natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Brandt Italia took the view that the Italian State was required to recover the unlawful aid from the real beneficiary.
Družba Brandt Italia je menila, da bi morala Italija vračilo nezakonite pomoči odrediti dejanskemu upravičencu takšne pomoči.
Although the recipient of the aid granted under the scheme that the Commission had held unlawful was Brandt Italia, FagorBrandt considered that the ultimate benefit of the aid had been transferred almost entirely to the creditors recognised by the court-appointed administrators of Ocean, via an increase of EUR 8,5 million in the purchase price of the assets, compared with EUR 8624283 in benefits actually granted.
Kljub temu, da je bil upravičenec do zadevne pomoči na podlagi sheme pomoči, ki jo je Komisija obsodila, družba Brandt Italia (družba, ki je bila dejansko upravičena do oprostitve plačila), je podjetje FagorBrandt menilo, da so bile končne koristi te pomoči skoraj v celoti prenesene na upnike, ki so jih navedli stečajni upravitelji družbe Ocean, in sicer zaradi povečanja nakupne cene sredstev (povečanje cene za 8,5 milijona EUR v primerjavi z dejansko odobrenimi oprostitvami v znesku 8624283 EUR).
The French authorities took the view that the balance for which Brandt Italia/FagorBrandt was still liable was consequently EUR 124283 plus interest.
Zato so francoski organi menili, da preostali znesek, ki ga mora poravnati družba Brandt Italia/FagorBrandt znaša 124283 EUR, pri čemer je treba temu znesku prišteti še obresti.
The Italian authorities have provided the Commission with information that invalidates this reasoning.
Vendar so italijanski organi Komisiji predložili informacije, na podlagi katerih je bilo takšno sklepanje zavrnjeno.
On 13 May 2008 the Italian authorities sent the Commission two judgments delivered by courts in Brescia.
Italijanski organi so 13. maja 2008 Komisiji predložili dve sodbi, ki jih je sprejelo sodišča v Brescii.
They concerned a dispute between the National Social Security Institute (INPS) and Brandt Italia over aid Brandt Italia had received in the form of exemptions from social security contributions.
Ti dve sodbi sta povezani s sporom med nacionalnim inštitutom za socialno varnost (INPS) in družbo Brandt Italia glede določitve zneska pomoči, in sicer oprostitev plačila socialnih prispevkov, do katerih je bila upravičena družba Brandt Italia.
On 29 April 2008 the appeal court annulled the suspension of the recovery order.
Prizivno sodišče je 29. aprila 2008 razveljavilo odlog naloga za izterjavo.
A third judgment dates from 8 July 2008, and was sent to the Commission on 20 October 2008: it finds in favour of the INPS, on the substance, and upholds the order to Brandt Italia to repay the aid in full.
Tretja sodba z dne 8. julija 2008, ki je bila predložena Komisiji 20. oktobra 2008, je potrdila stališče INPS, da mora družba Brandt Italia pomoč vrniti v celoti.
Brandt Italia was notified of that judgment on 15 September 2008.
O tej sodbi je bila družba Brandt Italia obveščena 15. septembra 2008.
On 21 October 2008, therefore, it could reasonably be supposed that the sum would serve to repay part of the aid.
Zato se je 21. oktobra 2008 lahko predvidevalo, da bi ta znesek lahko bil namenjen vračilu dela zadevne pomoči.
This conclusion is supported by the following:
To ugotovitev potrjuje dejstvo, da:
In paragraph 18 of its Decision of 30 March 2004, the Commission said that the aid scheme it held incompatible might benefit the purchaser of a firm in difficulty or the firm in difficulty itself.
je v odločbi Komisije z dne 30. marca 2004 v uvodni izjavi (18) navedeno, da so lahko do sheme sporne pomoči upravičeni kupci podjetij v težavah in tudi podjetja v finančnih težavah.
It was reasonable to suppose, in other words, that Ocean would be liable for at least part of the sum to be recovered.
