natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
If the measures were granted outside an existing aid scheme, the Commission doubted that they would comply with the market economy investor principle.
Če ukrepi niso bili dodeljeni v okviru obstoječe sheme pomoči, je Komisija imela pomisleke glede njihove skladnosti z načelom vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
Finland argues that the guarantee should not be considered state aid, as Karjaportti would probably have been able to acquire such a guarantee from private capital markets.
Finska trdi, da poroštvo ne bi smelo biti obravnavano kot državna pomoč, saj bi podjetje Karjaportti verjetno lahko pridobilo tako poroštvo na zasebnih trgih kapitala.
Finland refers to the fact that Tapiola granted the loan that was secured by the guarantee in question as part of a financing package of EUR 25 million for the investments in the Tikkala production site.
Finska se sklicuje na dejstvo, da je banka Tapiola dodelila posojilo, ki je bilo zavarovano z zadevnim poroštvom, kot del finančnega paketa v vrednosti 25 milijonov EUR za naložbe v proizvodni obrat Tikkala.
Other parties contributed to the financing.
Druge strani so prispevale k financiranju.
State support for the investment consisted of the assignment of land and bearing the costs for the levelling of the site by the City of Mikkeli (see recitals 89 and 90), loans and guarantees granted by Finnvera as well as direct grants granted by the Ministry of Trade and Industry.
Državna pomoč pri naložbi je zajemala dodelitev zemljišč in kritje stroškov za izravnavo zemljišča, ki ju je opravilo mesto Mikkeli (glej uvodni izjavi 89 in 90), posojila in poroštva, ki jih je dodelilo podjetje Finnvera, ter neposredne dotacije, ki jih je dodelilo Ministrstvo za trgovino in industrijo.
In addition, Finland claims that the City of Mikkeli was treating all companies applying for guarantees on an equal basis.
Poleg tega Finska trdi, da je mesto Mikkeli vsa podjetja, ki so vložila prošnje za poroštva, obravnavalo enako.
If the measure was to be considered as state aid, Finland is of the opinion that such aid would have been compatible with the internal market as it was granted in accordance with Guidelines on national regional aid [36] ('the RAG 1998').
Če bi se ukrep obravnaval kot državna pomoč, Finska meni, da bi bila taka pomoč združljiva z notranjim trgom, saj je bila dodeljena v skladu s Smernicami o državni regionalni pomoči [36] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice o regionalni pomoči 1998).
Large companies were eligible for regional aid measures under Article 107(3)(a) of the TFEU if they did not exceed the amount of 24 % of the eligible net costs.
Velika podjetja so bila upravičena do regionalnih ukrepov pomoči v skladu s členom 107(3)(a) PDEU, če niso presegla zneska 24 % upravičenih neto stroškov.
These conditions were met.
Ti pogoji so bili izpolnjeni.
In particular, Finland provided a calculation according to which the gross grant equivalent would still remain under 24 % when taking into account all the state support for the investment.
Finska je zlasti zagotovila izračun, v katerem bi bruto ekvivalent dotacije še vedno ostal pod 24 %, če bi se upoštevala vsa državna pomoč pri naložbi.
Finland claims that the current book value of the plot is not a comparable indicator for the determination of the value of the plot at the time of the transfer.
Finska trdi, da trenutna knjigovodska vrednost parcele ni primerljiv kazalnik za ugotovitev vrednosti parcele ob času prenosa.
The City of Mikkeli estimates the market value of the land at the time of the assignment at EUR 300000. According to Finland the costs of levelling the site amounted to FIM 2 million (EUR 336376).
Mesto Mikkeli ocenjuje tržno vrednost zemljišča ob dodelitvi na 300000 EUR. Po navedbah Finske so stroški izravnave zemljišča znašali 2 milijona FIM (336376 EUR).
Finland considers that the transfer of the plot of land and bearing the costs for levelling of the site has been in line with the RAG 1998 (see recital 87).
