natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Commission Decision of 16 July 2008 on State aid C 35/08 (ex NN 11/08) – Unlimited State guarantee for the IFP – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the TFEU (OJ C 259, 11.10.2008, p. 12).
Odločba Komisije z dne 16. julija 2008 o državni pomoči C 35/08 (prej NN 11/08) – Neomejeno državno jamstvo za IFP – Poziv k predložitvi pripomb na podlagi člena 108(2) PDEU, (UL C 259, 11.10.2008, str. 12).
OJ L 274, 19.10.2010, p. 1.
UL L 274, 19.10.2010, str. 1.
On this question, see in particular recital 19 of decision C 56/2007.
O tem vprašanju glej zlasti uvodno izjavo 19 zgoraj navedenega sklepa o pomoči C 56/2007.
See part 2.1 (‘The IFP Group’) in both the opening decision and decision C 51/2005.
Glej dela 2.1 („Skupina IFP“) v zgoraj navedenih odločitvi o začetku postopka oziroma odločbi C 51/2005.
To ensure that confidential information is not disclosed, parts of this text have been replaced.
Deli tega besedila so bili zamenjani, da ne bi bila objavljena nobena zaupna informacija.
They paraphrase the concealed information to ensure that the decision is comprehensible and coherent.
Ti deli parafrazirajo prikrite informacije zaradi zagotovitve razumevanja in koherence odločitve.
Those parts are indicated between square brackets and are followed by two asterisks.
Navedeni so med oglatima oklepajema, ki jima sledita dve zvezdici.
To ensure that confidential information is not disclosed, parts of this text have been omitted.
Deli tega besedila so bili izpuščeni, da ne bi bila objavljena nobena zaupna informacija.
Those parts are indicated by three full stops enclosed in square brackets and marked with an asterisk.
Ti deli so navedeni s tropičjem med oglatima oklepajema, ki jima sledi zvezdica.
By letter dated 18 June 2009, the French authorities sent the Commission a copy of the amendments to the contracts between IFP and its subsidiaries Axens and Prosernat in accordance with Article 6 of decision C 51/2005.
Francoski organi so v dopisu z dne 18. junija 2009 Komisiji poslali kopijo aneksov k pogodbama, sklenjenih med osebo javnega prava IFP in njenima hčerinskima družbama Axens in Prosernat v skladu s členom 6 zgoraj navedene odločbe C 51/2005.
Concerning Axens, the amendment […] (*) was signed [in] (**) 2009 by […] (*) IFP and […] (*) Axens.
Za družbo Axens sta aneks […] (*) [leta] (**) 2009 podpisali […] (*) oseba javnega prava IFP in […] (*) družba Axens.
Concerning Prosernat, the amendment […] (*) was signed [in] (**) 2009 by […] (*) IFP and […] (*) Prosernat.
Za družbo Prosernat sta aneks […] (*) [leta] (**) 2009 podpisali […] (*) oseba javnega prava IFP in […] (*) družba Prosernat.
Communication from the Commission – Community framework for State aid for research and development (OJ C 45, 17.2.1996, p. 5).
Sporočilo Komisije – Okvir Skupnosti za državno pomoč za raziskave in razvoj, (UL C 45, 17.2.1996, str. 5).
This minimum remuneration in fact limits the aid to each subsidiary to a maximum of 75 % of the costs of feasibility studies preparatory to industrial research activities, 50 % of the costs of industrial research and, where appropriate, 25 % of the costs of pre-competitive development activities.
S temi najmanjšimi plačili je pomoč za vsako hčerinsko družbo dejansko omejena na največ 75 % stroškov pripravljalnih študij izvedljivosti za industrijsko raziskovanje, 50 % stroškov industrijskega raziskovanja in 25 % stroškov dejavnosti predkonkurenčnega razvoja.
