natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In view of these additional factors inherent in the risk premium, the corresponding WACC is estimated at [> 12] % at the time of the investment, raised to [> 12] % by the FMEA (see recital 91).
Ob upoštevanju teh dodatnih elementov, vključenih v premijo za tveganje, naj bi tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala ob naložbi znašalo [več kot 12] %, sklad FMEA pa ga je zvišal na [več kot 12] % (glej uvodno izjavo 91).
It must be borne in mind that the WACC is the minimum rate of return required by the providers of capital of an undertaking (shareholders and creditors) to finance investment projects.
Vendar je treba opozoriti, da je tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala minimalna stopnja donosnosti, ki jo vlagatelji podjetja (delničarji in upniki) zahtevajo za financiranje naložbenih projektov.
The WACC calculated for Trèves therefore gives a significant indication regarding the acceptability of a ‘minimum’ IRR of [> 12 %] [24].
Tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala, izračunano za podjetje Trèves, je torej pomemben kazalnik sprejemljivosti najnižje [več kot 12-odstotne] notranje stopnje donosa [24].
However, to be on the safe side, the FMEA applies a discount of […] % to the EBITDA (see footnote 11) of the financial year 2011.
Vendar sklad FMEA zaradi varnosti uporabi […]-odstotni odbitek od dobička pred davki, obrestmi in amortizacijo (glej opombo 11) za poslovno leto 2011.
After discount, the IRR is [> 12 %], which is used as reference rate of return in this decision.
Po odbitku znaša notranja stopnja donosa [več kot 12 %], in ta se v tem sklepu uporablja kot referenčna stopnja donosa.
The potential disposal by the FMEA of its holding in 2012 is a working hypothesis with a view to assessing the return on the investment as it would stand in 2012, on the basis of the 2011 results.
Morebitna prodaja deleža sklada FMEA leta 2012 je delovna predpostavka za presojo donosnosti naložbe, kot bi bila dosežena v letu 2012 na podlagi rezultatov v letu 2011.
According to the shareholder agreement, the FMEA is totally free to retain or dispose of its holding in the first […] years of its investment.
V skladu z delničarskim sporazumom ima sklad FMEA vso pravico, da svoj delež obdrži ali proda v prvih […] letih po naložbi.
CDC Entreprises
Družba CDC Entreprises
According to established case-law (see in particular the Court of Justice judgment in Case C-305/89 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1603, paragraph 13), no distinction should be drawn between cases where aid is granted directly by the State and cases where it is granted by public or private bodies established or appointed by the State to administer the aid. European law cannot permit the rules on State aid to be circumvented merely through the creation of autonomous institutions charged with allocating aid. However, as the Court affirmed in its judgment of 16 May 2002 (C-482/99 France v Commission, known as ‘Stardust Marine’, [2002] ECR I-4397), for measures to be capable of being categorised as aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, they must, first, be granted directly or indirectly through state resources and, second, be imputable to the State.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso (glej zlasti sodbo Sodišča z dne 21. marca 1991 v zadevi C-305/89, Italija proti Komisiji (Recueil 1991, str. I-1603, točka 13) se namreč ne sme razlikovati med primeri, v katerih pomoč dodeli neposredno država, in tistimi, v katerih jo dodelijo javni ali zasebni organi, ki jih država ustanovi ali imenuje za upravljanje pomoči. Evropsko pravo namreč ne priznava, da je mogoče že s samo ustanovitvijo neodvisnih ustanov za razdeljevanje pomoči obiti pravila o nadzoru nad državnimi pomočmi. Kot pa je Sodišče trdilo v sodbi z dne 16. maja 2002 (C-482/99, Francija proti Komisiji, tako imenovana sodba „Stardust Marine“, Recueil, str. I-4397), se lahko kot pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU opredelijo samo tisti ukrepi, ki so, prvič, dodeljeni neposredno ali posredno iz državnih sredstev in, drugič, jih je dodelila država.
By means of various articles appearing in the press in spring 2009, it came to the Commission’s attention that the company Trèves would appear to have benefited from an investment amounting to EUR 55 million by the Fonds de Modernisation des Equipementiers Automobiles (Fund for the Modernisation of Automobile Parts Manufacturers) (below: ‘FMEA’). The Commission sent the French authorities requests for information on this subject by letters dated 5 May 2009, 11 June 2009, 10 July 2009 and 4 November 2009.