Finska meni, da sta bila prenos zemljišča in kritje stroškov izravnave zemljišča v skladu s smernicami o regionalni pomoči 1998 (glej uvodno izjavo 87).
According to Finland, the purchase of the properties in the year 2002 related to the construction project of the Tikkala production facility for which Karjaportti needed funding.
Po navedbah Finske je bil nakup zemljišč leta 2002 povezan z gradbenim projektom proizvodnega obrata Tikkala, za katerega je podjetje Karjaportti potrebovalo finančna sredstva.
Finland claims that the properties were bought at a market price.
Finska trdi, da so bila zemljišča kupljena po tržni ceni.
The evaluation took into account that the properties were purchased in order to turn them into predominantly residential use through an alteration of plans, while part of the area was still in business use.
Ocena je upoštevala dejstvo, da so bila zemljišča kupljena z namenom, da se jih s spremembo načrtov spremeni zlasti za stanovanjsko rabo, del območja pa je bil še vedno namenjen za poslovno uporabo.
In addition, the properties were subject to mortgages given to private creditors and alone one of the six properties had a total mortgage of approximately EUR 9,6 million, which confirms that the value of the properties was higher than the purchase price.
Poleg tega so bila zemljišča pod hipotekami, danimi zasebnim upnikom, in le eno od šestih zemljišč je imelo skupno hipoteko v vrednosti približno 9,6 milijona EUR, kar potrjuje, da je bila vrednost zemljišč večja od nakupne cene.
Hence, the City of Mikkeli respected the market economy investor principle and the purchase did not include state aid.
Zato je mesto Mikkeli spoštovalo načelo vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu in nakup ni pomenil državne pomoči.
When issuing the guarantee on 8 March 2004, the City of Mikkeli retained this security.
Ob izdaji poroštva 8. marca 2004 je mesto Mikkeli to zastavo obdržalo.
Finland argues that the original guarantee was granted before Finland's accession to the EU.
Finska trdi, da je bilo prvotno poroštvo dodeljeno pred pristopom Finske k EU.
When the City of Mikkeli granted the new guarantee on 8 March 2004, no new aid was granted, as the existing original guarantee was converted into a new guarantee while retaining sufficient counter-securities.
Ko je mesto Mikkeli 8. marca 2004 dodelilo novo poroštvo, ni bila dodeljena nova pomoč, saj je bilo obstoječe prvotno poroštvo pretvorjeno v novo poroštvo, ki je obdržalo zadostna dodatna poroštva.
In addition, at the same time, also other guarantors of the original pension loan of 1992 granted loans to Karjaportti.
Poleg tega so istočasno posojila podjetju Karjaportti dodelili tudi drugi garanti prvotnega posojila za pokojnine iz leta 1992.
These conditions were met, as the aid element of the guarantee was only EUR 57835 whereas the overall investments of Karjaportti in Tikkala amounted to EUR […].
Ti pogoji so bili izpolnjeni, saj je element pomoči poroštva znašal le 57835 EUR, skupne naložbe podjetja Karjaportti v obrat Tikkala pa so znašale […] EUR.
Court supervised restructuring proceedings (measure 6)
Postopek prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča (ukrep 6)
Finland argues that the measures taken were all related to the commencement of the court-supervised restructuring proceeding.
Finska trdi, da so bili vsi sprejeti ukrepi povezani z začetkom postopka prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča.
In accordance with the Court of Justice case-law, legislation on court-supervised recovery schemes and insolvency does not in itself justify treating that legislation as aid [37].
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča zakonodaja o shemah okrevanja pod nadzorom sodišča in nesolventnosti sama po sebi ne upravičuje obravnave navedene zakonodaje kot pomoči [37].
Second, no new loans were granted during the proceedings, but payment of debts granted prior to the restructuring was rescheduled in conformity with the national legislation on restructuring of enterprises, treating the creditors on an equal basis.
