natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP (period considered).
Proučitev trendov, pomembnih za oceno škode, je zajemala obdobje od 1. januarja 2006 do konca OP („obravnavano obdobje“).
In the parallel anti-subsidy proceeding, the Commission by Regulation (EU) No 473/2010 [4] imposed a provisional countervailing duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in Iran and the United Arab Emirates.
V vzporednem protisubvencijskem postopku je Komisija z Uredbo (EU) št. 473/2010 [4] uvedla začasno izravnalno dajatev na uvoz nekaterih vrst polietilen tereftalata s poreklom iz Irana in Združenih arabskih emiratov.
Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was decided to impose provisional anti-dumping measures (provisional disclosure), several interested parties made written submissions making their views known on the provisional findings.
Po razkritju bistvenih dejstev in premislekov, na podlagi katerih je bil sprejet sklep o uvedbi začasnih protidampinških ukrepov („začasno razkritje“), je več zainteresiranih strani pisno predstavilo svoja stališča do začasnih ugotovitev.
The parties who so requested were also granted the opportunity to be heard.
Stranem, ki so za to zaprosile, je bila dana možnost zaslišanja.
The Commission continued to seek and verify all information it deemed necessary for its definitive findings.
Komisija je nadaljevala z zbiranjem in preverjanjem vseh informacij, ki so bile po njenem mnenju potrebne za dokončne ugotovitve.
The oral and written comments submitted by the interested parties following the provisional disclosure were considered and, where appropriate, the provisional findings were modified accordingly.
Po začasnem razkritju so bile proučene ustne in pisne pripombe zainteresiranih strani in po potrebi so bile začasne ugotovitve ustrezno spremenjene.
All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the termination of the proceeding and the release of amounts secured by way of provisional duties imposed (final disclosure).
Vse strani so bile seznanjene z bistvenimi dejstvi in premisleki, na podlagi katerih se je nameravalo priporočiti zaključek postopka in sprostitev zneskov, zavarovanih z uvedbo začasnih dajatev („dokončno razkritje“).
They were also granted a period within which they could make representations subsequent to this disclosure.
Določeno je bilo tudi obdobje, v katerem so strani lahko predložile svoja stališča v zvezi s tem razkritjem.
The oral and written comments submitted by the interested parties were considered and, where appropriate, the findings were modified accordingly.
Proučene so bile ustne in pisne pripombe zainteresiranih strani in po potrebi so bile začasne ugotovitve ustrezno spremenjene.
Parties concerned by the proceeding
Strani v postopku
Some interested parties claimed that the sample of EU producers was not representative and inconsistent and that therefore the injury analysis was deficient.
Nekatere zainteresirane strani so trdile, da vzorec proizvajalcev EU ni bil reprezentativen in dosleden ter da je bila analiza škode zato pomanjkljiva.
In particular, it was claimed that sampling was not necessary since the number of producers was not large.
Zlasti so trdile, da vzorčenje ni bilo potrebno, ker proizvajalcev ni bilo veliko.
In addition, it was claimed that by ‘artificially’ splitting company groups into individual legal entities, the sample would not contain some of the market leaders (Artenius, M&G Polimeri) and that the methodology for the selection of the sample is inconsistent since the sample also included two groups of companies.
Trdile so tudi, da zaradi „umetne“ delitve skupin družb na posamezne pravne subjekte vzorec ne bi vseboval nekaterih na trgu vodilnih družb (Artenius, M&G Polimeri) in da je metodologija izbora vzorca nedosledna, ker je tudi vzorec vseboval dve skupini družb.
Moreover, as one company did not provide all necessary information and was excluded from the sample, the representativity allegedly dropped to 28 % of EU production.
Poleg tega ena družba ni predložila vseh potrebnih informacij in je bila iz vzorca izključena, zato naj bi reprezentativnost padla na 28 % proizvodnje Unije.
The same parties claimed that the selected sample was not statistically valid.
Iste strani so trdile, da izbrani vzorec ni bil statistično veljaven.