Komisija je iz različnih časopisnih člankov, objavljenih spomladi leta 2009, izvedela, da naj bi sklad Fonds de Modernisation des Equipementiers Automobiles (sklad za posodobitev podjetij, ki proizvajajo avtomobilsko opremo, v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklad FMEA) v podjetje Trèves vložil 55 milijonov EUR. Z dopisi z dne 5. maja 2009, 11. junija 2009, 10. julija 2009 in 4. novembra 2009 je od francoskih organov zahtevala informacije v zvezi s tem.
of 13 July 2011
z dne 13. julija 2011
concerning State aid C 3/09 (ex NN 41 A-B/03) implemented by Portugal for the collection, transportation, treatment and destruction of slaughterhouse waste
o shemi državne pomoči C 3/09 (ex NN 41 A-B/03), ki jo je Portugalska uporabila za zbiranje, prevoz, obdelavo in uničevanje klavniških odpadkov
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti prvega pododstavka člena 108(2) Pogodbe,
Following a complaint, on 15 November 2002 the Commission asked the Portuguese authorities for information on the introduction of a parafiscal charge designed to finance the collection, transportation, treatment and destruction of mammalian meat and poultrymeat by-products, pursuant to Decree-Law No 197/2002 of 25 September 2002 [1] (hereinafter referred to as ‘Decree-Law No 197/2002’).
V odgovor na pritožbo je Komisija 15. novembra 2002 na portugalske organe naslovila zahtevo po podatkih v zvezi z uvedbo davku podobne dajatve, namenjene financiranju zbiranja, prevoza, obdelave in uničevanja stranskih proizvodov, pridobljenih pri zakolu prežvekovalcev in perutnine, v skladu z zakonskim odlokom št. 197/2002 z dne 25. septembra 2002 [1] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zakonski odlok iz leta 2002).
The Portuguese authorities replied by letter of 20 January 2003.
Portugalski organi so odgovorili z dopisom z dne 20. januarja 2003.
As the information provided indicated that this measure had been implemented without prior authorisation from the Commission, it was entered in the register of non-notified aid under number NN 41 A-B/03.
Ker iz predloženih podatkov izhaja, da je bila zadevna shema izvršena brez predhodne odobritve Komisije, je bila vpisana v register nepriglašenih pomoči pod številko NN 41 A-B/03.
By letters of 16 and 30 April 2003, the Commission services asked the Portuguese authorities for further information on the measure in question.
Službe Komisije so z dopisoma z dne 16. in 30. aprila 2003 od portugalskih organov zahtevale nove podatke o zadevni shemi.
The Portuguese authorities were given a period of 4 weeks in which to reply.
Portugalski organi so imeli za odgovor na voljo štiri tedne.
By letters of 5 May and 6 June 2003, registered on 5 May and 10 June 2003 respectively, the Permanent Representation of Portugal to the European Union, on behalf of the Portuguese authorities, in view of the time needed to gather this information, asked for a further period in order to provide all the information requested.
Stalno predstavništvo Portugalske pri Evropski uniji je z dopisoma z dne 5. maja in 6. junija 2003, ki sta bila evidentirana 5. maja oziroma 10. junija 2003, v imenu portugalskih organov zaprosilo za podaljšanje roka za predložitev vseh zahtevanih podatkov, in sicer zaradi časa, potrebnega za njihovo pridobitev.
By letter of 25 July 2003, the Commission services granted an extension of 4 weeks.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 25. julija 2003 odobrile štiritedensko podaljšanje.
Since no reply was received within the 4-week period allowed in the last letter mentioned above, on 19 December 2003 the Commission services sent the Portuguese authorities an official reminder, stipulating that, should the latter fail to reply, the Commission services reserved the right to propose that the Commission send an information injunction, pursuant to Article 10(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [2] (now Article 108 TFEU).
Ker službe Komisije v roku štirih tednov, določenem v zadnjenavedenem dopisu, niso prejele odgovora, so portugalskim organom z dopisom z dne 19. decembra 2003 poslale opomin, v katerem so navedle, da bodo, če se navedeni organi ne bodo odzvali, Komisiji predlagale sprejetje odredbe o predložitvi podatkov na podlagi člena 10(3) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 (postal člen 108 PDEU) Pogodbe ES [2].
By letter of 5 February 2004 registered on the same date, the Permanent Representation of Portugal to the European Union sent the Commission the reply from the Portuguese authorities to the letters from the Commission services of 16 and 30 April 2003.
Stalno predstavništvo Portugalske pri Evropski uniji je z dopisom z dne 5. februarja 2004, ki je bil evidentiran istega dne, Komisiji posredovalo odgovor portugalskih organov na dopisa služb Komisije z dne 16. in 30. aprila 2003.