Recital 18 of the opening decision states that the Commission intends to examine the effects of the conversion of IFP into an EPIC on the publicly owned establishment IFP and its subsidiaries, as a single market operator.
Iz uvodne izjave 18 odločitve o začetku postopka izhaja, da namerava Komisija preučiti učinke preoblikovanja IFP v EPIC na osebo javnega prava IFP in njene hčerinske družbe kot edinega nosilca dejavnosti na trgu.
Recital 36 of the opening decision states that this single entity is considered to be a potential beneficiary of the unlimited State guarantee.
V uvodni izjavi 36 odločitve o začetku postopka je pojasnjeno, da se ta edini subjekt šteje za morebitnega upravičenca do neomejenega državnega poroštva.
See judgment of 21 December 1987 (First Civil Division).
Glej zlasti sodbo z dne 21. decembra 1987 (prvi civilni senat).
The same arguments are developed at greater length in section 2.1 of decision C 56/2007, recitals 20 to 22.
Iste trditve so obširneje predstavljene v uvodnih izjavah od 20 do 22 v delu 2.1 zgoraj navedenega sklepa C 56/2007.
See also section 2.2 of decision C 56/2007, recitals 23 to 30.
Glej tudi uvodne izjave od 23 do 30 v delu 2.2 zgoraj navedenega sklepa C 56/2007.
Pursuant to Article 21 of the Decree of 6 July 2006, ‘In matters of financial management and accounting, the publicly owned establishment IFP is subject to the rules applicable to industrial and commercial establishments.’ Even though the publicly owned establishment IFP does not have a public accountant, there is evidence to suggest that EPICs which do not have a public accountant would also, in the event of their being closed down, have their debts transferred to the State or to another publicly owned establishment.
Člen 21 odloka z dne 6. julija 2006 določa: „Na področju finančnega in računovodskega upravljanja za osebo javnega prava IFP veljajo pravila, ki se uporabljajo za industrijska in trgovska podjetja.“ Čeprav oseba javnega prava IFP nima javnega računovodje, nekateri elementi kažejo, da se dolgovi EPIC tudi brez javnega računovodje v primeru prenehanja te osebe prenesejo na državo ali drugo osebo javnega prava.
The Commission refers to the examples of Charbonnages de France and ERAP, cited in recitals 49 and 50 of the opening decision, which show that where an EPIC is to be wound up — even an EPIC without a public accountant — a transfer of its rights and obligations to another public entity or to the State is not only possible, but clearly expected by the market.
Komisija se sklicuje na primera Charbonnages de France in ERAP, navedena v uvodnih izjavah 49 in 50 odločitve o začetku postopka, ki dokazujeta, da je v primeru prenehanja EPIC, tudi če nima javnega računovodje, možnost prenosa pravic in obveznosti na drug pravni subjekt javnega prava ali državo ne le mogoča, temveč jo trg jasno predvideva.
See also section 2.3 of decision C 56/2007, recitals 31 to 36.
Glej tudi uvodne izjave od 31 do 36 v delu 2.3 zgoraj navedenega sklepa C 56/2007.
See also section 2.4 of decision C 56/2007, recital 37.
Glej tudi uvodno izjavo 37 v delu 2.4 zgoraj navedenega sklepa C 56/2007.
See in particular. the letters from the French authorities dated 18 July 2006, 30 January 2008 and 26 June 2008.
Glej zlasti dopise francoskih organov z dne 18. julija 2006, 30. januarja 2008 in 26. junija 2008.
The Commission emphasises that these arguments have already been presented in section 3 (‘Observations and proposals by the French authorities’) of decision C 56/2007.
Komisija poudarja, da so bile te trditve predstavljene že v delu 3 („Pripombe in predlogi francoskih organov“) zgoraj navedenega sklepa C 56/2007.
To simplify the presentation, the Commission will therefore refer to that decision as often as possible.
Da bi poenostavila predstavitev, se bo Komisija torej čim pogosteje sklicevala na ta del.
