natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The French authorities consider that such an extension would make it possible to prevent any risk of triggering the State’s strict liability based on La Poste’s insolvency alone.
Po mnenju francoskih organov bi bilo na podlagi te razširitve mogoče izključiti vsakršno tveganje uveljavljanja nekrivdne odgovornosti države na podlagi gole plačilne nesposobnosti podjetja La Poste.
Firstly, the Commission wishes to point out that the remark made in recital 181 is obviously applicable to this section of the present Decision.
Komisija želi najprej opozoriti, da se opomba iz uvodne izjave 181 očitno uporablja za ta oddelek tega sklepa.
Moreover, as indicated in the opening decision, the Commission acknowledges that this is a measure likely to restrict the opportunities for a creditor who has signed such a contract to obtain payment of his claim through legal proceedings.
Kot je navedeno v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, poleg tega Komisija priznava, da gre za ukrep, ki lahko omeji možnosti upnika, podpisnika take pogodbe, da dobi poplačilo svoje terjatve s sprožitvijo sodnega postopka.
The Commission nonetheless has doubts about the durability of this solution, the exception for accepted risk being a rule established by case law, which could always evolve (the overturning of existing case law is all the more likely as the trend in case law is towards extending the scheme of strict liability on the part of the State).
Vseeno ima še vedno pomisleke o trajnosti take rešitve, saj je izjema sprejetega tveganja pravilo, določeno s sodno prakso, ki se lahko vedno spremeni (preobrat sodne prakse je še toliko verjetnejši, ker se sodna praksa razvija k razširitvi sistema nekrivdne odgovornosti države).
In response to the observations of the French authorities, the Commission would emphasise that the preceding remarks do not lead the Commission entirely to reject the French authorities’ proposal but to emphasise how fragile the resultant legal framework would be.
Komisija v odgovor na pripombe francoskih organov poudarja, da s predhodnimi opombami ne zanika vsakega učinka predloga francoskih organov, ampak poudarja krhkost pravnega okvira, ki bi bil oblikovan.
Moreover, the Commission considers the French authorities’ proposal to be inadequate as the State’s guarantee could come into play for any type of liability including, for example, non-contractual liability and criminal liability, which present the same characteristics from this point of view: it is impossible to make it contractually clear in advance to debtors that the State is not liable for La Poste’s debts.
Poleg tega Komisija predlog francoskih organov šteje za nezadosten, ker bi državno poroštvo lahko veljalo za vse vrste odgovornosti, vključno z nepogodbeno in kazensko odgovornostjo, ki imata s tega stališča enake značilnosti: za dolžnike je nemogoče s pogodbo vnaprej določiti, da država ni odgovorna za dolgove podjetja La Poste.
In general, La Poste may find itself indebted towards a third party through a variety of judicial mechanisms — a state of affairs that would imply a guarantee on the part of the State in the event of insolvency.
Na splošno lahko to podjetje postane dolžnik do tretje osebe z različnimi pravnimi mehanizmi, kar bi vključevalo državno poroštvo v primeru neizpolnitve obveznosti.
For example, if La Poste were to absorb another structure (another publicly owned establishment), the rights and obligations of that structure would be transferred to it at the same time.
Na primer, če bi podjetje La Poste moralo sprejeti še eno strukturo (drugo osebo javnega prava), bi bile ob tej priložnosti nanjo prenesene pravice in obveznosti te strukture.
If it were subsequently to meet that structure’s debts towards a third party, no contract or other legal document would have laid down that the State was not required to pay La Poste’s debts towards creditors of the absorbed structure, since no one would have been able to foresee the situation.
Če bi nato moralo plačati dolgove te strukture do tretje osebe, ne bi nobena pogodba niti noben pravni dokument določal, da država ni odgovorna za vračilo dolgov podjetja La Poste do upnikov prevzete strukture, ker tega ni mogel nihče predvideti.
Thus, through a mechanism (such as merger or absorption) for converting certain public sector structures, La Poste may acquire a number of debts towards third parties, without its being possible contractually to provide for a limitation of the guarantee on the part of the State.
Tako lahko podjetje La Poste z mehanizmom preoblikovanja (spojitev, združitev) nekaterih struktur v javnem sektorju postane dolžnik za nekatere dolgove do tretjih oseb, ne da bi bilo s pogodbo mogoče predvideti omejitev državnega poroštva.
It is not, therefore, enough to insert such a clause into the ‘contracts’ with the ‘creditors’, as the clause would not cover all eventualities.