By letter of 11 November 2004, the Commission services asked the Portuguese authorities for further information on the measure in question.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 11. novembra 2004 od portugalskih organov zahtevale nove podatke o zadevni shemi.
By letter of 30 December 2004, registered on 5 January 2005, the Permanent Representation of Portugal to the European Union, on behalf of the Portuguese authorities, in view of the time needed to gather this information, asked for a further period of 1 month in order to provide all the information requested.
Stalno predstavništvo Portugalske pri Evropski uniji je z dopisom z dne 30. decembra 2004, ki je bil evidentiran 5. januarja 2005, v imenu portugalskih organov zaprosilo za enomesečno podaljšanje roka za predložitev vseh zahtevanih podatkov, in sicer zaradi časa, potrebnega za njihovo pridobitev.
By letter of 17 January 2005, the Commission services granted an extension for the second time, as requested.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 17. januarja 2005 še drugič odobrile zaprošeno podaljšanje roka.
Since no reply was received to their questions within the further period allowed, on 12 April 2005 the Commission services sent the Portuguese authorities another official reminder, drawing the latter’s attention once again to the fact that, should they fail to reply within the 4-week period allowed for this purpose, the Commission services reserved the right to propose that the Commission send an information injunction, pursuant to Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Ker službe Komisije v novem roku, ki so ga določile, niso prejele odgovora na svoja vprašanja, so portugalskim organom z dopisom z dne 12. aprila 2005 poslale nov opomin, v katerem so te organe znova opozorile, da bodo, če štiritedenski rok za predložitev odgovora ne bo upoštevan, Komisiji predlagale sprejetje odredbe o predložitvi podatkov na podlagi člena 10(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
As none of the requested information was provided, on 28 January 2009 the Commission decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU.
Ker Komisija ni prejela nobenih podatkov, ki jih je zahtevala, se je 28. januarja 2009 odločila sprožiti postopek iz člena 108(2) PDEU.
This Decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [4].
Ta odločitev je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [4].
The Commission invited the other Member States and interested parties to submit their comments on the aid in question.
Komisija je pozvala druge države članice in zainteresirane tretje strani, naj predložijo svoje pripombe o zadevni pomoči.
On 15 June 2009 comments were received from ETSA — Empresa de Transformação de Subprodutos Animais, SA.
Poleg tega je Komisija 15. junija 2009 prejela pripombe skupine ETSA – Empresa de Transformação de Subprodutos Animais, SA.
On 1 July 2009 the Commission sent ETSA’s comments to the Portuguese authorities.
Komisija je 1. julija 2009 Portugalski posredovala pripombe skupine ETSA.
The Portuguese authorities did not send the Commission any observations on ETSA’s comments.
Portugalska v zvezi s tem Komisiji ni predložila pripomb.
Further to ETSA’s comments, on 19 February 2010 the Commission services sent a letter to the Portuguese authorities requesting additional clarification.
Po prejetju pripomb skupine ETSA so službe Komisije z dopisom z dne 19. februarja 2010 zaprosile portugalske organe, naj jim ti predložijo dodatna pojasnila.
The Portuguese authorities replied by letter of 27 April 2010.
Portugalski organi so odgovorili z dopisom z dne 27. aprila 2010.
By letter of 1 February 2011, the Commission services requested clarification from the Portuguese authorities and called upon them to answer fully all the questions raised previously by those services.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 1. februarja 2011 zaprosile portugalske organe za pojasnila in naknadne odgovore na vprašanja, ki so jih tem organom postavile že prej in na katera navedeni organi niso odgovorili v celoti.
By letter of 24 February 2011, the Portuguese authorities requested an extension of 30 days to the deadline for replying.
Portugalski organi so z dopisom z dne 24. februarja 2011 zaprosili za 30-dnevno podaljšanje predpisanega roka za odgovor.
By letter of 28 February 2011, the Commission services granted the extension of 30 days to the deadline for replying.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 28. februarja 2011 odobrile 30-dnevno podaljšanje roka za odgovor.
The Portuguese authorities replied to the questions of the Commission services by letter of 1 April 2011.
Portugalski organi so z dopisom z dne 1. aprila 2011 odgovorili na vprašanja služb Komisije.
By letter of 20 June 2011, the Commission services informed the Portuguese authorities that they were going to propose that the Commission take a conditional positive decision, and they set out the conditions to which that decision would be subject.
Službe Komisije so z dopisom z dne 20. junija 2011 obvestile portugalske organe, da bodo Komisiji predlagale, naj sprejme pogojni pozitivni sklep, pri čemer so navedle postavljene pogoje.
