natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Therefore, in the context of the annual reports that the French authorities will be called upon to send the Commission in the future, they should furnish information relating to the levels and terms of IFP’s debt, providing proof that these loans are in line with market conditions, or adding the gross equivalent of the aid component to the estimate of the maximum impact of the guarantee using a methodology similar to that described in Table 6 appearing in recital 300.
Zato bodo morali francoski organi v okviru letnih poročil, ki jih bodo morali v prihodnje predložiti Komisiji, navesti informacije o ravni in pogojih zadolženosti osebe javnega prava IFP in predložiti dokaz, da so navedena posojila v skladu s tržnimi pogoji, ali v oceno najvišjih zneskov učinkov poroštva dodati bruto ekvivalent ustrezne pomoči po podobni metodi, kot je opisana v Preglednici 6 v uvodni izjavi 300.
Finally, the Commission notes the proposal of the French authorities to include the following written statement in the financing contract for each transaction (for all instruments covered by a contract):
Komisija je nazadnje seznanjena s predlogom francoskih organov, da se za vsak posel v pogodbo o financiranju (za vsak instrument iz pogodbe) vključi naslednje:
While this commitment will not by itself suffice to resolve the question of the existence of the guarantee, in the particular context, combined with all the other obligations imposed on France, it will allow the plea of accepted risk to be relied upon where appropriate, and any negative repercussions of the guarantee to be limited considerably.
V teh okoliščinah se bo lahko z navedeno zavezo poleg vseh drugih obveznosti Francije, tudi če samo z njo ne bo mogoče urediti vprašanja obstoja poroštva, po potrebi uveljavljala izjema sprejetega tveganja, morebitni negativni učinki poroštva pa se bodo precej omejili.
Advantage in dealings with suppliers
Prednost v odnosih z dobavitelji
As regards suppliers, contrary to the view expressed by the French authorities (see recital 65), in order to prevent IFP from drawing any advantage from its EPIC status it is not sufficient that it should be subject, under European Union law or national law, to a competitive procurement obligation: when IFP issues a public call for tenders, every potential supplier drawing up a tender can anticipate the impossibility of a bankruptcy of IFP.
Pri dobaviteljih v nasprotju z navedbami francoskih organov (glej uvodno izjavo 65) ne zadostuje, da za osebo javnega prava IFP v pravu Evropske unije ali nacionalnem pravu velja obveznost zbiranja ponudb, da bi se izločila vsaka prednost zaradi njenega statusa EPIC: v okviru organiziranih javnih naročil lahko vsak morebitni dobavitelj, ko se prijavlja na javni razpis, za osebo javnega prava IFP predvidi nezmožnost stečaja.
When considering public procurement, therefore, a distinction has to be drawn between the fall in price resulting from the efficiency gains secured by competition between bidders – which, as the Commission found in the report cited by the French authorities, represent a genuine ‘social benefit’ – and the fall in price resulting from the more favourable assessment by contractors of the risk of default on the part of an entity which they know is protected from the risk of compulsory winding up by its status as a publicly owned establishment.
Zato je treba pri javnem naročanju razlikovati med znižanjem cen, povezanim z večjo učinkovitostjo zaradi zbiranja ponudb med ponudniki ob javnih razpisih – ki je v skladu z opozorilom Komisije v poročilu, ki so ga navedli francoski organi, resnična „socialna korist“ –, in znižanjem cen, ker so sopogodbeniki ugodneje ocenili tveganje neplačila za subjekt, za katerega vedo, da je zavarovan pred tveganjem sodne likvidacije zaradi statusa osebe javnega prava.
Both of these factors tend to cause the prices of public procurement to fall, but they are of an intrinsically different nature, which means that there can be no question for the Commission of imputing the effects of the second factor to the first.
Čeprav pri obeh navedenih dejavnikih obstaja težnja po znižanju cen javnih naročil, se povsem razlikujeta, tako da Komisija ne more učinkov drugega pripisati prvemu.
To estimate the fall in price resulting from the more favourable assessment of the risk of default made by suppliers in the case of an EPIC, the Commission will look at the cost of equivalent risk cover.
Komisija namerava za oceno znižanja cen zaradi ugodnejše ocene tveganja neplačila za EPIC, ki jo opravijo njeni dobavitelji, sklepati na podlagi stroškov kritja enakovrednega tveganja.
In the absence of a State guarantee, a supplier to IFP wishing to benefit from a comparable guarantee (i.e. to cover itself in full against the risk of default of the other party) could have recourse to the services of a specialised credit institution or insurance undertaking.