With regard to the argument that sampling was not necessary since the number of producers was not large, it is reiterated that in the sampling exercise 14 Union producers belonging to eight groups of companies came forward.
Glede trditve, da vzorčenje ni bilo potrebno, ker proizvajalcev ni bilo veliko, se ponovno poudarja, da se je za izvedbo vzorčenja javilo 14 proizvajalcev Unije iz osmih skupin družb.
Given the objectively high number of EU producers that cooperated, i.e. 14, sampling was applied in accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation on the basis of the largest representative volume of sales that could reasonably be investigated within the time available.
Glede na objektivno visoko število proizvajalcev Unije, ki so sodelovali, tj. 14, se je uporabilo vzorčenje v skladu s členom 17(1) osnovne uredbe na podlagi največjega reprezentativnega obsega prodaje, ki ga je bilo mogoče dovolj dobro preiskati v razpoložljivem času.
The sample selected consisted of five individual companies (with six producing locations).
Vzorec je sestavljalo pet posameznih družb (s šestimi lokacijami proizvodnje).
With regard to the first claim concerning the representativity of the sample, it should be noted that the institutions can include individual companies which are part of a company group within the sample as long as they are representative and have separate financial accounts.
Glede prve trditve o reprezentativnosti vzorca je treba opozoriti, da institucije v vzorec lahko vključijo posamezne družbe, ki so del skupine družb, če so te reprezentativne in imajo ločene finančne račune.
Otherwise, investigating all 14 EU producers belonging to the eight groups of companies would have prevented the timely completion of the investigation.
Drugače zaradi preiskovanja vseh štirinajstih proizvajalcev EU iz osmih skupin družb ne bi bilo mogoče pravočasno zaključiti preiskave.
However, the fact that two company groups have been included in the sample is not inconsistent with the sampling methodology applied in this case, i.e. the largest representative volumes of sales to EU clients.
Vendar dejstvo, da sta bili v vzorec vključeni dve skupini družb, ni nedosledno z metodologijo vzorčenja, uporabljeno v tem primeru, tj. z največjim reprezentativnim obsegom prodaje strankam EU.
As regards Indorama, this group had two different production plants in the IP — one in the Netherlands and the other one in UK.
Glede družbe Indorama se ugotavlja, da je ta skupina v OP imela dva različna obrata za proizvodnjo – enega na Nizozemskem in enega v UK.
Including this group in the sample is in line with the sampling methodology applied since those plants formed one entity from the legal and financial perspective.
Vključitev te skupine v vzorec je v skladu z uporabljeno metodologijo, ker sta navedena obrata s pravnega in finančnega vidika sestavljala en subjekt.
As regards Equipolymers, which had two separate entities producing PET in the IP (one in Italy and another one in Germany), the company reported consolidated figures for both locations.
Glede družbe Equipolymers, ki je v OP imela dve ločeni osebi za proizvodnjo PET (eno v Italiji in eno v Nemčiji), se ugotavlja, da je družba oddala poročilo s konsolidiranimi podatki za obe lokaciji.
Given that the verification of these consolidated figures was possible during one visit at the company’s headquarters, it was decided to accept this consolidated reporting and to treat Equipolymers PET producing companies as one entity for the purpose of this proceeding.
Ker je bilo te konsolidirane podatke mogoče preveriti med enim od obiskov sedeža družbe, se je sklenilo, da se to konsolidirano poročilo sprejme in da se družbi Equipolymers, ki proizvajata PET, v tem postopku obravnavata kot en subjekt.
With regard to the claim that Artenius and M&G Polimeri had to be included in the sample because they were the market leaders, it is noted that none of their individual entities belonged to the companies with the highest volumes of sales to EU clients.
Glede zahteve, da je bilo v vzorec treba vključiti Artenius in M&G Polimeri kot na trgu vodilni družbi, se opozarja, da nobena od njunih posameznih oseb ni spadala med družbe z največjim obsegom prodaje strankam EU.