Vstavitev take določbe v „pogodbe“ z „upniki“ torej ne zadostuje, ker ne zajema vseh primerov.
Such a formulation would be likely to overlook claims by initially unidentifiable third parties.
S takim oblikovanjem besedila se lahko izpustijo terjatve tretjih oseb, ki jih sprva ni mogoče opredeliti.
Only a text of general scope applicable in any situation and to any type of third party, indicating that the State is not the guarantor of La Poste, would be enough.
Zadostno je samo splošno besedilo, s katerim se navede, da država ni porok podjetja La Poste, ter ki se uporablja v vseh položajih in za vse vrste tretjih oseb.
Finally, even in a scenario in which the French proposals would make it quite impossible for a creditor of La Poste to hold the State liable for paying its claim (a scenario that the Commission considers not to have been shown to exist), such proposals would not enable it to be clearly established what would happen in the event of La Poste’s becoming insolvent.
Nazadnje, tudi ob predpostavki, da bi francoski predlogi za upnika podjetja La Poste popolnoma onemogočili uveljavljanje odgovornosti države, da bi dobil poplačilo svoje terjatve (predpostavka, ki po mnenju Komisije ni preverjena), na podlagi teh predlogov ni mogoče jasno dognati, kaj bi se zgodilo v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti podjetja La Poste.
Indeed, a creditor of La Poste who had not been able to have his claim met by requesting payment of his individual claim could always hope to obtain payment within the framework of an overall State-financed restructuring of La Poste, as will be shown subsequently in this Decision.
Upnik podjetja La Poste, ki mu ni uspelo dobiti poplačila svoje terjatve z zahtevo po izvršitvi individualne terjatve, bi namreč lahko še vedno upal, da bo terjatev dobil povrnjeno v okviru splošne sanacije podjetja La Poste, ki bi jo financirala država, kot bo prikazano v nadaljevanju tega sklepa.
Even if he were to fail obtain satisfaction, the creditor could invoke legal effects from the legitimate mistake he made, when the claim arose, that it would always be honoured.
Tudi če upnik ne bi dobil zadoščenja, lahko uveljavlja pravne učinke upravičene napake, ki jo je storil pri ustvarjanju terjatve glede tega, da naj bi bila vedno poplačana
Use of the theory of appearance enables what has been demonstrated to be confirmed.
Dokaz je mogoče potrditi z uporabo teorije navideznosti.
Indeed, even if one were to follow the French authorities’ argument, according to which there is no unlimited guarantee in favour of La Poste because of the latter’s legal form — an argument refuted by the Commission — the factors analysed above legitimately lead creditors to believe that such a guarantee does nonetheless exist.
Namreč, tudi če bi sledili sklepanju francoskih organov, da neomejeno državno poroštvo za podjetje La Poste zaradi njegovega statusa ne obstaja, kar Komisija izpodbija, lahko upniki na podlagi zgoraj analiziranih elementov zakonito menijo, da tako poroštvo vseeno obstaja.
The theory of appearance amplifies the effect produced by the concordance of a series of indices.
Teorija navideznosti povečuje učinek, ki ga ustvarja ujemanje vrste znakov.
The main relevant indices in relation to the theory of appearance are noted below:
Glavni upoštevni znaki glede na teorijo navideznosti so navedeni v nadaljevanju:
regarding the state guarantee in favour of EPICs, a variety of legislative instruments (Law of 16 July 1980 and the measures implementing it) or official (budgetary) documents lead the creditor to believe that the State would take over EPICs’ debts in the event of their having a shortage of funds or that it would assume liability for those debts,
kar zadeva državno poroštvo v korist EPIC, lahko upniki na podlagi različnih besedil (zakona z dne 16. julija 1980 in njegovih izvedbenih ukrepov) ali uradnih dokumentov (proračunskih dokumentov) menijo, da bo država prevzela dolgove EPIC v primeru nezadostnosti sredstev ali da se bo uveljavljala njena odgovornost,
the lack of clarification of the legal situation following the Campoloro case and of the initial procedures undertaken by the Commission on the legal form of EPICs also increases creditors’ confidence that such a guarantee does in fact exist,
zaupanje upnikov v obstoj takega poroštva temelji tudi na nejasnem stanju prava po zadevi Campoloro in prvih postopkih, ki jih je Komisija sprožila glede statusa EPIC,
the lack of any clear indication as to the effects of a situation in which an EPIC is in default also militates in favour of this view,
v prid tej teoriji je tudi neobstoj jasne navedbe o posledicah položaja ustavitve plačil EPIC,
the reaction of the rating agencies is also relevant in this context in that, rightly or wrongly, third parties attach importance to the legal form of the debtor, attributing to the latter a rating whose role is crucial in the matter of funding (this will be demonstrated in section 4.1.2(a) of this Decision).
v ta okvir spada tudi odziv bonitetnih agencij, ker tretje osebe pri dodelitvi ocene, ki ima bistveno vlogo na področju financiranja, pomen napačno ali pravilno pripisujejo statusu dolžnika (to bo dokazano v oddelku 4.1.2(a) tega sklepa).