Dobavitelj osebe javnega prava IFP, ki bi želel imeti primerljivo poroštvo (torej popolno kritje pred tveganjem neplačila svojega sopogodbenika), bi lahko namreč zaradi neobstoja državnega poroštva uporabil storitve specializirane posojilne ustanove ali zavarovalnice. Tak prevzem tveganja neplačila pogosto ponujajo zlasti družbe, ki se ukvarjajo s faktoringom.
The remuneration for such a factoring service comprises two components:
Komisija ugotavlja, da plačilo take storitve faktoringa zajema dva elementa:
a financing fee (or debit interest) calculated in proportion to the time involved, to cover the funding of the advance granted to the supplier, which depends in particular on the interest rate in force at the time the claims are transferred;
provizijo za financiranje (ali negativne obresti), ki je izračunana v skladu z načelom časovne sorazmernosti za kritje vnaprejšnjega financiranja, odobrenega dobavitelju, in je zlasti odvisna od obrestne mere, veljavne ob odstopu terjatev;
a factoring fee proper, varying between 0,7 % and 2,5 % of the turnover assigned, with an average rate of 1,5 % [200], calculated on the value of the claims transferred, to pay for the accounting management, collection and performance bond services.
faktorinško provizijo v pravem pomenu besede, ki se giblje [200] med 0,7 % in 2,5 % razkritega prometa z 1,5-odstotno povprečno obrestno mero in se izračuna na podlagi zneska prenesenih terjatev za plačilo računovodskih storitev, izterjave in garancije za dobro izvedbo pogodbenih obveznosti.
In their letter dated 26 November 2010, the French authorities said that, in their opinion, the Commission’s arguments on the role of factoring were based on an inaccurate assessment of the reasons for which an undertaking might have recourse to this type of service.
Francoski organi so v dopisu z dne 26. novembra 2010 navedli, da po njihovem mnenju razmisleki Komisije o vlogi faktoringa temeljijo na nepopolni presoji razlogov, zaradi katerih lahko podjetje uporablja take storitve.
They acknowledged that factoring companies could provide three services, i.e. cash advance, collection and guarantee of claims, but said they could offer these services jointly or separately.
Francoski organi seveda priznavajo, da družbe za faktoring lahko zagotovijo tri storitve gotovinskega predujma, izterjave in jamstva za terjatve, vendar pojasnjujejo, da navedene storitve lahko ponujajo v paketu ali ločeno.
On the basis of a Banque de France study carried out in 2009 [201], they added that, among these different services, delegated management (i.e. a financial transaction without debt collection) was becoming predominant in the services offered by factors, so that recourse to factoring increasingly amounted to a mere cash transaction for the supplier.
Na podlagi študije Banque de France [201] iz leta 2009 dodajajo, da preneseno upravljanje (to je financiranje brez izterjave terjatev) začenja prevladovati med različnimi storitvami v ponudbi faktorjev, tako da je uporaba faktoringa za dobavitelja čedalje pogosteje omejena samo na gotovinsko poslovanje.
The Commission takes note of this observation.
Komisija je seznanjena z navedeno pripombo.
The French authorities have communicated the volume of payments made by IFP to factors [202] since 2004 (to pay for supplies needed for both types of activity, economic and non-economic):
Francoski organi so poleg tega sporočili znesek plačil, ki jih je oseba javnega prava IFP nakazala faktorjem [202] od leta 2004 (za plačilo dobav, potrebnih za obe vrsti dejavnosti, gospodarske in negospodarske):
Recourse to factoring by IFP’s suppliers over the period 2004-2010
Uporaba faktoringa med dobavitelji osebe javnega prava IFP v obdobju od 2004 do 2010
Number of suppliers concerned
Število zadevnih dobaviteljev
Payments to factors
Plačila faktorjem
(in euros)
(v EUR)
Number of invoices concerned
Številno zadevnih računov
Period as a whole
Celotno obdobje
The French authorities observe that since its change of legal form in 2006, the payments made by IFP to factors have increased.
Francoski organi ugotavljajo, da so se plačila, ki jih je oseba javnega prava IFP nakazala faktorjem, zvišala od spremembe statusa leta 2006.
They say that this trend invalidates the Commission’s argument concerning the perception of third parties of the risk of default of EPICs.
Iz tega sklepajo, da bi ta sprememba ovrgla sklepanje Komisije o dojemanju tretjih oseb v zvezi s tveganjem neplačila za EPIC.
They consider that if IFP had benefited from cover of its risk of default by the State from 2006, recourse to the services of factors should have become less frequent from that date, if it did not stop altogether.