According to the information provided by the Portuguese authorities, 66 cases of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (hereinafter referred to as ‘BSE’) were detected in Portugal between 1 January and 14 October 1998.
Po podatkih portugalskih organov je bilo med 1. januarjem in 14. oktobrom 1998 na Portugalskem ugotovljenih 66 primerov goveje spongiformne encefalopatije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: BSE).
In view of this risk to public and animal health, the Commission adopted Decision 98/653/EC of 18 November 1998 concerning emergency measures made necessary by the occurrence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Portugal [5], and imposed emergency measures as required by the BSE cases in Portugal, in particular prohibiting the dispatch of certain animals and animal by-products from Portugal to other Member States.
Komisija je v odgovor na te razmere, ki so pomenile tveganje za javno zdravje in zdravje živali, sprejela Odločbo 98/653/ES z dne 18. novembra 1998 o nujnih ukrepih, potrebnih ob pojavu goveje spongiformne encefalopatije na Portugalskem [5], in predpisala nujne ukrepe, potrebne zaradi primerov BSE, ki so se pojavili na Portugalskem, pri čemer je prepovedala zlasti odpošiljanje določenih živali in živalskih stranskih proizvodov s portugalskega ozemlja v druge države članice.
In order to mitigate the effects of the measures adopted to combat BSE, from 1999 the Portuguese State assumed the total cost of the collection, processing and destruction of mammalian meat and poultrymeat by-products.
Da bi portugalska država ublažila posledice ukrepov, sprejetih v okviru boja proti BSE, je od leta 1999 prevzela vse stroške, povezane z dejavnostmi zbiranja, predelave in uničevanja stranskih proizvodov iz mesa sesalcev in perutnine.
Through Decree-Law No 393-B/98 of 4 December 1998 [6] (hereinafter referred to as ‘Decree-Law No 393-B/98’), the Portuguese State assumed responsibility for and the cost of the collection, processing and destruction of these by-products.
Portugalska država je odgovornost in stroške v zvezi z dejavnostmi zbiranja, predelave in uničevanja teh stranskih proizvodov prevzela z zakonskim odlokom št. 393-B/98 z dne 4. decembra 1998 [6] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zakonski odlok iz leta 1998).
Article 4(3) of Decree-Law No 393-B/98 allowed charges to be imposed on slaughterhouses in order to finance the destruction of certain raw materials.
V členu 4(3) zakonskega odloka iz leta 1998 je bila predvidena možnost, da se klavnicam odmeri dajatev za financiranje uničevanja nekaterih surovin.
According to the information received from the Portuguese authorities, this charge was not imposed on slaughterhouses.
V skladu s podatki, ki so jih predložili portugalski organi, ta dajatev klavnicam ni bila odmerjena.
The Portuguese authorities have explained that they did not have a sufficient number of specific facilities in order to adequately treat the waste and that they were therefore forced to contract these services — which are, by their nature, the State’s responsibility — to the private sector.
Kot so pojasnili portugalski organi, niso imeli dovolj posebnih naprav za ustrezno obdelavo odpadkov, tako da so se bili – da bi zagotovili te storitve, ki so po svoji naravi odgovornost države – primorani obrniti na zasebne ponudnike storitev.
The Portuguese authorities have explained that this public interest mission was entrusted to the private sector in accordance with Decree-Law No 197/99 of 8 June 1999 [7], which transposed into national law European Parliament and Council Directive 97/52/EC of 13 October 1997 amending Directives 92/50/EEC, 93/36/EEC and 93/37/EEC concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, public supply contracts and public works contracts respectively [8].
Portugalski organi so natančneje navedli, da je bila ta naloga splošnega interesa dodeljena zasebnemu sektorju, in sicer ob upoštevanju zahtev, določenih v zakonskem odloku št. 197/99 z dne 8. junija 1999 [7], ki je nacionalni instrument za prenos Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 97/52/ES z dne 13. oktobra 1997 o spremembah direktiv 92/50/EGS, 93/36/EGS in 93/37/EGS o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil storitev, blaga in gradenj [8].
The private undertakings entrusted with providing these services were selected based on their technical ability to correctly perform the public interest mission entrusted to them, having regard to the urgent need to treat these by-products safely, quickly and effectively.
Zasebna podjetja, zadolžena za opravljanje zadevnih storitev, so bila izbrana glede na njihovo sposobnost in tehnično zmožnost zagotoviti dobro izpolnjevanje naloge splošnega interesa, ki jim je bila dodeljena, ter glede na nujnost ukrepanja, da bi se ti proizvodi varno, hitro in učinkovito obdelali.