Z drugimi besedami, predvideno je bilo, da bo vsaj del sredstev, ki jih je treba vrniti, morala zagotoviti družba Ocean,
The judgment of the Ordinary Court of Brescia of 8 July 2008 refers to the fact that this sum is being held in a frozen account, and considers it ‘evident’ that the sum may serve to repay the INPS in part.
v sodbi sodišča v Brescii z dne 8. julija 2008 je navedeno, da je ta blokiran znesek na depozitnem računu in da je torej „očitno“, da bi se lahko ta znesek uporabil za delno vračilo INPS.
In the light of the circumstances set out in paragraphs 76 to 81, the Commission considers that the final amount of the Italian aid to be taken into account for purposes of the present analysis is EUR 3190878,02, plus interest running to 21 October 2008.
Zato Komisija ob upoštevanju ugotovitev iz uvodnih izjav (76) do (81) meni, da končni znesek italijanske pomoči, ki ga je treba upoštevati za namene te analize, znaša 3190878,02 EUR, pri čemer je treba temu znesku prišteti še obresti do 21. oktobra 2008.
The Commission must take account of the cumulative effect of those two aid measures, but must not add interest running to the date of the actual recovery.
Zato mora Komisija upoštevati kumulacijo teh elementov in zadevnemu znesku ne sme prišteti obresti do datuma dejanske izterjave.
The advantage conferred by the interest running from 21 October 2008 to the date of recovery will be removed by the recovery itself, in which that interest will of course have to be included.
Poleg tega bo prednost, ki je bila pridobljena z obrestmi od 21. oktobra 2008 do datuma dejanske izterjave, odpravljena s samo izterjavo, ki bo morala zadevne obresti vključevati.
The cumulative effect of the restructuring aid and the Italian aid
Pregled kumulativnega učinka pomoči za prestrukturiranje in italijanske pomoči
FagorBrandt consequently had at its disposal a sum of EUR 3190878,02, plus interest, in addition to the EUR 31 million in aid it was granted by the French authorities.
Podjetje FagorBrandt je imelo na voljo znesek v višini 3190878,02 EUR (plus obresti) poleg pomoči v višini 31 milijonov EUR, ki so mu jo dodelili francoski organi.
This advantage had an impact on competition: FagorBrandt had additional liquidity that it would not have had under normal market conditions (i.e. in the absence of the incompatible Italian aid).
Ta prednost vpliva na konkurenco: podjetje je imelo na voljo dodatna denarna sredstva, ki jih v običajnih tržnih pogojih ne bi imelo (tj. brez nezdružljive italijanske pomoči).
In line with point 23 of the restructuring aid guidelines and with the judgment in Electrolux and Whirlpool, the Commission proposes as part of its assessment of the compatibility of the restructuring aid to examine the cumulative effect of the restructuring aid and the Italian aid.
V skladu s točko 23 smernic za prestrukturiranje in s sodbo Splošnega sodišča z dne 14. februarja 2012 namerava Komisija analizirati kumulativen učinek italijanske pomoči in pomoči za prestrukturiranje v okviru analize združljivosti pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
This examination of the cumulative effect requires the Commission to verify two things.
Komisija s to analizo kumulativnega učinka zagotovi dvojni nadzor.
First, the Commission must check that the compensatory measures (see paragraphs 89 ff. and especially paragraphs 118 ff.) do offset the damage to competition caused by the additional liquidity available to FagorBrandt.
Po eni strani mora Komisija preveriti, ali izravnalni ukrepi (glej uvodno izjavo (89) in naslednje, predvsem uvodno izjavo (114) in naslednje) omogočajo natančno izravnavo vpliva na konkurenco, povzročenega zaradi dodatnih denarnih sredstev, ki jih je imelo na voljo podjetje FagorBrandt.
Second, the Commission will also seek to ensure that the recipient’s own contribution is free of any aid component (see paragraphs 154 ff.).
Po drugi strani Komisija namerava zagotoviti, da v lastni prispevek upravičenca ni všteta nobena pomoč (glej uvodno izjavo (151) in naslednje).
This is because it is not impossible that the contribution envisaged by the firm may incorporate the sum in question.