Če bi namreč imela oseba javnega prava IFP državno kritje tveganja neplačila od leta 2006, bi morala biti po njihovem mnenju uporaba storitev, ki jih zagotavljajo faktorji, od tega datuma manj pogosta, če že ne bi povsem prenehala.
But as the French authorities themselves indicate (see recital 206), recourse to factoring is increasingly associated with a need for cash advances (increase in the delegated management service) and less and less with a need to transfer the risk of non-payment (decline in the collection, financing and guarantee service), and in IFP’s accounts it is not possible to break down the use made of factoring by its suppliers by type of service; in the Commission’s view, therefore, the trend established by IFP does not invalidate the Commission’s arguments, still less does it show that IFP’s suppliers have concluded that since IFP’s change of legal form the risk of a default on its part has increased.
Ker je v skladu z navedbami francoskih organov v uvodni izjavi 206 uporaba faktoringa čedalje bolj povezana s potrebami po gotovinskih predujmih (povečanje števila storitev prenesenega upravljanja), čedalje manj pa s prevzemom tveganja neplačanih obveznosti (zmanjšanje števila storitev izterjave, financiranja in jamstva), in ker v računovodskih izkazih osebe javnega prava IFP ni mogoče razlikovati med uporabo faktoringa med dobavitelji glede na vrsto storitve, Komisija nasprotno meni, da razvoj, ki ga ugotavlja oseba javnega prava IFP, ne more ovreči njenega sklepanja, še manj pa dokazati, da bi dobavitelji osebe javnega prava IFP po spremembi njenega statusa sklepali na povečano tveganje neplačila te osebe.
The Commission acknowledges that it is unable to provide a precise estimate of the amount of the premium which would be necessary to cover IFP’s suppliers against the risk of default if IFP did not already enjoy a State guarantee.
Komisija priznava, da ne more natančno oceniti zneska premije, ki bi bil potreben za kritje dobaviteljev pred tveganjem neplačila osebe javnega prava IFP, če ne bi že imela državnega poroštva.
The Commission points out, however, that since the factoring fee referred to in recital 205.b in fact covers three separate services (collection, financing and guarantee against the risk of unpaid invoices), the maximum amount of 2,5 % of the guaranteed turnover which is mentioned there must in any event be an upper bound to the premium which would be required to cover the risk of default only.
Ker faktorinška provizija iz uvodne izjave 205(b) v resnici krije tri storitve (izterjave, financiranja in jamstva pred tveganjem neplačanih obveznosti), Komisija ugotavlja, da navedeni največji 2,5-odstotni delež od zagotovljenega prometa vsekakor pomeni zgornjo mejo premije, ki bi bila potrebna za kritje tveganja neplačila.
In any event, the French authorities are still free to notify a more precise methodology for estimating the advantage conferred by the guarantee on IFP in its dealings with suppliers.
Francoski organi si vsekakor pridržujejo možnost, da sporočijo natančnejšo metodologijo za ocenitev prednosti, ki jo osebi javnega prava prinaša poroštvo v odnosih z njenimi dobavitelji.
Such a methodology could be based on an economic report by an expert, which would be debated by the two sides in the context of the appraisal, and if found appropriate could be the subject of a positive decision by the Commission and could be used by France to meet the information requirements laid down in the operative part of this decision.
Navedena metodologija, ki temelji na gospodarskem izvedenskem mnenju, o katerem se je kontradiktorno razpravljalo ob preučitvi, bo lahko po potrebi predmet pozitivne odločitve Komisije, Francija pa jo bo lahko uporabila za izpolnjevanje obveznosti obveščanja iz izreka tega sklepa.
As regards the amounts in question, the French authorities indicated in their letter dated 26 November 2010 that the cost of these goods and services was incorporated directly into the ratios for the use made of the staff allocated to the activities to which the acquisition of these goods and services related [204].
Francoski organi so v zvezi z zadevnimi zneski v dopisu z dne 26. novembra 2010 navedli, da so stroški nabave tega blaga in storitev neposredno vključeni v stopnjo ovrednotenja osebja, ki se ukvarja z nabavo navedenega blaga in storitev [204].
Moreover, the invoicing of seconded staff and of premises did not give rise to any significant specific expenditure, since all the relevant costs were already integrated into the structural costs of the establishment.
Poleg tega stroškovna porazdelitev začasno dodeljenega osebja in prostorov ne povzroča visokih posebnih stroškov, ker so vsi pripadajoči stroški že vključeni v strukturne stroške osebe javnega prava IFP.