As regards the claim that the sample was not representative because it did not include one producer who produces mainly for internal consumption, it should be noted that the capability to supply can be examined in the framework of the Union interest analysis if such a claim is made and for that purpose the captive consumption can be deducted from the production volume.
Glede trditve, da vzorec ni bil reprezentativen, ker ni vključeval enega proizvajalca, ki večinoma proizvaja za notranjo porabo, je treba opozoriti, da se v primeru take trditve dobavna zmožnost lahko prouči pri analizi interesa Unije in da se v ta namen lahko lastna poraba odšteje od obsega proizvodnje.
Thus, there is no need to have such a producer in the sample for the examination of certain injury factors.
Zato v vzorcu za proučitev nekaterih škodnih dejavnikov ni treba imeti takšnega proizvajalca.
Secondly, any double interest resulting from the position of a company as EU producer and processor at the same time can also be assessed in the Union interest analysis.
Drugič, kakršen koli dvojni interes, ki izhaja iz položaja družbe kot proizvajalca in predelovalca EU obenem, se lahko oceni tudi v analizi interesa Unije.
The position of a company as EU producer and processor is not linked with the performance of the Union industry where sales to unrelated customers in the EU are taken as a benchmark.
Položaj družbe kot proizvajalca in predelovalca EU ni povezan z uspešnostjo industrije EU, pri kateri je merilo prodaja nepovezanim strankam EU.
The claim is thus rejected.
Zato se trditev zavrne.
With regard to the claim concerning the overall representativity of the sample, it is reiterated that the reduction of the sample to four companies lowered the representativity from 65 % to 47 % of the sales by all cooperating producers.
Glede trditve o splošni reprezentativnosti vzorca se ponovno poudari, da je zmanjšanje vzorca na štiri družbe zmanjšalo reprezentativnost s 65 % na 47 % prodaje vseh sodelujočih proizvajalcev.
The same four companies accounted for 52 % of the Union production.
Iste štiri družbe so predstavljale 52 % proizvodnje Unije.
This is considered to be a representative sample of the EU producers in terms of sales to independent customers in the EU.
To se šteje za reprezentativen vzorec proizvajalcev EU glede prodaje neodvisnim strankam EU.
As regards the claim that the sample selected was not statistically valid, it is noted that Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation clearly allows for a sample to be based on the largest representative volume of the sales that can reasonably be investigated in the time available, as an alternative for a ‘statistically valid’ sample.
Glede trditve, da izbrani vzorec ni bil statistično veljaven, se opozarja, da člen 17(1) osnovne uredbe kot nadomestno možnost za „statistično veljaven“ vzorec jasno dopušča, da vzorec temelji na največjem reprezentativnem obsegu prodaje, ki ga je mogoče dovolj dobro preiskati v razpoložljivem času.
In the absence of any other comments concerning the findings, recitals 3 to 10 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Ker k zadevnim ugotovitvam ni drugih pripomb, se potrdijo uvodne izjave 3 do 10 začasne uredbe.
It is recalled that, in recital 12 of the provisional Regulation, the product concerned was defined as polyethylene terephthalate having a viscosity number of 78 ml/g or higher according to the ISO Standard 1628-5, originating in the countries concerned and currently falling within CN code 39076020.
Treba je opomniti, da uvodna izjava 12 začasne uredbe zadevni izdelek določa kot polietilen tereftalat z viskoznostjo 78 ml/g ali več v skladu s standardom ISO 1628-5 s poreklom iz Irana, Pakistana in Združenih arabskih emiratov, trenutno uvrščen v oznako KN 39076020.
Moreover, in recital 14 of the provisional Regulation, it was stated that the investigation showed that PET produced and sold in the Union by the Union industry, and the PET produced and sold on the domestic markets of the countries concerned, and exported to the Union were like products.
Poleg tega uvodna izjava 14 začasne uredbe nadalje določa, da je preiskava pokazala, da sta PET, ki ga v Uniji proizvaja in prodaja industrija Unije, ter PET, ki se proizvaja in prodaja na domačih trgih zadevnih držav ter izvaža v Unijo, podobna izdelka.