In accordance with the conclusions of its expert, the Commission has arrived at the view that, even if, in the scenario championed by the French authorities, it was in error that a creditor came to consider that the State was required to guarantee the debts of publicly owned establishments and of La Poste in particular, his error would be legitimate given the above-mentioned factors, and the law could impart effects to it.
Komisija na podlagi ugotovitev svoje izvedenke ugotavlja, da tudi če bi, tako kot trdijo francoski organi, upnik napačno menil, da mora država jamčiti za dolgove oseb javnega prava, zlasti podjetja La Poste, bi bila njegova napaka glede na zgoraj navedene elemente upravičena in bi lahko imela pravne učinke.
If, exceptionally, the creditor did not succeed in obtaining the payment of his claim, he could nevertheless rest assured that there was no likelihood of the claim being cancelled.
Če upniku izjemoma ne bi uspelo doseči poravnave njegove terjatve, bi mu bilo vseeno zagotovljeno, da njegova terjatev nikakor ne more izginiti.
Guarantee of the continued existence of La Poste and/or of its obligations
Poroštvo za ohranitev obstoja podjetja La Poste in/ali njegovih obveznosti
As will be shown, even if, within a reasonable period and after the use of the procedures described in the previous section, the creditor does not succeed in obtaining the payment of his claim, he will be secure in the knowledge that the claim will not be cancelled.
Kot bo prikazano, tudi če upniku v razumnem roku in po uporabi postopkov, opisanih v predhodnem oddelku, ni uspelo doseči poravnave njegove terjatve, mu je zagotovljeno, da terjatev ne bo izginila.
When a company constituted under private law is closed down, its rights and obligations are likely to disappear with it.
Kadar izgine družba zasebnega prava, lahko z njo izginejo njene pravice in obveznosti.
The procedure for winding up companies provides no guarantee at all that claims will be paid.
Likvidacijski postopek družb ne daje nobenega zagotovila za poravnavo terjatev.
The situation regarding publicly owned establishments is different.
Položaj oseb javnega prava je drugačen.
As shown above, there is no procedure for the closing down/winding up of publicly owned establishments in default, involving the elimination of those establishments’ debts.
Kot je bilo prikazano zgoraj, ne obstaja noben postopek prenehanja obstoja – likvidacije oseb javnega prava, katerih plačila so bila ustavljena, z odpisom njihovih dolgov.
In the event of publicly owned establishments being closed down following a decision of the public authority — and despite the fact that no legislation expressly provides for this — experience and certain basic principles of administrative law tend to show that the rights and obligations of publicly owned establishments that are closed down as such are always taken over by another body and, failing that, by the State.
Čeprav to ni izrecno določeno v nobenem besedilu, je iz prakse in nekaterih temeljnih načel upravnega prava razvidno, da v primeru prenehanja obstoja s sklepom javnega organa pravice in obveznosti oseb javnega prava, ki kot take prenehajo obstajati, vedno prevzame neki drugi subjekt, če tega ni, pa država.
There is no public authority-motivated winding up/closing down of publicly owned establishments in which the rights and obligations of the establishments are also cancelled.
Likvidacija – prenehanje obstoja osebe javnega prava zaradi volje javnega organa s prenehanjem pravic in obveznosti ne obstaja.
Each creditor can therefore be certain that the right arising from his claim may be invoked against another body and that his claim will not, therefore, be cancelled.
Zato je vsak upnik prepričan, da bo lahko pravice, ki jih ima na podlagi terjatve, uveljavljal zoper drug organ in da njegova terjatev torej ne bo izginila.
This demonstration is based on a practical study of organic developments affecting publicly owned establishments.
Ta dokaz temelji na praktični študiji logičnega nadaljnjega razvoja, ki zadeva osebe javnega prava.
This study, conducted by the Commission’s expert, shows that the debts of publicly owned establishments are always transferred to another legal entity, which cannot refuse them.