Drugič, med postopkom nova posojila niso bila dodeljena, vendar je bilo plačilo dolgov, dodeljenih pred prestrukturiranjem, odloženo v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo o prestrukturiranju podjetij, ki upnike obravnava enako.
In addition to the City of Mikkeli's receivables, receivables of private players were also rearranged during the proceedings.
Poleg denarnih terjatev mesta Mikkeli so bile med postopkom prerazporejene tudi denarne terjatve zasebnih subjektov.
The creditors of Karjaportti were divided into several groups.
Upniki podjetja Karjaportti so bili razdeljeni v več skupin.
The receivables of each group of creditors were subject to mutually equal and similar terms.
Za denarne terjatve vsake skupine upnikov so veljali medsebojno enaki in podobni pogoji.
Finland points out that this is in particular true as regards the secured debts of the City of Mikkeli.
Finska izpostavlja, da to zlasti velja glede zavarovanih dolgov mesta Mikkeli.
Hence, it seems that the City of Mikkeli has acted like a private market economy investor when agreeing to the court-supervised restructuring proceedings.
Zato se zdi, da je mesto Mikkeli ravnalo kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržnem postopku, ko je soglašalo s postopkom prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča.
In addition, Finland points out that the City of Mikkeli had deemed it more profitable to reschedule the debts than to allow Karjaportti to go bankrupt and to close down permanently, which is also showed in a liquidation balance sheet attached to the restructuring programme.
Poleg tega Finska izpostavlja, da je mesto Mikkeli menilo, da je odlog plačila dolgov donosnejši, kot če se podjetju Karjaportti dovoli, da gre v stečaj in se za vedno zapre, kar je nakazano tudi v likvidacijski bilanci stanja, priloženi programu prestrukturiranja.
As regards the compatibility of the measures under the R&R Guidelines 1999, Finland argues that a company subject to restructuring proceedings should generally be deemed as firm in difficulty within the meaning of the Guidelines.
Glede združljivosti ukrepov v okviru smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje 1999 Finska trdi, da bi moralo biti podjetje, za katero velja postopek prestrukturiranja, običajno obravnavano kot podjetje v težavah v smislu smernic.
It then repeats that the restructuring proceeding did not involve state aid and that the City of Mikkeli did not carry out support measures during the restructuring proceedings.
Nato ponovi, da postopek prestrukturiranja ni zajemal državne pomoči in da mesto Mikkeli med postopkom prestrukturiranja ni izvajalo ukrepov podpore.
Then Finland brings forward arguments relating to each of the measures granted: As regards the triggering of City of Mikkeli's guarantee for the loan granted in 2000, Finland argues that Mikkeli did not grant any new loans to Karjaportti, but simply stepped in as a creditor on the demand of Tapiola at the beginning of the court-supervised restructuring proceedings, which was an ordinary measure under such restructuring proceedings.
Finska nato predloži utemeljitve v zvezi z vsakim dodeljenim ukrepom: glede sprožitve poroštva mesta Mikkeli za posojilo, dodeljeno leta 2000, Finska trdi, da mesto Mikkeli ni dodelilo novih posojil podjetju Karjaportti, temveč je le postalo upnik na zahtevo banke Tapiola na začetku postopka prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča, kar je bil običajni ukrep v okviru takega postopka prestrukturiranja.
As regards the terms and conditions of the repayment of the loan, Finland points out that they had been specified in the restructuring programme and were equal for all creditors within the same group of creditors.
Glede pogojev povračila posojila Finska izpostavlja, da so bili opredeljeni v programu prestrukturiranja in so bili enaki za vse upnike znotraj iste skupine upnikov.
As regards the unpaid charges, Finland clarifies that the receivables are owed to the City property administration, the water management department and the waste management department of the City.
Glede neplačanih stroškov Finska pojasnjuje, da se denarne terjatve dolgujejo mestni upravi zemljišč, oddelku za upravljanje voda in mestnemu oddelku za ravnanje z odpadki.