Since the product under investigation was considered a homogeneous product, it was not further subdivided into different product types for calculating the dumping and the injury margins.
Ker se je obravnavani izdelek štel za homogen izdelek, ni bil dodatno razdeljen na različne vrste izdelkov za izračun stopnje dampinga in stopnje škode.
As explained in recital 20, the methodology for the calculation of the dumping margin was adapted and the dumping margin for each country concerned is now calculated for each product type separately.
Kot pojasnjuje uvodna izjava 20, je bila metodologija za izračun stopnje dampinga prilagojena in stopnja dampinga za vsako zadevno državo je zdaj izračunana za vsako vrsto izdelka posebej.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recitals 16 to 18 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 16 do 18 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recital 19 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodni izjavi 19 začasne uredbe.
In recital 23 of the provisional Regulation it was stated that the Iranian exporter was not able to quantify the alleged impact of the sanctions against Iran in a way that could be supported by any evidence.
Uvodna izjava 23 začasne uredbe določa, da iranski izvoznik domnevnega vpliva sankcij proti Iranu ni mogel količinsko opredeliti tako, da bi ga lahko podprl z dokazi.
In its comments to the provisional Regulation, the company claimed that it would be upon the investigating authority to ensure a fair comparison, not the exporter.
V pripombah k začasni uredbi je družba trdila, da bi moral pošteno primerjavo zagotoviti preiskovalni organ in ne izvoznik.
However, in accordance with Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation, an adjustment may be made for differences in other factors if it is demonstrated that they affect the price comparability, in particular that customers consistently pay different prices on the domestic market because of the differences in such factors.
Vendar je v skladu s členom 2(10)(k) osnovne uredbe možna prilagoditev za razlike v drugih dejavnikih, če se pokaže, da ti vplivajo na primerljivost cen in zlasti da stranke dosledno plačujejo različne cene na domačem trgu zaradi razlik v takšnih dejavnikih.
As it is for the exporting producer to demonstrate the existence of any other factor, the claim is rejected and the methodology explained in recitals 20 to 23 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker mora obstoj kakšnega koli drugega dejavnika pokazati proizvajalec izvoznik, se trditev zavrne in potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 20 do 23 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recitals 24 to 25 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 24 do 25 začasne uredbe.
The definitive dumping margin for Iran, expressed as a percentage of the cif Union frontier price, duty unpaid, is 26,8 %.
Dokončna stopnja dampinga za Iran, izražena kot odstotek cene CIF meja Unije brez plačane dajatve, je 26,8 %.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recitals 27 to 29 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 27 do 29 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recital 30 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodni izjavi 30 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recitals 31 to 32 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 31 do 32 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recital 33 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodni izjavi 33 začasne uredbe.
The definitive dumping margin for the sole Pakistani exporting producer, Novatex Limited, expressed as a percentage of the cif Union frontier price, duty unpaid, is 0,6 %, i.e. below de minimis in the sense of Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation.
Dokončna stopnja dampinga za edinega pakistanskega proizvajalca izvoznika, tj. Novatex Limited, izražena kot odstotek cene CIF meja Unije brez plačane dajatve, je 0,6 %, tj. pod stopnjo de minimis v smislu člena 9(3) osnovne uredbe.
Since there are no other producers of the product concerned in Pakistan, no definitive measures should be imposed.
Ker v Pakistanu ni drugih proizvajalcev zadevnega izdelka, se dokončni ukrepi ne uvedejo.
Following the change in methodology explained in recitals 20 and 21, the results of the ordinary course of trade test as described in recitals 37 and 38 of the provisional Regulation changed with regard to some product types.
Po spremembi metodologije, pojasnjeni v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, so se rezultati preizkusa običajnega poteka trgovanja, opisanega v uvodnih izjavah 37 in 38 začasne uredbe, za nekatere vrste izdelkov spremenili.