Dejansko ni mogoče izključiti možnosti, da bi bil lahko v lastni prispevek, ki ga je načrtovalo podjetje, vštet ta znesek.
When it verifies these aspects the Commission may impose new conditions on the Member State, irrespective of any proposals the Member State has made (and in the present case the Commission cannot take account of any such proposals made after 21 October 2008).
Komisija lahko zaradi tega dvojnega nadzora določi nove pogoje za zadevno državo članico neodvisno od morebitnih predlogov te države (ki jih v tem primeru Komisija ne bi mogla upoštevati, če bi bili predlogi sprejeti po 21. oktobru 2008).
This is confirmed by point 46 of the restructuring aid guidelines: ‘the Commission may impose any conditions and obligations it considers necessary in order to ensure that the aid does not distort competition to an extent contrary to the common interest, in the event that the Member State concerned has not given a commitment that it will adopt such provisions’.
Kot je potrjeno v točki 46 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje, „lahko Komisija določi kakršne koli pogoje in obveznosti, za katere meni, da so potrebni zato, da se prepreči, da bi pomoč izkrivila konkurenco v tolikšni meri, ki bi bila v nasprotju s skupnim interesom, v primeru da se zadevna država članica ni zavezala k sprejetju takšnih pravil“.
No undue distortion of competition
Preprečevanje čezmernega izkrivljanja konkurence
The need for compensatory measures
Analiza nujnosti izravnalnih ukrepov
Point 38 of the restructuring aid guidelines provides that, in order for restructuring aid to be authorised by the Commission, compensatory measures must be taken to lessen the adverse effects of the aid on trading conditions.
Točka 38 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje določa, da lahko Komisija odobri pomoč za prestrukturiranje samo, če se sprejmejo izravnalni ukrepi za zmanjšanje negativnih učinkov pomoči na pogoje trgovanja.
In its notification, France asserted that compensatory measures did not appear necessary in this case, inter alia because the aid would not have any excessive distortive effects.
Francija je v priglasitvi trdila, da se izravnalni ukrepi v obravnavanem primeru ne zdijo nujni, zlasti ker naj pomoč ne bi imela učinkov čezmernega izkrivljanja.
In paragraphs 37, 38 and 40 of the opening decision, the Commission explained briefly why it rejected this assertion.
Komisija v točkah 37, 38 in 40 sklepa o začetku postopka na kratko pojasnjuje, zakaj to trditev zavrača.
In the paragraphs that follow, the Commission explains in greater detail why it considers that the aid causes distortion and why, contrary to what the French authorities assert, compensatory measures are needed.
V naslednjih uvodnih izjavah Komisija podrobneje pojasnjuje, zakaj pomoč po njenem mnenju povzroča izkrivljanje in zakaj je izvajanje izravnalnih ukrepov nujno potrebno, v nasprotju s trditvami francoskih organov.
As already indicated, FagorBrandt manufactures large electrical household appliances and markets them to distributors (it does not distribute or sell to private individuals).
Kot je bilo že navedeno, je podjetje FagorBrandt prisotno v sektorju proizvodnje bele tehnike in njenega trženja pri distributerjih (v nasprotju z distribucijo in prodajo posameznikom).
The Commission has in the past considered that the geographic market for large electrical household appliances is at least Community-wide, owing, among other things, to the absence of entry barriers, technical harmonisation, and relatively low transport costs [32].
Glede geografske razsežnosti trga bele tehnike je Komisija v preteklosti menila, da zajema najmanj celotno Evropsko unijo, zlasti ker ni vstopnih ovir ter zaradi tehničnega usklajevanja in razmeroma nizkih prevoznih stroškov [32].
The data provided by FagorBrandt and by the two competitors that submitted comments confirm that the market is Community-wide in scale.
Podatki, ki so jih predložili FagorBrandt in dva konkurenta, ki sta poslala pripombe, potrjujejo, da ima trg razsežnost Evropske unije.
The Commission considers that restructuring aid automatically distorts competition, because it prevents the recipient from being forced out of the market, and thus hinders the development of competing firms.