Council of State judgment, Société de l’hôtel d’Albe, 1 April 1938, reported in Receuil, p. 341.
Odločitev Conseil d'État z dne 1. aprila 1938 v zadevi Société de l’hôtel d’Albe, str. 341.
Council of State judgments in the Campoloro case (10 November 1999 and 18 November 2005).
Sodbi Conseil d'État v zadevi Campoloro (10. november 1999 in 18. november 2005).
See recital 59 of the opening decision.
Glej uvodno izjavo 59 odločitve o začetku postopka.
See the observations submitted by the French authorities in the postal case on 23 January 2008 and 27 October 2009, to which they have referred mutatis mutandis in the present IFP case.
Glej pripombe francoskih organov, poslane 23. januarja 2008 in 27. oktobra 2009 v poštni zadevi, na katere se smiselno sklicujejo v tej zadevi o osebi javnega prava IFP.
See 2006 Council of State report, p. 69.
Glej poročilo Conseil d'État za leto 2006, str. 69.
See the observations submitted by the French authorities on 27 October 2009 in connection with decision C 56/2007.
Glej pripombe francoskih organov, poslane 27. oktobra 2009 v okviru Sklepa C 56/2007.
The French authorities emphasise that an express guarantee had to be granted when the Administration of Posts and Telecommunications was converted into an independent legal person in 1991, whereas that would not have been necessary if the new La Poste, as an establishment equivalent to an EPIC, had enjoyed a State guarantee by virtue of its legal form.
Francoski organi poudarjajo, da je, nasprotno, izrecno poroštvo moralo biti dodeljeno ob preoblikovanju uprave za pošto in telekomunikacije leta 1991 v samostojno pravno osebo, medtem ko to ne bi bilo potrebno, če bi bilo podjetje La Poste kot ustanova, enakovredna EPIC, zakonsko upravičeno do državnega poroštva.
Likewise, express guarantees have been granted to ERAP and the French Development Agency (Agence Française du Développement), which are both EPICs.
Izrecno poroštvo je bilo odobreno ERAP in Agence Française du Développement (Francoska agencija za razvoj), ki sta EPIC.
Labetoulle, ‘La responsabilité des AAI dotées de la personnalité morale: coup d’arrêt à l’idée de “garantie de l’État” ’, RJEP/CJEG No 635, October 2006.
Labetoulle, La responsabilité des AAI dotées de la personnalité morale: coup d’arrêt à l’idée de „garantie de l’État“ (Odgovornost neodvisnih upravnih organov, ki so pravne osebe: ustavitev zamisli „državnega poroštva“), RJEP/CJEG, št. 635, oktober 2006.
See the observations submitted by the French authorities in the postal case on 23 January 2008.
Glej pripombe francoskih organov, poslane 23. januarja 2008 v poštni zadevi.
Council of State, Société de gestion du port de Campoloro, 10 November 1999, reported in Recueil p. 3409
Conseil d'État, 10. november 1999, Société de gestion du port de Campoloro, zbirka Conseil d’État, str. 3409.
Council of State, Société de gestion du port de Campoloro, 18 November 2005.
Conseil d'État, 18. november 2005, Société de gestion du port de Campoloro.
Bon, ‘Le Préfet face à l’inexécution par une collectivité territoriale d’un jugement la condamnant pécuniairement’, RFDA, March-April 2006, p. 341.
Bon, Le Préfet face à l'inexécution par une collectivité territoriale d’un jugement la condamnant pécuniairement (Prefekt in neizvršitev sodne odločbe, s katero je ozemeljski skupnosti naložena denarna kazen), RFDA – marec–april 2006, str. 341.
Landais & F. Lenica, ‘Le pouvoir de substitution du préfet en cas d’inexécution de la chose jugée par les collectivités territoriales’, AJDA, 23 January 2006, p. 137.