Thus, where the volume of profitable sales of a product type represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that type, or where the weighted average price of that type was below the cost of production, normal value was based on the actual domestic price, calculated as a weighted average of profitable sales of that type only.
Kadar je obseg dobičkonosne prodaje vrste izdelka predstavljal 80 % ali manj celotnega obsega prodaje izdelka navedene vrste ali kadar je bilo tehtano povprečje cene navedene vrste izdelka pod stroškom proizvodnje, je normalna vrednost zato temeljila na dejanski domači ceni, izračunani kot tehtano povprečje dobičkonosne prodaje le navedene vrste izdelka.
Where there were no profitable sales of a certain product type, it was considered that this product type was sold in insufficient quantities for the domestic price to provide an appropriate basis for the establishment of the normal value.
Kadar dobičkonosne prodaje kake vrste izdelka ni bilo, se je štelo, da ni bila prodana zadostna količina te vrste izdelka, da bi bila domača cena primerna osnova za določitev normalne vrednosti.
Wherever domestic prices of a particular product type sold by the exporting producers could not be used in order to establish normal value, the normal value was constructed in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation.
Kadar se domača cena kake vrste izdelka v prodaji proizvajalca izvoznika ni mogla uporabiti za določitev normalne vrednosti, se je normalna vrednost računsko določila v skladu s členom 2(3) osnovne uredbe.
When constructing normal value pursuant to Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation, the amounts for selling, general and administrative costs and for profits have been based, pursuant to Article 2(6) of the basic Regulation, on the actual data pertaining to the production and sales, in the ordinary course of trade, of the like product, by the exporting producer under investigation.
Pri računskem določanju normalne vrednosti v skladu s členom 2(3) osnovne uredbe, zneski za prodajne, splošne in upravne stroške ter za dobičke na podlagi člena 2(6) osnovne uredbe temeljijo na dejanskih podatkih o proizvodnji in prodaji pri običajnem poteku trgovanja s podobnim izdelkom s strani obravnavanega proizvajalca izvoznika.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recital 39 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodni izjavi 39 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recitals 40 to 41 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 40 do 41 začasne uredbe.
In the absence of any comments other than those already mentioned in the above recitals 20 and 21, the methodology explained in recital 42 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni bilo nobenih drugih pripomb razen tistih, ki so že navedene v uvodnih izjavah 20 in 21, se potrdi metodologija, pojasnjena v uvodni izjavi 42 začasne uredbe.
The definitive dumping margin for the sole UAE exporting producer, JBF RAK LLC, expressed as a percentage of the cif Union frontier price, duty unpaid, is 0,6 %, i.e. below de minimis in the sense of Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation.
Začasna stopnja dampinga za edinega proizvajalca izvoznika ZAE, tj. LBF RAK LLC, izražena kot odstotek cene CIF meja Unije brez plačane dajatve, je 0,6 %, tj. pod stopnjo de minimis v smislu člena 9(3) osnovne uredbe.
Since there are no other producers of the product concerned in the UAE, no definitive measures should be imposed.
Ker v ZAE ni drugih proizvajalcev zadevnega izdelka, se dokončni ukrepi ne uvedejo.
Union production, Union industry and Union consumption
Proizvodnja Unije, industrija Unije in potrošnja Unije
No comments have been received with regard to Union production, Union industry and Union consumption.
K proizvodnji Unije, industriji Unije in potrošnji Unije ni bilo prejetih pripomb.
Consequently, the recitals 45 to 50 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Zato se potrdijo uvodne izjave 45 do 50 začasne uredbe.
It is reiterated that in recital 52 of the provisional Regulation, it was considered that as the dumping margin found for Pakistan was de minimis, the effect of those imports could not be assessed together with imports provisionally found to be dumped from Iran and the UAE.
Ponovno se poudarja, da se je v uvodni izjavi 52 začasne uredbe zaradi ugotovitve, da je bila stopnja dampinga za Pakistan enaka stopnji de minimis, štelo, da učinka navedenega uvoza ni mogoče oceniti skupaj z dampinškim uvozom iz Irana in ZAE.