The receivables consist of unpaid charges that had arisen prior to the commencement of the court-supervised restructuring proceeding.
Denarne terjatve zajemajo neplačane stroške, ki so nastali pred začetkom postopka prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča.
No guarantee was granted for those outstanding amounts by the City of Mikkeli, as they were receivables due to the City.
Za navedene neporavnane zneske mesto Mikkeli ni dodelilo nobenega poroštva, saj so se denarne terjatve dolgovale mestu.
Hence, when the court-supervised restructuring proceedings started, they were entered into the restructuring programme as one sum.
Zato so bile ob začetku postopka prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča vknjižene v program prestrukturiranja kot en znesek.
Finland claims that the shares of the real estate company Kiinteistö Oy Suksimäki were purchased at a market price from Karjaportti.
Finska trdi, da so bile delnice nepremičninskega podjetja Kiinteistö Oy Suksimäki od podjetja Karjaportti kupljene po tržni ceni.
Finland submitted an independent valuer’s statement according to which the value of the shares amounted to approximately EUR 1 million based on the prevailing rent level.
Finska je predložila izkaz neodvisnega cenilca, v skladu s katerim je vrednost delnic znašala približno 1 milijon EUR na podlagi prevladujoče višine najemnin.
This value was adjusted as regards the actual prevailing rent level and the shares were accordingly bought at a price of EUR 860000. Hence, the property transaction did not include any aid element.
Ta vrednost je bila prilagojena glede na dejansko prevladujočo višino najemnin in delnice so bile v skladu s tem kupljene po ceni 860000 EUR. Zato pravni posel za pridobitev nepremičnine ni vključeval elementa pomoči.
Concerning the conversion of the unpaid interest into a loan, Finland firstly argues that the non-payment of interest rates is a typical measure to court-supervised restructuring proceedings.
Glede pretvorbe neplačanih obrestnih mer v posojilo Finska trdi, da je neplačilo obrestnih mer običajni ukrep v postopku prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča.
The conversion of such unpaid interest into loans, which will be better ranked than other loans, is foreseen by Finnish legislation.
Pretvorbo takih neplačanih obresti v posojila, ki bodo bolje uvrščena kot druga posojila, predvideva finska zakonodaja.
In addition, Finland considers that the conversion of the unpaid interest into a loan was taken in accordance with the private market investor principle, as private creditors converted unpaid interest receivables into loans together with the City of Mikkeli.
Poleg tega Finska meni, da je bila pretvorba neplačanih obresti v posojilo v skladu z načelom zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, saj so zasebni upniki, skupaj z mestom Mikkeli, pretvorili obrestne terjatve v posojila.
Write-off of debts in the financial statements of 2006 and 2008 (measure 9 and measure 10)
Odpis dolgov v računovodskih izkazih iz let 2006 in 2008 (ukrepa 9 in 10)
Finland confirms that recording the debts as a loss is simply a bookkeeping operation on the creditor's part, done in accordance with the principle of prudence and the respective provisions in the Accounting Act 1336/1997.
Finska priznava, da je zapis dolgov kot izgube le knjigovodsko dejanje upnika v skladu z načelom previdnosti in ustreznimi določbami Zakona o računovodstvu 1336/1997.
Finland argues that the debt write-off does not affect the legal relationship between the creditor and the debtor, i.e. the debts were not waived.
Finska trdi, da odpis dolgov ne vpliva na pravno razmerje med upnikom in dolžnikom, tj. da dolgovi niso bili opuščeni.
The City of Mikkeli has confirmed that it has not waived the debts recorded as losses and that it continues to pursue collection.
Mesto Mikkeli je potrdilo, da ni opustilo dolgov, ki so bili zapisani kot izgube, in da jih še naprej poskuša izterjati.
The debt is part of the secured debt under the court-supervised restructuring proceedings.