Komisija meni, da pomoč za prestrukturiranje že sama po sebi pomeni izkrivljanje konkurence, ker upravičencu preprečuje umik s trga in tako zavira razvoj konkurenčnih podjetij.
Such aid therefore obstructs the exit of the least efficient firms, which is, in the words of point 4 of the restructuring aid guidelines, ‘a normal part of the operation of the market’.
Taka pomoč torej zavira umik najmanj uspešnih podjetij, ki je „običajen del delovanja trga“, kot je navedeno v točki 4 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
The notified aid to FagorBrandt therefore gives rise to distortion of competition of this kind.
Priglašena pomoč za podjetje FagorBrandt torej povzroča navedeno izkrivljanje konkurence.
The Commission would observe, however, that the following factors tend to limit the scale of this distortion of competition.
Vendar Komisija ugotavlja, da naslednji dejavniki omejujejo obseg takega izkrivljanja konkurence.
First, in the European market for large electrical appliances, FagorBrandt has a market share of at most [0–5] % [33].
Prvič, FagorBrandt ima na evropskem trgu bele tehnike največ [0–5]-odstotni delež [33].
Second, there are four competitors in the market — Indesit, Whirlpool, BSH and Electrolux — with market shares of 10 % or more [34].
Drugič, na tem trgu so štirje konkurenti z več kot 10-odstotnim tržnim deležem (Indesit, Whirlpool, BSH in Electrolux) [34].
The competitor requesting anonymity acknowledges that FagorBrandt is a relatively small player in the European market whose market share is diminishing (see above the doubts expressed by this competitor concerning the company’s return to viability, which are related to its small size) [35].
Tudi konkurent, ki je želel ostati anonimen, priznava, da je FagorBrandt razmeroma majhen akter na evropskem trgu (glej zgornje dvome, ki jih je ta konkurent imel o ponovni vzpostavitvi sposobnosti preživetja podjetja in njegovi majhnosti), njegov tržni delež pa se zmanjšuje [35].
Third, the amount of the aid is small by comparison with FagorBrandt’s European turnover (at less than 4 % of turnover in 2007), and smaller again by comparison with the turnovers of the four main market operators, which are larger than that of FagorBrandt [36].
Tretjič, znesek pomoči je omejen glede na promet, ki ga FagorBrandt ustvarja v Evropi (pomoč pomeni manj kot 4 % prometa iz leta 2007), še bolj pa glede na promet štirih glavnih akterjev na trgu, katerih promet je večji od prometa skupine FagorBrandt [36].
The previous paragraph analyses the distortion of competition brought about by the aid; it is also necessary, as indicated in point 38 of the restructuring aid guidelines, which in turn reflects Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU, to analyse the scale of the ‘adverse effects on trading conditions’ between Member States.
Medtem ko je v prejšnji uvodni izjavi analizirano izkrivljanje konkurence zaradi pomoči, je treba, kot je navedeno v točki 38 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje, v kateri se odraža člen 107(3)(c) PDEU, analizirati obseg „škodljivih učinkov na pogoje trgovanja“ med državami članicami.
As observed in paragraph 38 of the opening decision, the aid distorts the location of economic activities, and hence trade, between Member States.
Kot je bilo navedeno že v točki 38 sklepa o začetku postopka, pomoč izkrivlja izbiro kraja za opravljanje gospodarskih dejavnosti med državami članicami, posledično pa tudi trgovanje med njimi.
The bulk of FagorBrandt’s production activities and employees are located in France ([80–100] % of the volumes produced by the company are produced there).
FagorBrandt je podjetje, ki ima veliko večino proizvodnih dejavnosti in zaposlenih v Franciji ([80–100] % proizvedene količine podjetje proizvede v Franciji).
However, the products manufactured at FagorBrandt’s production plants are in competition mainly with products manufactured by competitors in other Member States [37].
Proizvodi, ki prihajajo iz proizvodnih obratov skupine FagorBrandt, v glavnem konkurirajo proizvodom, ki jih konkurenti proizvajajo v drugih državah članicah [37].