Landais in F. Lenica, Le pouvoir de substitution du préfet en cas d'inexécution de la chose jugée par les collectivités territoriales (Pooblastilo za nadomestitev prefekta, kadar ozemeljske skupnosti ne izvršijo pravnomočne odločitve), AJDA, 23. januar 2006, str. 137.
Commission Notice on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of guarantees, OJ C 71, 11.3.2000, p. 14.
Obvestilo Komisije o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES za državno pomoč v obliki poroštev (UL C 71, 11.3.2000, str. 14).
The procedure which would be followed in the event of the insolvency of IFP should be defined and publicised.
Postopek, ki bi se uporabil v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti osebe javnega prava IFP, bi moral biti opredeljen in objavljen.
This procedure should be either the private-law procedure or a procedure which confers on the creditors of the publicly owned establishment IFP rights no greater than those they would have had under commercial law.
Ta postopek bi moral biti bodisi postopek zasebnega prava bodisi postopek, s katerim upniki osebe javnega prava IFP pridobijo pravice, ki niso večje od pravic, ki bi jih imeli na podlagi trgovinskega prava.
According to the French authorities, compliance with these criteria is sufficient, albeit not necessary, to rule out the existence of any advantage.
Po mnenju francoskih organov upoštevanje teh meril zadostuje za izločitev obstoja kakršne koli prednosti, vendar ni potrebno.
In their opinion, it would be counter-intuitive to regard the alleged existence of a doubt about the procedure applicable in the event of insolvency to be reflected in more favourable funding terms.
Po njihovem mnenju bi bilo zlasti v nasprotju z zdravim razumom, če bi menili, da lahko domnevni obstoj pomislekov o postopku, ki se uporablja v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti, privede do boljših pogojev financiranja.
According to France, in such circumstances, the undertaking would initially be required to open negotiations with its creditors in order to establish a plan for rescheduling liabilities.
Po mnenju Francije bi se moralo podjetje v podobnih okoliščinah najprej vključiti v pogajanja z upniki, da bi pripravilo načrt reprogramiranja obveznosti.
Next, if the plan were judged unsatisfactory or if it did not bring the financial difficulties to an end, and in the absence of a new agreement with creditors, the creditors – or some of them – could refer the case to the competent court to obtain a judgment against the debtor and therefore have their claim recognised.
Če načrt ne bi bil zadovoljiv ali ne bi omogočal odprave finančnih težav in če ne bi bilo novega dogovora z upniki, bi lahko nato ti – ali nekateri od njih – zadevo predložili pristojnemu sodišču, da bi dosegli obsodbo dolžnika in priznanje svojih terjatev.
According to the French authorities, if the procedure introduced by the Law of 16 July 1980 were to founder for lack of assets at IFP, and if the supervising authority were therefore faced with an impossible task, not having any more assets to sell in order to generate the resources needed to pay the amount due, the procedure provided for by the Law of 16 July 1980 would be terminated.
Francoski organi menijo, da če bi se s postopkom, uvedenim z zakonom z dne 16. julija 1980, ugotovilo, da oseba javnega prava IFP nima zadostnih sredstev, in če torej nadzorni organ dejansko ne bi mogel ustvariti potrebnih sredstev za plačilo dolgovanega zneska, ker ne bi imel več nobenega sredstva za prodajo, bi bil postopek, določen z zakonom z dne 16. julija 1980, končan.
Pursuant to Article L. 225-248 of the Commercial Code, if a company’s equity capital falls below half of its share capital, the general meeting must record this and decide whether the company should be prematurely dissolved.
Člen L.225-258 trgovinskega zakonika določa, da mora generalna skupščina, kadar je lastniški kapital družbe manjši od polovice njenega osnovnega kapitala, to ugotoviti in odločiti, ali je potrebno predčasno prenehanje družbe.