Finally, with regard to the goods and services specifically acquired for the pursuit solely of economic activities, the French authorities submit that the average annual value of such supplies represents only a small fraction of IFP’s annual average turnover [205].
Navsezadnje po navedbah francoskih organov povprečni letni znesek dobav, pri katerih gre za blago in storitve, nabavljene izključno za gospodarske dejavnosti, zajema samo majhen del [205] povprečnega letnega prometa osebe javnega prava IFP.
For contract research, on the basis of the information obtained by IFP via its analytical accounting system, the average value of supplies acquired by IFP to provide its services between 2006 and 2009 comes to EUR […] (*) per year.
Povprečni letni znesek blaga in storitev, ki jih je oseba javnega prava IFP nabavila za izvajanje storitev med letoma 2006 in 2009, je za pogodbene raziskave na podlagi podatkov, ki jih je oseba javnega prava IFP zbrala prek svojega analitičnega računovodskega sistema, znašal […] (*) na leto.
The Commission considers that, for the performance of its economic activities, IFP has enjoyed a real economic advantage, consisting in a reduction in the prices charged by its suppliers, and resulting from a more favourable assessment by the latter of the risk of default of the establishment.
Oseba javnega prava IFP je imela po mnenju Komisije pri izvajanju gospodarskih dejavnosti dejansko gospodarsko prednost, ker so njeni dobavitelji nižali cene, saj so ugodneje ocenili tveganje neplačila podjetja.
The Commission cannot quantify this advantage precisely, but considers that, in any case, it would not have exceeded a sum in the order of EUR […] (*) per year on average over the period under review (2006-2009) [206].
Čeprav Komisija ne more natančno oceniti zneska navedene prednosti, ta po njenem mnenju v povprečju nikakor ne more preseči […] (*) EUR na leto [206] v zadevnem obdobju (od 2006 do 2009).
Finally, the Commission points out that such an advantage in dealings between IFP and its suppliers is selective, because its competitors, which remain subject to compulsory administration and winding-up procedures under ordinary law, do not enjoy a comparable guarantee conferred by the State, which is intrinsically linked to IFP’s status as a publicly owned establishment.
Komisija nazadnje ugotavlja, da je taka prednost v odnosu osebe javnega prava IFP z dobavitelji selektivna, ker njeni konkurenti, za katere še naprej veljajo sodni postopki sanacije in likvidacije občega prava, nimajo primerljivega poroštva, povezanega s statusom osebe javnega prava, dodeljenega osebi javnega prava IFP s strani države.
Advantage in dealings with customers
Prednost v odnosih s strankami
As regards the research services provided by the publicly owned establishment IFP, the Commission notes the comments made by UOP, which indicates that in technology transfer, a field which is risky by nature, acquirers are particularly sensitive to the guarantees that their providers are able to give them in terms of cover of both contractual and non-contractual liability.
Komisija je v zvezi z raziskovalnimi storitvami osebe javnega prava IFP seznanjena s pripombami družbe UOP Limited, v katerih navaja, da so kupci pri prenosu tehnologije, ki je že po naravi tvegano področje, posebno dovzetni za poroštva, ki jim jih lahko zagotovijo izvajalci storitev v obliki kritja pogodbene in nepogodbene odgovornosti.
As regards non-contractual liability, the French authorities stated in their letter dated 13 January 2010 that in France companies governed by private law and publicly owned establishments were both subject to ordinary law (Article 1382 of the Civil Code, relating in particular to tortious liability) [207].
Vendar so francoski organi pri nepogodbeni odgovornosti v dopisu z dne 13. januarja 2010 pojasnili, da za družbe zasebnega prava in osebe javnega prava brez razlike velja sistem občega prava (člen 1382 civilnega zakonika, zlasti v zvezi s sistemom deliktne odgovornosti [207]).
They added that IFP’s activities presented specific characteristics, in that they required the use of laboratory apparatus and inflammable, explosive or toxic products, which were potential sources of a significant ‘industrial’ risk [208], within the meaning of the term customarily used by insurers.
Dodali so, da imajo dejavnosti osebe javnega prava IFP posebne značilnosti, ker vključujejo uporabo laboratorijskih pripomočkov ter vnetljivih, eksplozivnih in strupenih snovi, ki pomenijo veliko „industrijsko“ tveganje [208] v pomenu, ki ga običajno uporabljajo zavarovatelji.
Consequently, IFP had entered into various insurance contracts to cover not only the traditional risks (civil liability), but also specific risks, such as those associated with sources of ionising radiation or with breakdown of machinery in the areas surrounding wells.
