšala s 67 % na 52 % (glej uvodno izjavo 7 zgoraj).
Finally, the company is ranked tenth in the Greek textile market (according to 2007 data, see recital 8 above).
Poleg tega je družba na grškem trgu tekstila na desetem mestu (na podlagi podatkov za leto 2007, glej uvodno izjavo 8 zgoraj).
At the same time, the company’s presence in non-EU countries has also increased in the past years (from 1 % to 6 %), which shows that the company’s viability does not depend on increasing its presence in the EU market.
Prav tako se je v preteklih letih povečala prisotnost družbe v državah, ki niso članice EU (z 1 % na 6 %), kar kaže, da sposobnost preživetja družbe ni odvisna od povečanja njene prisotnosti na trgu EU.
At the same time, the withdrawal from the Greek market will mean Varvaressos partially or entirely giving up its established commercial relations within its own country and attempting to replace them with new ones, in other EU Member States or in third countries.
Zmanjšanje prodaje na grškem trgu bo tudi pomenilo, da bo morala družba Varvaressos delno ali v celoti prekiniti vzpostavljene poslovne odnose v lastni državi in jih poskusiti nadomestiti z novimi odnosi v drugih državah članicah EU ali tretjih državah.
This will be a real test of the company’s competitiveness.
To bo pravi preskus konkurenčnosti podjetja.
The Commission also notes that under all three viability scenarios, the company’s sales are expected to increase (see recital 24 above).
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da se v vseh treh scenarijih v zvezi s sposobnostjo preživetja pričakuje povečanje prodaje družbe (glej uvodno izjavo 24 zgoraj).
However, the reduction of sales in Greece does not contradict the increase in turnover: the former can take place to the benefit of the company’s competitors by freeing up capacity for them; the latter will allow the viability of the beneficiary.
Vendar zmanjšanje prodaje v Grčiji ne pomeni nujno, da se promet ne bo povečal: zmanjšanje prodaje v Grčiji lahko koristi konkurenčnim družbam, tako da se sprosti zmogljivost za njih, to pa bo omogočilo sposobnost preživetja upravičenke.
On the other hand, the Commission notes that the impact of compensatory measures needs to be as significant as possible.
Na drugi strani Komisija ugotavlja, da mora biti vpliv izravnalnih ukrepov čim večji.
In the case at hand, the company’s 2009 sales in Greece were higher than the 2006 sales (EUR 8,1 million and EUR 7,1 million, respectively).
V zadevnem primeru je bila prodaja družbe v Grčiji leta 2009 (8,1 milijona EUR) višja od prodaje leta 2006 (7,1 milijona EUR).
Therefore, the Commission considers that the measure is to be reckoned in comparison with 2009 sales, since this way it will have a higher impact.
Zato Komisija meni, da je treba ukrep obravnavati v primerjavi s prodajo za leto 2009, saj bo tako imel večji vpliv.
As regards the ban on any kind of State aid, the Commission considers it an addition to the withdrawal from the Greek market, which is already of a satisfactory level (10 %).
V zvezi s prepovedjo kakršne koli državne pomoči Komisija meni, da je to dodatek k zmanjšanju prodaje na grškem trgu, ki je že na zadovoljivi ravni (10 %).
Indeed, Varvaressos is located in the area of Imathia, an assisted area for regional aid purposes under the derogation in Article 107(3)(a) TFEU (see recital 47 above), which means that the company could have been eligible for investment aid with an aid intensity of 40 %.
Družba Varvaressos ima dejansko sedež na območju Imathie, ki prejema regionalno pomoč v skladu z odstopanjem iz člena 107(3)(a) PDEU (glej uvodno izjavo 47 zgoraj), kar pomeni, da bi družba lahko bila upravičena do pomoči za naložbe s 40-odstotno intenzivnostjo pomoči.
Bans on future aid have already been approved before, as additional compensatory measures, in cases Alstom [24] and Constructions Mécaniques de Normandie [25].
Prepovedi prihodnje pomoči so bile kot dodatni izravnalni ukrepi že odobrene, in sicer v zadevah Alstom [24] in Constructions Mécaniques de Normandie [25].
In addition, the Commission considers that the company’s size has decreased so much that any further reduction would be fatal to its viability (see recital 48 above).
Poleg tega Komisija meni, da se je velikost družbe tako zelo zmanjšala, da bi bila morebitna dodatna zmanjšanja usodna za njeno sposobnost preživetja (glej uvodno izjavo 48 zgoraj).
At the same time, the Commission notes again that the impact of compensatory measures needs to be as significant as possible.
Komisija hkrati ponovno ugotavlja, da mora biti vpliv izravnalnih ukrepov čim večji.