Dolg je del zavarovanega dolga v okviru postopka prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča.
Finland argues that rescheduling of debts is a measure inherent to court-supervised restructuring proceedings and does not involve state aid.
Finska trdi, da je odlog plačila dolgov ukrep, ki je neločljivo povezan s postopkom prestrukturiranja pod nadzorom sodišča in ne zajema državne pomoči.
According to Finland, the creditors of Karjaportti had a mutual understanding that the rescheduling of debts was a reasonable alternative in order to safeguard their receivables.
Po navedbah Finske so se upniki podjetja Karjaportti med seboj sporazumeli, da je odlog plačila dolgov razumna alternativa za zaščito njihovih denarnih terjatev.
It informs the Commission that the notified rescheduling was never implemented, as the administrative court of Kuopio (Kuopion Hallinto-Oikeus) halted the implementation of the debt rescheduling.
Komisijo obvešča, da priglašeni odlog plačil ni bil nikoli izvajan, saj je upravno sodišče mesta Kuopio (Kuopion Hallinto-Oikeus) zaustavilo izvajanje odloga plačila dolga.
Finland explains that Karjaportti's debts were nevertheless rescheduled, following several proposals by Karjaportti in the period 2009–2011, which were accepted by the City of Mikkeli.
Finska pojasnjuje, da so bila plačila dolgov podjetja Karjaportti v obdobju 2009–2011 kljub temu odložena po več predlogih podjetja Karjaportti, ki jih je mesto Mikkeli sprejelo.
Finland claims that this subsequent rescheduling was in line with the market economy investor principle, as the City of Mikkeli and all other creditors implemented the rescheduling at equal terms.
Finska trdi, da je bil naslednji odlog plačil v skladu z načelom zasebnega vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu, saj so mesto Mikkeli in vsi drugi upniki odlog plačila izvajali pod enakimi pogoji.
First, Finnvera's risk was not increased, as the guarantee replaced a guarantee that Finnvera granted earlier (in 1992) for a pension loan.
Tveganje podjetja Finnvera se ni povečalo, saj je poroštvo nadomestilo poroštvo, ki ga je podjetje Finnvera dodelilo pred tem (leta 1992) za posojilo za pokojnine.
This loan was replaced by a new pension loan in 2004, for which Finnvera granted the guarantee in question.
To posojilo je leta 2004 nadomestilo novo pokojninsko posojilo, za katerega je podjetje Finnvera dodelilo zadevno poroštvo.
Finally, the forecasts for Karjaportti were good at the time the guarantee was granted.
Napovedi za podjetje Karjaportti so bile ob dodelitvi poroštva dobre.
Finland considers that the loan granted in 2006 did not involve state aid as Finnvera acted like a private market creditor when converting the unpaid interest into a new loan in line with the restructuring programme.
Finska meni, da posojilo, dodeljeno leta 2006, ni zajemalo državne pomoči, saj je podjetje Finnvera ravnalo kot zasebni tržni upnik, ko je pretvorilo neplačane obresti v novo posojilo v skladu s programom prestrukturiranja.
In addition, private creditors converted their unpaid interest into new loans shortly before Finnvera did so and at similar conditions.
Poleg tega so zasebni upniki pretvorili svoje neplačane obresti v nova posojila, še preden je to storilo podjetje Finnvera in pod podobnimi pogoji.
Finland considers that the loan granted in 2007 did not involve state aid as Finnvera acted together with two private creditors who granted new loans at the same time and at similar conditions.
Finska meni, da posojilo, dodeljeno leta 2007, ni zajemalo državne pomoči, saj je podjetje Finnvera delovalo skupaj z dvema zasebnima upnikoma, ki sta nova posojila dodelila ob istem času in pod podobnimi pogoji.
In addition, the loan was collateralised by way of valuable mortgages and business mortgages.
Poleg tega je bilo posojilo zavarovano z visokimi hipotekami in poslovnimi hipotekami.