Zato je oseba javnega prava IFP sklenila različne zavarovalne pogodbe za kritje ne le običajnih (civilna odgovornost), temveč tudi posebnih vrst tveganja, kot so tveganja zaradi ionizirajočih sevanj ali okvare strojev okoli jaškov.
As regards civil liability cover, IFP’s insurance contract covered four risks: civil liability for its operations, civil liability after delivery, professional liability and environmental damage.
Pri kritju civilne odgovornosti so na podlagi zavarovalne pogodbe osebe javnega prava IFP krite štiri vrste tveganja: civilna odgovornost pri poslovanju, civilna odgovornost po dobavi, civilna poklicna odgovornost in okoljska škoda.
It appears from the above that IFP has not shifted its non-contractual liability to the State by taking the risk that in the event of a claim it would be able to rely on the guarantee it derives from its EPIC status, but that, on the contrary, it has covered the risk by entering into the necessary insurance contracts on the market.
Iz zgoraj navedenega izhaja, da oseba javnega prava IFP nepogodbene odgovornosti nikakor ni prenesla na državo, tako da bi v primeru škode prevzela tveganje uveljavljanja poroštva, ki ga ima zaradi statusa EPIC, temveč da je, nasprotno, za kritje navedenega tveganja na trgu sklenila zavarovalne pogodbe.
As regards contractual liability, it is clear from the information supplied by the French authorities in response to UOP’s comments, in particular those set out in recital 91, that with respect to the provision of services IFP’s liability towards its customers (whether they are its own subsidiaries or third parties) ‘is limited to […] (*) % of the remuneration actually received, with a maximum which may reach up to […] (*) % depending on the case’, so that if the customer considers that the work carried out by IFP is defective, the latter cannot under any circumstances be obliged to repeat the work ad infinitum.
Iz informacij francoskih organov, predloženih kot odgovor na pripombe družbe UOP Limited, zlasti tistih iz uvodne izjave 91, je v zvezi s pogodbeno odgovornostjo razvidno, da je odgovornost osebe javnega prava IFP do strank (naj gre za njene hčerinske družbe ali tretje osebe) pri izvajanju storitev „omejena na […] (*) % dejansko prejetega plačila z najvišjo vrednostjo, ki lahko odvisno od primera doseže največ […] (*) %“, tako da osebi javnega prava IFP, če je opravljeno delo po mnenju stranke pomanjkljivo, del nikakor ne bo treba popravljati v nedogled.
Moreover, the Commission takes note of the French authorities’ observation that, on account of the principle of non-combination of liabilities, a contracting party cannot invoke non-contractual liability to seek compensation for damage suffered under a contractual relationship [209].
Komisija je poleg tega seznanjena s pripombo francoskih organov, ki ugotavljajo, da pogodbena stranka zaradi načela neprekrivanja odgovornosti ne more uveljavljati nepogodbene odgovornosti za povrnitev škode, nastale na podlagi pogodbenega razmerja [209].
The fact remains that, in view of the State guarantee granted to IFP, its customers are assured that IFP will never be subjected to compulsory winding up and therefore will always be able to fulfil its contractual obligations, or failing that that they will be compensated for any such breach.
Vendar je dejstvo, da so stranke osebe javnega prava IFP ob upoštevanju njenega državnega poroštva prepričane, da ta nikoli ne bo v položaju sodne likvidacije in bo torej vedno lahko izpolnjevala pogodbene obveznosti ali pa, če tega ne bi storila, da jim bo za neizpolnitev obveznosti povrnjena škoda.
By analogy with the arguments it set out in recitals 204 et seq. with regard to dealings with suppliers, the Commission considers that in the absence of a State guarantee, a customer wishing to enjoy the same level of protection would take out a performance bond from a financial intermediary (a bank or insurance company, for example) to ensure the completion of the contract between it and IFP.
Komisija v skladu s svojim sklepanjem, predstavljenim v uvodni izjavi 204 in naslednjih, o odnosih z dobavitelji meni, da bi morala stranka, ki bi želela imeti v primeru neobstoja državnega poroštva isto raven varstva, pri finančnem posredniku (na primer pri bančni ustanovi ali zavarovalnici) skleniti garancijo za dobro izvedbo pogodbenih obveznosti (v angleščini „performance bond“), da bi se zavarovala pred prekinitvijo pogodbe z osebo javnega prava IFP.
The purpose of such protection would be to guarantee financial compensation for the customer for loss caused by (total or partial) breach of contract.
Namen takega varstva bi bil navedeni stranki zagotoviti finančno nadomestilo v primeru škode zaradi (popolne ali delne) neizpolnitve pogodbe.