Thus, in the case at hand, the Commission considers that the duration of the future ban on State aid should be extended to more than 2 years.
Zato Komisija v zadevnem primeru meni, da je treba trajanje prepovedi prihodnje državne pomoči podaljšati na več kot dve leti.
This will not damage the company’s viability, but will make good the undue distortion of competition.
To ne bo škodilo sposobnosti preživetja družbe, ampak bo odpravilo neupravičeno izkrivljanje konkurence.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that a 4-year ban is more appropriate.
Komisija meni, da je štiriletna prepoved ustreznejša.
On the basis of the above, the Commission considers that the compensatory measures described above fulfil the requirements of the R&R Guidelines.
Na podlagi navedenega Komisija meni, da zgoraj opisani izravnalni ukrepi izpolnjujejo zahteve iz smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
In particular: (a) they benefit Varvaressos’s competitors, within the meaning of point 31; (b) they take a form provided for in points 39 and 46(c); and (c) they will take place in the market where Varvaressos will have a significant market position after restructuring, within the meaning of point 40.
Ti ukrepi zlasti: (a) koristijo konkurentom družbe Varvaressos v smislu točke 31; (b) ustrezajo obliki iz točke 39 in točke 46(c); ter (c) se bodo izvajali na trgu, na katerem bo družba Varvaressos po prestrukturiranju imela pomemben tržni položaj v smislu točke 40.
Also, in accordance with point 40 of the R&R Guidelines, the compensatory measures are in proportion to the distortive effects of the aid in question, and in particular to the size and relative importance of the firm on the market.
Poleg tega so v skladu s točko 40 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje izravnalni ukrepi sorazmerni z izkrivljajočimi učinki zadevne pomoči, zlasti z velikostjo in relativno pomembnostjo družbe na trgu.
Varvaressos in 2008 had a small market share of […] % in EU yarn production (see recital 8 above).
Družba Varvaressos je imela leta 2008 majhen tržni delež v višini […] % proizvodnje preje v EU (glej uvodno izjavo 8 zgoraj).
At the same time, point 56 of the Guidelines provides that the conditions for authorising aid may be less stringent in an assisted area.
Hkrati točka 56 smernic določa, da so lahko pogoji za odobritev pomoči manj strogi na območjih, ki prejemajo podporo.
Varvaressos is located in the area of Imathia, an assisted area for regional aid purposes under the derogation in Article 107(3)(a) TFEU (see recital 47 above).
Družba Varvaressos ima sedež na območju Imathie, ki prejema regionalno pomoč v skladu z odstopanjem iz člena 107(3)(a) PDEU (glej uvodno izjavo 47 zgoraj).
On the basis of the above, the compensatory measures proposed by Greece do not seem to be sufficient.
Na podlagi navedenega se zdi, da izravnalni ukrepi, ki jih predlaga Grčija, niso zadostni.
On the other hand, the Commission is of the view that the measures combined with the ban on future aid extended until 2015 indeed meet the compensatory measures criteria of the R&R Guidelines.
Na drugi strani Komisija meni, da ukrepi skupaj s podaljšanjem prepovedi prihodnje pomoči do leta 2015 dejansko izpolnjujejo merila za izravnalne ukrepe iz smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
Aid limited to the minimum: real contribution, free of aid
Pomoč, omejena na najmanjšo potrebno: realen prispevek brez pomoči
Greece argues that since 2009 the company has been medium-sized, according to the criteria set out in the Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises [26].
Grčija trdi, da je družba od leta 2009 srednje veliko podjetje glede na merila iz Priporočila Komisije z dne 6. maja 2003 o opredelitvi mikro, malih in srednje velikih podjetij [26].
However, taking into consideration the fact that the company received State aid for the first time in 2007, it should be considered a large company for the purposes of the present assessment (in 2006 it had an annual turnover of EUR 28 million).
Vendar bi se morala ob upoštevanju dejstva, da je družba prvič prejela državno pomoč leta 2007, za namene te ocene obravnavati kot veliko podjetje (leta 2006 je imela letni promet v višini 28 milijonov EUR).
Therefore, the company’s contribution to the restructuring plan should in principle be at least 50 % of the plan’s total cost, according to point 44 of the R&R Guidelines.
Zato bi moral prispevek družbe k načrtu za prestrukturiranje v skladu s točko 44 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje načeloma znašati vsaj 50 % skupnih stroškov načrta.
However, the Commission notes that the company is located in an assisted area for regional aid purposes under the derogation in Article 107(3)(a) TFEU (see recital 47 above).
Vendar Komisija ugotavlja, da ima družba Varvaressos sedež na območju, ki prejema regionalno pomoč v skladu z odstopanjem iz člena 107(3)(a) PDEU (glej uvodno izjavo 47 zgoraj).