If it is decided to continue the activity of the company, the company must, no later than the end of the second financial year after that in which the losses were recorded, reconstitute its equity to a value at least equivalent to half the share capital, and reduce the share capital if the equity has not been reconstituted otherwise.
Če se sprejme odločitev o nadaljevanju dejavnosti družbe, mora ta najpozneje ob koncu drugega poslovnega leta po letu, v katerem je bila ugotovljena izguba, obnoviti kapital na vrednost, ki je najmanj enaka polovici osnovnega kapitala, tako da tega zmanjša, če lastniški kapital ni bil obnovljen drugače.
Court of Justice in Case C-303/88 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1433, paragraph 21.
Sodba Sodišča ES z dne 21. marca 1991 v zadevi Italija proti Komisiji, C-303/88, Recueil, str. I-1433, točka 21.
See in particular Court of Justice in Case C-482/99 France v Commission (Stardust Marine) [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraphs 68 to 83.
Glej zlasti sodbo Sodišča z dne 16. maja 2002 v zadevi Francija proti Komisiji (Stardust Marine), C-482/99, Recueil, str. I-4397, točke od 68 do 83.
European Commission, 21 December 2005, State aid measure No N 531/2005 – France – Measures relating to the creation and operation of Banque Postale.
[46] Evropska komisija, 21. december 2005, državna pomoč N 531/2005 – Francija – Ukrepi v zvezi z ustanovitvijo in delovanjem Banque Postale.
Court of First Instance in Case T-68/03 Olympiaki Aeroporia Ypiresies AE v Commission, not yet reported in the ECR; to the same effect see also Court of First Instance in Case T-266/02 Deutsche Post AG v. Commission, not yet reported in the ECR, paragraph 92: ‘Moreover, the Commission must check whether the beneficiary of aid has received an actual advantage’.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 12. septembra 2007 v zadevi Olympiaki Aeroporia Ypiresies AE proti Komisiji, T-68/03, še neobjavljena v ZOdl.; v istem smislu glej tudi sodbo Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 1. julija 2008 v zadevi Deutsche Post AG proti Komisiji, T-266/02, še neobjavljena v ZOdl., točka 92: „Poleg tega je Komisija obvezana preveriti obstoj dejanske prednosti za upravičenca pomoči.“
As amended, the provision in the Decree would read:‘If the notice given has had no effect by the time these deadlines expire, the representative of the State or the authority responsible for supervision shall enter the expenditure in the budget of the defaulting authority or publicly owned establishment. The representative of the State or the authority responsible for supervision shall, as appropriate, release the necessary resources from the budget of the defaulting authority or establishment, either by reducing the appropriations allocated to other expenditures and still available or by increasing resources’ (the amendment is shown in italic).
Tako spremenjena določba odloka bi se glasila:„Če ob izteku teh rokov opomin ostaja brez učinka, predstavnik države ali organ, pristojen za nadzor, odhodek vpiše v proračun skupnosti ali osebe javnega prava, ki ni izpolnila obveznosti. Po potrebi zagotovi potrebna sredstva v proračunu skupnosti ali ustanove bodisi z zmanjšanjem sredstev, ki so namenjena za druge odhodke in so še na voljo, bodisi s povečanjem sredstev.“ (spremembe so podčrtane)
The French authorities refer to recital 68 of the opening decision, in which the Commission takes the view that the proposal by the French authorities to amend the Decree implementing the Law of 16 July 1980‘does not exclude the possibility that, where the resources of the publicly owned establishment IFP are exhausted, the creditor who has not obtained repayment of his claim under application of the Law of 16 July 1980 could bring legal action to render the State liable on the basis of a breach of the principle of equality before public burdens’.
Francoski organi se sklicujejo na uvodno izjavo 68 odločitve o začetku postopka, v kateri Komisija meni, da predlog spremembe odloka o izvajanju zakona z dne 16. julija 1980, ki so ga pripravili francoski organi, „ne omogoča izključitve možnosti, da v primeru izčrpanja sredstev osebe javnega prava IFP upnik, ki mu terjatev ne bi bila poplačana na podlagi zakona iz leta 1980, na sodišču zahteva, da država prevzame odgovornost na podlagi kršitve enakosti pred javnimi bremeni“.