The interested party only commented on measures 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 10.
Zainteresirana stran je predložila pripombe le na ukrepe 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9 in 10.
The interested party states that the guarantee was granted in order to secure a loan of FIM 25 million for the investment in a new production site.
Zainteresirana stran trdi, da je bilo poroštvo dodeljeno za zavarovanje posojila v vrednosti 25 milijonov FIM za naložbo v nov proizvodni obrat.
The interested party claims that a plot of land was allocated to Karjaportti and the City of Mikkeli undertook to provide municipal engineering and other requisite technical work, with costs totalling FIM 2,5 million.
Zainteresirana stran trdi, da je bilo zemljišče dodeljeno podjetju Karjaportti in da je mesto Mikkeli prevzelo stroške mestnega inženirstva in drugih potrebnih tehničnih del v skupni vrednosti 2,5 milijona FIM.
Karjaportti paid FIM 1,2 million for the plot.
Podjetje Karjaportti je za parcelo plačalo 1,2 milijona FIM.
In the books of Karjaportti, the plot is valued EUR 403000 and the interested party wonders whether the allocation of the land could have been state aid.
V poslovnih knjigah podjetja Karjaportti je parcela vredna 403000 EUR in zainteresirana stran se sprašuje, ali bi dodelitev zemljišča lahko bila državna pomoč.
The interested party alleges that Karjaportti was in grave difficulties at the time the guarantee was granted.
Zainteresirana stran trdi, da je bilo podjetje Karjaportti ob dodelitvi poroštva v velikih težavah.
The company had substantial debts already towards the City of Mikkeli and the group companies owned by the City of Mikkeli.
Podjetje je že imelo velike dolgove do mesta Mikkeli in skupine podjetij, ki so v lasti mesta Mikkeli.
The interested party alleges that the price paid for the shares in the real estate company was above the book value of the shares.
Zainteresirana stran trdi, da je bila cena, plačana za delnice nepremičninskega podjetja, višja od knjigovodske vrednosti delnic.
Article 107(1) of the TFEU lays down that any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever, which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods and affects trade between Member States is incompatible with the internal market.
Člen 107(1) PDEU določa, da je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, v kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
The conditions laid down in Article 107(1) TFEU are cumulative and thus for a measure to be qualified as state aid all the conditions must be fulfilled simultaneously.
Pogoji, določeni v členu 107(1) PDEU, so kumulativni, zato morajo biti vsi pogoji istočasno izpolnjeni, da ukrep velja za državno pomoč.
Whereas Article 107(1) of the TFEU provides for the general prohibition of state aid within the Union, Articles 107(2) and 107(3) of the TFEU provide for exemptions to the general rule that such aid is incompatible with the internal market as stated in Article 107(1) of the TFEU.
Člen 107(1) PDEU določa splošno prepoved državne pomoči znotraj Unije, člena 107(2) in 107(3) pa določata izjeme od splošnega pravila, da je taka pomoč nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, kot določa člen 107(1) PDEU.
In the following sections, the Commission assesses the existence of state aid separately for each of the measures described.
V naslednjih oddelkih Komisija ločeno ocenjuje obstoj državne pomoči za vsak opisani ukrep.
If a measure entails state aid, the Commission goes on to assess the compatibility of the aid measure.
Kadar ukrep zajema državno pomoč, Komisija naprej oceni združljivost ukrepa pomoči.
The Commission distinguishes between measures withdrawn, measures that were granted by the City of Mikkeli and measures that were granted by Finnvera.
Komisija razlikuje med umaknjenimi ukrepi, ukrepi, ki jih je dodelilo mesto Mikkeli, in ukrepi, ki jih je dodelilo podjetje Finnvera.
As a preliminary point, it is assessed at what point in time Karjaportti could be considered a company in difficulty.
V predhodni točki Komisija presoja, kdaj bi se podjetje Karjaportti lahko obravnavalo kot podjetje v težavah.