The Portuguese authorities have supplied a model service provision contract, which applied between 1 September 2004 and 31 December 2004.
Portugalski organi so predložili primer pogodbe o opravljanju storitev za obdobje od 1. septembra do 31. decembra 2004.
Through Decision 2000/766/EC [12], the Council prohibited the use of animal by-products from almost all species in animal feed and imposed the destruction of these by-products in all Member States, including Portugal.
Svet je z Odločbo 2000/766/ES [12] prepovedal uporabo živalskih stranskih proizvodov iz skoraj vseh vrst živali v živalski krmi in odredil uničenje teh proizvodov v vseh državah članicah, tudi na Portugalskem.
The Portuguese authorities have explained that, due to this Decision, the quantity of waste increased, thereby also increasing the cost of these operations.
Portugalski organi so pojasnili, da se je po tej odločbi količina odpadkov, za katere se uporablja ta proces, povečala, zato so se povečali tudi stroški, povezani s temi dejavnostmi.
Through Decision 2001/376/EC [13], the Commission decided to maintain Decision 98/653/EC, adopted in relation to Portugal.
Komisija je z Odločbo 2001/376/ES [13] sklenila, da ohrani Odločbo 98/653/ES, sprejeto v zvezi s Portugalsko.
Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption [14] lays down specific rules for the collection, processing and destruction of animal by-products, applicable to various categories of by-products.
Uredba (ES) št. 1774/2002 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 3. oktobra 2002 o določitvi zdravstvenih pravil za živalske stranske proizvode, ki niso namenjeni prehrani ljudi [14], določa posebna pravila v zvezi z zbiranjem, predelavo in uničevanjem živalskih stranskih proizvodov, pri čemer ta pravila veljajo za različne kategorije stranskih proizvodov.
The Portuguese authorities have explained that, in order to meet their obligations in this respect, they decided to pass on the cost of these operations to economic operators in the sector, in strict compliance with the polluter pays principle and without losing sight of the concerns about protecting public health, for which they are responsible and which must be ensured.
Kot so pojasnili portugalski organi, so se, da bi izpolnili svoje obveznosti v tem okviru, odločili prenesti stroške zadevnih dejavnosti na gospodarske subjekte v sektorju, pri čemer so strogo upoštevali načelo „plača povzročitelj obremenitve“, v mislih pa so imeli tudi skrb za varovanje javnega zdravja, ki ostaja bistveno in njihova odgovornost.
Portugal therefore adopted the measure laid down in Decree-Law No 197/2002 of 25 September 2002.
Tako so sprejeli shemo, določeno v zakonskem odloku št. 197/2002 z dne 25. septembra 2002.
Since October 2002, when Decree-Law No 197/2002 entered into force, the cost of the collection, transportation, processing and destruction of mammalian meat and poultrymeat by-products has been financed by revenue from a parafiscal charge imposed on slaughterhouses, importers of bone-in beef, veal and pigmeat, and intra-Community operators, i.e. bone-in beef, veal and pigmeat operators/receivers.
Od oktobra 2002, ko je začel veljati zakonski odlok iz leta 2002, so bili stroški, povezani z dejavnostmi zbiranja, prevoza, predelave in uničevanja stranskih proizvodov iz mesa sesalcev in perutnine, financirani s prihodki od davku podobne dajatve, odmerjene klavnicam, uvoznikom govedine, teletine in svinine s kostmi ter trgovcem znotraj Skupnosti, tj. trgovcem z govedino, teletino in svinino s kostmi oziroma prevzemnikom teh proizvodov.
By letter of 20 January 2003, the Portuguese authorities indicated that the following operators were exempt from paying this charge:
Portugalski organi so v dopisu z dne 20. januarja 2003 navedli, da so plačila te dajatve oproščeni naslednji subjekti:
slaughterhouses collecting, processing and destroying all by-products generated either in the slaughterhouse itself or in cutting plants, with the exception of specified risk materials (hereinafter referred to as ‘SRM’), given that these units were in a position to independently treat the respective by-products (see Annex 2, paragraph 2, of Decree-Law No 197/2002),
klavnice, ki same zbirajo, predelujejo in uničujejo vse zadevne stranske proizvode, razen snovi s specifičnim tveganjem (v nadaljnjem besedilu: SST), ustvarjene v lastnem obratu ali v razsekovalnicah, ker so te enote vzpostavile pogoje za neodvisno obdelavo lastnih stranskih proizvodov (glej točko 2 Priloge 2 k zakonskemu odloku iz leta 2002),