Ta študija, ki jo je opravila izvedenka Komisije, kaže, da se dolgovi oseb javnega prava vedno prenesejo na drugo pravno osebo, ki jih ne more zavrniti.
The Commission’s expert has identified three reasons why publicly owned establishments may be closed down: because they have reached the ends of their lives (1), because the tasks assigned to them no longer need to be carried out (2), and (the case most frequently encountered) because the tasks assigned to them have been transferred elsewhere, necessarily implying a transfer of the rights and obligations (3).
Izvedenka Komisije je razlikovala med tremi vzroki za prenehanje obstoja oseb javnega prava: konec delovanja (1), prenehanje obstoja naloge (2) ter najbolj razširjeni primer, prenos naloge, ki nujno vključuje prenos pravic in obveznosti (3).
Publicly owned establishments that have reached the ends of their lives
Osebe javnega prava, ki so prenehale delovati
There are few cases of publicly owned establishments reaching the ends of their lives.
Primeri oseb javnega prava, ki so prenehale delovati, so redki.
The only example found by the Commission’s expert shows that the rights and obligations of the publicly owned establishment — particularly its debts (which are expressly referred to) — are transferred to other legal entities governed by public law.
Edini primer, ki ga je našla izvedenka Komisije, kaže, da se pravice in obveznosti osebe javnega prava, zlasti njeni dolgovi (ki so izrecno navedeni), prenesejo na druge pravne osebe javnega prava.
Publicly owned establishments closed down due to their tasks no longer needing to be carried out
Prenehanje obstoja oseb javnega prava zaradi prenehanja obstoja njihovih nalog
The cancellation of the task of the publicly owned establishment is almost always preceded by the cancellation of a public-service task, meaning that the public authorities no longer wish to see a particular activity as representing a public-interest task that they are obliged to take over or guarantee.
Prenehanje obstoja naloge osebe javnega prava skoraj vedno vključuje predhodno prenehanje obstoja naloge javne službe. To pomeni, da javni organi v taki ali drugačni dejavnosti ne želijo več videti naloge v splošnem interesu, ki jo morajo prevzeti ali zagotavljati.
In fact, the trend is to identify more and more activities as public services.
Težnja pa je, da se vse več dejavnosti opredeljuje kot javna služba.
This explains why the cancellation of public service tasks is a very rare phenomenon.
To pojasnjuje, zakaj obseg tega pojava ostaja zelo omejen.
It is necessary, however, to set aside cases of publicly owned establishments without a public-service task whose closing down due to the cancellation of their task does not imply the prior cancellation of a public-service task.
Vendar je treba dati na stran primer oseb javnega prava, ki ne opravljajo naloge javne službe in katerih prenehanje obstoja s prenehanjem obstoja naloge ne vključuje predhodnega prenehanja obstoja naloge javne službe.
La Poste does not fall into the latter category.
Podjetje La Poste ne spada v to zadnjo kategorijo.
Even in this hypothetical case, experience in any case demonstrates that the rights and obligations of these establishments are systematically taken over by another legal entity governed by public law, more often than not the State itself, as shown by the numerous legislative instruments and examples identified by the Commission’s expert on the basis of the study carried out by S. Carpi-Petit .
Vsekakor je tudi v tem primeru iz prakse razvidno, da pravice in obveznosti teh oseb javnega prava sistematično prevzame drug pravni subjekt javnega prava, najpogosteje sama država, kot izhaja iz številnih besedil in primerov, ki jih je navedla izvedenka Komisije na podlagi študije, ki jo je opravil S. Carpi-Petit .
Transfer of the task, implying a transfer of the rights and obligations
Prenos naloge, ki vključuje prenos pravic in obveznosti
Transfer of the task of a publicly owned establishment to another body, implying a transfer of the rights and obligations, is the most frequent scenario.
Prenos naloge osebe javnega prava na drug subjekt, ki vključuje prenos pravic in obveznosti, je najpogostejši primer.
The principle of continuity of public service implies a transfer of the assets assigned to the task and, therefore, a transfer of the rights and obligations.
Načelo kontinuitete javne službe vključuje prenos sredstev, dodeljenih nalogi, in posledično prenos pravic in obveznosti.
A basic principle emerges: if the task remains, the debts of the former publicly owned establishment are transferred to the body that takes over the task.
Iz tega izhaja temeljno načelo: ker naloga še naprej obstaja, se dolgovi nekdanje osebe javnega prava prenesejo na organ, ki prevzame nalogo.