Consequently, the disappearance of FagorBrandt would enable those European competitors appreciably to increase their sales and hence their production.
Zato bi zaradi izginotja podjetja FagorBrandt ti evropski konkurenti lahko precej povečali svojo prodajo in s tem tudi proizvodnjo.
The aid has the effect of maintaining production activities in France which would otherwise have moved partly to other Member States.
Zaradi pomoči se bodo v Franciji ohranile proizvodne dejavnosti, ki bi se v nasprotnem primeru preselile v druge države članice.
It therefore has an adverse effect on trading conditions in that it reduces the opportunities for competitors based in other Member States to export to France [38].
Pomoč ima torej škodljiv učinek na pogoje trgovanja, saj konkurentom s sedežem v drugih državah članicah zmanjšuje možnosti izvoza v Francijo [38].
On the basis of the above analysis, the Commission considers that compensatory measures should be taken which are real (i.e. non-negligible) but nevertheless limited in scope.
Komisija na podlagi navedene analize meni, da so potrebni dejanski (tj. nezanemarljivi) izravnalni ukrepi, vendar v omejenem obsegu.
In paragraph 39 of the opening decision, the Commission expressed doubts about whether the measures notified by the French authorities were acceptable as compensatory measures inasmuch as point 40 of the restructuring aid guidelines states that ‘Write-offs and closure of loss-making activities which would at any rate be necessary to restore viability will not be considered reduction of capacity or market presence for the purpose of the assessment of the compensatory measures.’ It appeared that all of the measures described by the French authorities fell under that exclusion.
Komisija je v točki 39 sklepa o začetku postopka izrazila dvom, da bi se ukrepi, ki so jih priglasili francoski organi, lahko šteli za izravnalne ukrepe, saj je v točki 40 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje navedeno, da „[o]dpis dolgov in opustitev deficitnih dejavnosti, ki bi ju bilo v vsakem primeru treba izvesti zato, da se obnovi sposobnost podjetja za preživetje, ne štejeta za zmanjševanje zmogljivosti ali prisotnosti na trgu z namenom ocene izravnalnih ukrepov“. Bilo naj bi očitno, da se ta izključitev uporablja za vse ukrepe, ki so jih opisali francoski organi.
Regarding the closure of the chest freezer manufacturing plant (at Lesquin) in 2005, France indicated in its notification of 6 August 2007 that this plant, ‘which made chest freezers and wine cellars for the whole FagorBrandt group, had fallen to a size … which no longer enabled it to cover either its variable costs or its fixed costs and had generated an operating loss of EUR 5,8 million in 2004’.
Francija je v zvezi z zaprtjem tovarne za proizvodnjo zamrzovalnih skrinj leta 2005 (obrat v Lesquinu) v dopisu z dne 6. avgusta 2007 navedla, da je ta obrat, „v katerem so izdelovali zamrzovalne skrinje in vinske vitrine za celotno skupino FagorBrandt, dosegel velikost […], ki mu ni več omogočala kritja variabilnih stroškov niti fiksnih stroškov, in leta 2004 ustvaril 5,8 milijona EUR izgube iz poslovanja“.
There can therefore be no doubt that what is involved here is a closure of a loss-making business rendered necessary in order to restore viability [39] and that, in accordance with point 40 of the restructuring aid guidelines, it cannot be taken into account as a compensatory measure.
Nobenega dvoma torej ni, da gre v obravnavanem primeru za opustitev deficitne dejavnosti, ki je nujna za ponovno vzpostavitev sposobnosti preživetja [39], in da je na podlagi točke 40 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje ni mogoče šteti za izravnalni ukrep.
The cessation of production of freestanding microwave ovens at the Aizenay plant also involved a closure of a loss-making activity which was needed in order to re-establish viability — something which the French authorities explicitly acknowledged in their submissions [40].
Tudi pri ukinitvi proizvodnje samostoječih mikrovalovnih pečic v obratu v Aizenayu je šlo za opustitev deficitne dejavnosti, ki je bila nujna za ponovno vzpostavitev sposobnosti preživetja, kar so tudi francoski organi izrecno priznali v predloženih dokumentih [40].