Council of State, Sille, 16 November 1998: ‘First, as the judges in the court of first instance decided, while the public authorities can be held liable, even without fault, on the grounds of the principle of the equality of citizens before public burdens, where a measure lawfully adopted has the effect of causing a special loss of a certain degree of gravity to a natural or legal person, that does not hold true in this case, because Mr Sille, in his capacity as a real-estate professional, could not be unaware of the risks necessarily involved in the execution of a building project such as that projected, in respect of which it was necessary, in particular, to amend the provisions of the land-use plan and obtain the agreement of the local council. Mr Sille should have contemplated the possibility that if the findings of the public enquiry were negative or if the project encountered hostility it might be abandoned by the local authority. Having taken the risk in full knowledge of the facts, he cannot to any purpose maintain that he has suffered an abnormal loss and that the local authority must bear the substantial consequences for him arising from the shelving of the project’.
Conseil d'État, 16. november 1998, Sille: „Ob upoštevanju, prvič, da se sicer, kot je odločilo prvostopenjsko sodišče, lahko odgovornost, tudi nekrivdna, javnega organa uveljavlja na podlagi načela enakosti državljanov pred javnimi bremeni, kadar zakonito sprejet ukrep fizični ali pravni osebi povzroči posebno in dokaj resno škodo, to ne drži v tem primeru, ker g. Sille kot nepremičninski strokovnjak ni mogel spregledati tveganj, ki so nujno povezana z izvedbo nepremičninskega programa, kot je bil ta, ki je bil načrtovan v tem primeru ter za izvedbo katerega je bilo med drugim treba spremeniti določbe načrta rabe tal in pridobiti soglasje občinskega sveta, in ker bi moral g. Sille predvideti možnost, da bo občina projekt opustila glede na negativne rezultate javne raziskave in nasprotovanja, ki ga je bil projekt deležen; ker je to tveganje prevzel, čeprav je bil popolnoma seznanjen z dejstvi, ne more upravičeno trditi, da je utrpel neobičajno škodo in da mora občina nositi denarne posledice, ki zanj izhajajo iz odpovedi projekta.“
Council of State, Meunier, 10 July 1996: ‘When it concluded from the choice of such a place for the location of the business and from a letter from the mayor concerning the possibility of land slip that the interested party had accepted in full knowledge of the facts the risks of instability to which his establishment was exposed, the Administrative Appeal Court made a final decision on the facts. When it took the view that the loss resulting from a situation to which the interested party had knowingly exposed himself did not give him grounds for compensation, the Court did not fail to apply the rules governing the liability of legal persons governed by public law’.
Conseil d'État, 10. julij 1996, Meunier: „Upravno pritožbeno sodišče je s tem, ko je menilo, da iz odločitve o umestitvi trgovine v tak kraj in pisma župana o možnosti premikov zemljišča izhaja, da je zadevna stranka, ki je bila seznanjena z dejstvi, sprejela tveganja nestabilnosti, ki jim je bila njena stavba izpostavljena, opravilo suvereno presojo. Z mnenjem, da škoda, ki je nastala zaradi položaja, ki se mu je zadevna stranka vede izpostavila, tej ne daje pravice do povrnitve škode, ni kršilo pravil, s katerimi se ureja odgovornost javnih oseb.“
General Court in Joined Cases T-425/04, T-444/04, T-450/04 and T-456/04 France and Others v Commission, 21 May 2010, not yet reported in the ECR.
Sodba Splošnega sodišča z dne 21. maja 2010 v združenih zadevah Francija proti Komisiji, T-425/04, T-444/04, T-450/04 in T-456/04, še neobjavljena v ZOdl.