More often than not, the task is transferred to a single body and, as a result, the assets are transferred in their entirety rather than being split up.
Najpogosteje pripade naloga enemu samemu organu, zaradi česar je premoženje preneseno v celoti, ne da bi bilo razdeljeno.
The same principle applies in scenarios in which the assets are transferred to a private person .
Enako načelo velja pri prenosu premoženja na zasebno osebo .
There are also scenarios in which assets are split up, showing in this case too that there is continuity in the rights and obligations of publicly owned establishments.
Obstajajo tudi primeri delitve premoženja, vendar je tudi iz teh razvidna kontinuiteta pravic in obveznosti osebe javnega prava.
Article 1 of Decree No 74-947 of 14 November 1974, concerning the transfer to the Institut de l’audiovisuel of the ORTF’s assets, rights and obligations, gives concrete expression to the existence of a principle whereby a successor body is appointed ‘by default’: ‘it will be possible for the assets, rights and obligations of the Office de radiodiffusion-télévision française that have not been transferred […] to the public broadcasting establishment or to one of the companies created by this law to be transferred to the Institut de l’audiovisuel as from 1 January 1975 by order of the Prime Minister’.
Z odlokom št. 74-947 z dne 14. novembra 1974 o prenosu premoženja, pravic in obveznosti ORTF na Institut de l’audiovisuel je uresničen obstoj načela določitve „privzetega“ organa naslednika: člen 1: „Premoženje, pravice in obveznosti Office de radiodiffusion-télévision française, ki ne bodo preneseni […] na osebo javnega prava za difuzijo ali eno od družb, ustanovljenih s tem zakonom, bodo lahko s 1. januarjem 1975 z odlokom predsednika vlade preneseni na Institut de l’audiovisuel“.
The scenarios in which the assets are transferred in more than one stage confirm the trend described above.
Primeri, v katerih se premoženje prenese v več fazah, potrjujejo težnjo, na katero je opozorjeno zgoraj.
When a publicly owned establishment is converted into a public limited company, there are several ‘conversion’ procedures:
Kadar se oseba javnega prava preoblikuje v delniško družbo, obstaja več postopkov „preoblikovanja“:
closing down/abolition: the simplest procedure is that of closing down by abolition, the publicly owned establishment then being wound up,
prenehanje obstoja – ukinitev: najpreprostejši primer je prenehanje obstoja z ukinitvijo, pri čemer se oseba javnega prava razpusti,
closing down/substitution: as B. Plessix expresses it, closing down by substitution is ‘the abolition of the publicly owned establishment, accompanied by the creation of a new legal entity to which is entrusted the statutory task for which the wound-up establishment was responsible’.
prenehanje obstoja – nadomestitev: prenehanje obstoja z nadomestitvijo je po besedah B. Plessixa„ukinitev osebe javnega prava, ki jo spremlja ustanovitev novega pravnega subjekta, ki mu je podeljena statutarna naloga, za katero je bila pristojna razpuščena oseba javnega prava.
In other words, a new legal entity is substituted in the rights and obligations of the wound-up publicly owned establishment; a new legal entity inherits the tasks of the abolished establishment’,
Z drugimi besedami, novi pravni subjekt nadomesti razpuščeno osebo javnega prava pri pravicah in obveznostih; novi pravni subjekt nasledi naloge ukinjene osebe javnega prava“,
conversion without abolition: conversion without abolition, or without closing down, is an operation based on organising the continuity of the converted legal entity.
preoblikovanje brez ukinitve: preoblikovanje brez ukinitve ali prenehanja obstoja je postopek, ki temelji na organizaciji kontinuitete preoblikovane pravne osebe.
The legislature has committed itself in recent years to conversion without closing down.
Zakonodajalec se je v zadnjih letih lotil preoblikovanja brez prenehanja obstoja.
Where the initial conversions, and especially that of France Télécom, were concerned, the legislature abolished the EPIC, then transferred all of its assets, rights and obligations to a new legal entity taking the form of a company governed by private law.
Pri prvih preoblikovanjih in zlasti pri France Télécom je zakonodajalec ukinil EPIC, vse njeno premoženje, pravice in obveznosti pa prenesel na novo pravno osebo, ki je prevzela obliko družbe zasebnega prava.
Then, in the course of the subsequent operations, the legislature effected only a change in legal form without creating a new legal entity.
Pri naslednjih postopkih je zakonodajalec samo spremenil pravno obliko brez ustanovitve nove pravne osebe.