The unprofitability of that activity is not surprising given that freestanding microwave ovens are one of the market segments that products from low-cost countries have penetrated the most [41].
Nedobičkonosnost te dejavnosti ni presenetljiva, saj so samostoječe mikrovalovne pečice eden od tržnih segmentov, na katerega so proizvodi iz poceni držav najbolj prodrli [41].
Moreover, the Aizenay plant had lost important contracts under which it produced microwave ovens for other groups [42].
Poleg tega je tovarna iz Aizenaya izgubila pomembna naročila za proizvodnjo mikrovalovnih pečic za druge skupine [42].
In conclusion, on the basis of point 40 of the restructuring aid guidelines, this measure cannot be taken into account as a compensatory measure.
Skratka, na podlagi točke 40 smernic za pomoči za prestrukturiranje tega ukrepa torej ni mogoče šteti za izravnalni ukrep.
This measure is therefore not excluded by the said provision in point 40 of the restructuring aid guidelines.
Tega ukrepa torej ne izključuje navedena določba iz točke 40 smernic o pomoči za prestrukturiranje.
The business divested in March 2004 [44] had in 2003 a turnover of EUR 35,4 million — equivalent to 4 % of the company’s 2003 turnover — and 306 employees — equivalent to 6 % of the company’s workforce.
Dejavnost, prodana marca 2004 [44], je v letu 2003 ustvarila promet v višini 35,4 milijona EUR, kar je 4 % prometa podjetja v letu 2003, in štela 306 zaposlenih, kar je 6 % vseh zaposlenih v podjetju.
But this measure cannot be regarded as a valid compensatory measure.
Vendar tega ukrepa ni mogoče šteti za veljaven izravnalni ukrep.
Brandt Components was sold about three and a half years before the notification of the aid under scrutiny.
Prodaja podružnice Brandt Components je bila izvedena približno tri leta in pol pred priglasitvijo obravnavane pomoči.
The measure does not reduce FagorBrandt’s presence in the large electrical household appliance market [45], the main market in which FagorBrandt will remain present.
Na drugi strani se s tem ukrepom ne zmanjšuje prisotnost podjetja FagorBrandt na trgu bele tehnike [45], tj. na največjem trgu, na katerem bo podjetje FagorBrandt še naprej prisotno.
Thus the measure did not have as its object — and could not have as its effect — a lessening of the distortion of competition generated by the planned aid.
Zato ta ukrep ni imel za cilj in ni mogel imeti za posledico zmanjšanja izkrivljanja konkurence, ki bi bil posledica dodelitve načrtovane pomoči.
Additional compensatory measures proposed by the French authorities
Izravnalni ukrepi, ki jih predlagajo francoski organi
To meet the concerns raised in the opening decision regarding the adequacy of the notified compensatory measures, the French authorities propose the cessation of the marketing of Vedette refrigeration appliances and cooking appliances for a period of five years.
Da bi odpravili dvome o zadostnosti priglašenih izravnalnih ukrepov iz sklepa o začetku postopka, francoski organi predlagajo petletno ustavitev trženja proizvodov hladilne tehnike in kuhalnih aparatov Vedette.
As indicated above, FagorBrandt achieves [50–80] % of its sales in the French market, where in 2006 the company had a market share of [10-20] % in terms of value and [10-20] % in terms of volume.
Kot je bilo navedeno, FagorBrandt ustvari [50–80] % prodaje na francoskem trgu, na katerem je imelo podjetje leta 2006 [10–20]-odstotni tržni delež po vrednosti in [10–20]-odstotni tržni delež po količini.
This means that if FagorBrandt had ceased trading, it is mainly its competitors in the French market that would have benefited, in the form of increased sales.
To pomeni, da bi od prodaje dejavnosti podjetja FagorBrandt imeli največjo korist njegovi konkurenti na francoskem trgu, saj bi lahko povečali svojo prodajo.