According to point 56 of the R&R Guidelines, in assisted areas and unless otherwise stipulated in the rules on State aid in a particular sector, the conditions for authorising aid may be less stringent as regards the size of the beneficiary’s contribution.
V skladu s točko 56 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje so lahko na območjih, ki prejemajo podporo, pogoji za odobritev pomoči manj strogi glede višine prispevka upravičenca, razen če pravila o državni pomoči v določenem sektorju določajo drugače.
In the light of the circumstances explained above and in accordance with its practice, the Commission considers that in the case at hand the percentage of 40 % qualifies as a proper own contribution under the R&R Guidelines.
Ob upoštevanju zgoraj pojasnjenih okoliščin Komisija v skladu s svojo prakso meni, da v zadevnem primeru 40-odstotni prispevek velja za ustrezen lastni prispevek na podlagi smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
In view of the above and the calculation of the aid measures in recitals 70 to 84 above, the overall restructuring of EUR 30,7 million is financed as follows:
Glede na navedeno in izračun ukrepov pomoči v uvodnih izjavah 70–84 zgoraj se celotno prestrukturiranje v višini 30,7 milijona EUR financira na naslednji način:
EUR 16,7 million of aid: direct grant of EUR 14 million, plus aid element of EUR 2,4 million of the 2007 State guarantee (under the 400 basis points scenario), plus aid element of EUR 0,3 million of the 2008 State guarantee (under the 1000 basis),
16,7 milijona EUR pomoči: neposredna nepovratna sredstva v višini 14 milijonov EUR ter element pomoči državnega poroštva iz leta 2007 v višini 2,4 milijona EUR (v okviru scenarija s 400 bazičnimi točkami) in element pomoči državnega poroštva iz leta 2008 v višini 0,3 milijona EUR (v okviru scenarija s 1000 bazičnimi točkami),
plus EUR 14 million of own contribution.
ter 14 milijonov EUR lastnega prispevka.
Therefore the company’s own contribution is 46 % of the total financial cost of restructuring, i.e. above the 40 % minimum own contribution as determined in recital 122 above, thus within appropriate limits under the R&R Guidelines.
Zato lastni prispevek družbe znaša 46 % skupnih stroškov financiranja prestrukturiranja, tj. nad 40-odstotnim minimalnim lastnim prispevkom, določenim v uvodni izjavi 122 zgoraj, in je tako znotraj ustreznih mejnih vrednosti v skladu s smernicami za reševanje in prestrukturiranje.
REVOCATION OF COMMISSION RESCUE AID DECISION OF JULY 2008
PREKLIC SKLEPA KOMISIJE O POMOČI ZA REŠEVANJE IZ JULIJA 2008
The 2007 State guarantee shows that the Commission’s rescue aid decision of July 2008 (see recital 1 above) was based on wrong information provided by the Greek authorities.
Državno poroštvo iz leta 2007 kaže, da je sklep Komisije o pomoči za reševanje iz julija 2008 (glej uvodno izjavo 1 zgoraj) temeljil na napačnih informacijah, ki so jih predložili grški organi.
In particular, the Greek authorities stated in the notification of the rescue aid (November 2007) that Varvaressos had not received rescue or restructuring aid, even though it had been granted a State guarantee in May 2007.
Natančneje, grški organi so v priglasitvi pomoči za reševanje (november 2007) navedli, da družba Varvaressos ni prejela pomoči za reševanje ali prestrukturiranje, čeprav ji je bilo maja 2007 odobreno državno poroštvo.
According to Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, the Commission may revoke a decision taken pursuant to Article 4(3), after having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to submit its comments, where the decision was based on incorrect information provided during the procedure, which was a determining factor for the decision.
V skladu s členom 9 postopkovne uredbe lahko Komisija prekliče sklep, ki ga je sprejela na podlagi člena 4(3), potem ko je zadevni državi članici omogočila, da predloži svoje pripombe, kadar je sklep temeljil na napačnih informacijah, ki so bile pridobljene med postopkom in so bile odločilen dejavnik pri sprejetju tega sklepa.
In the case at hand, the Commission was not aware that Varvaressos had already received aid before, while already being in difficulty.
Komisija v zadevnem primeru ni bila seznanjena s tem, da je družba Varvaressos že prejela pomoč, medtem ko je že bila v težavah.
Therefore, the ‘one time, last time’ principle was not examined and the aid already granted was not taken into account in the rescue aid calculation.
Zato načelo enkratnosti pomoči ni bilo proučeno, že odobrena pomoč pa ni bila upoštevana pri izračunu pomoči za reševanje.