natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
on the signing, on behalf of the Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the protection of geographical indications of agricultural products and foodstuffs
o podpisu Sporazuma med Evropsko unijo in Republiko Moldavijo o zaščiti geografskih označb za kmetijske proizvode in živila v imenu Unije
The Commission has negotiated, on behalf of the Union, an Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the protection of geographical indications of agricultural products and foodstuffs (the ‘Agreement’).
Komisija je v imenu Unije s pogajanji dosegla Sporazum med Evropsko unijo in Republiko Moldavijo o zaščiti geografskih označb za kmetijske proizvode in živila (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporazum).
The Agreement will allow the reciprocal protection of the geographical indications of the Union and the Republic of Moldova, as well as contribute to the approximation of legislation among the neighbouring countries of the Union.
Sporazum bo omogočil vzajemno zaščito geografskih označb Unije in Republike Moldavije, prispeval pa bo tudi k približevanju zakonodaje med sosednjimi državami Unije.
The signing of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on the protection of geographical indications of agricultural products and foodstuffs is hereby authorised on behalf of the Union, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement [1].
Podpis Sporazuma med Evropsko unijo in Republiko Moldavijo o zaščiti geografskih označb za kmetijske proizvode in živila se odobri v imenu Unije, s pridržkom sklenitve navedenega sporazuma [1].
on State aid SA.28809 (C 29/10) (ex NN 42/10 and ex CP 194/09) implemented by Sweden in favour of Hammar Nordic Plugg AB
o državni pomoči SA.28809 (C 29/10) (ex NN 42/10 & ex CP 194/09) Švedske v korist podjetja Hammar Nordic Plugg AB
(notified under document C(2012) 546)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2012) 546)
By letter dated 26 May 2009, registered on 16 June 2009, the Commission received a complaint concerning the alleged grant of State aid to Hammar Nordic Plugg AB through the sale of public property below market price by the Municipality of Vänersborg.
Z dopisom z dne 26. maja 2009, evidentiranim 16. junija 2009, je Komisija prejela pritožbo glede domnevne dodelitve državne pomoči podjetju Hammar Nordic Plugg AB s prodajo javne lastnine pod tržno ceno s strani občine Vänersborg.
On 27 October 2009, the Commission forwarded a non-confidential version of the complaint to the national authorities.
Komisija je 27. oktobra 2009 državnim organom posredovala nezaupno različico pritožbe.
Sweden replied by letter of 30 November 2009, registered on the same day.
Švedska je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 30. novembra 2009, evidentiranim istega dne.
On 9 March 2010, the Commission requested further information and Sweden replied by letter dated 20 April 2010.
Komisija je 9. marca 2010 zahtevala dodatne informacije, Švedska pa je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 20. aprila 2010.
On 11 May 2010, the Commission received information submitted by Chips AB.
Komisija je 11. maja 2010 prejela informacije, ki jih je predložilo podjetje Chips AB.
By means of the letter dated 27 October 2010, the Commission notified Sweden that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2] (TFEU) in respect of the aid.
Z dopisom z dne 27. oktobra 2010 je Komisija obvestila Švedsko o odločitvi, da bo glede pomoči začela postopek iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije [2] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PDEU).
The Commission decision to initiate the procedure (‘the opening decision’) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [3].
Sklep Komisije o začetku postopka (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklep o začetku postopka) je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [3].
The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Komisija je pozvala zainteresirane strani, naj predložijo pripombe glede pomoči.
By letter dated 23 November 2010, Sweden asked for an extension of the deadline to submit comments on the opening decision.
Švedska je z dopisom z dne 23. novembra 2010 zaprosila za podaljšanje roka za predložitev pripomb na sklep o začetku postopka.
By letters dated 15 and 17 December 2010, the Swedish authorities submitted their comments to the Commission.
Švedski organi so z dopisoma z dne 15. in 17. decembra 2010 Komisiji predložili svoje pripombe.
Hammar Nordic Plugg AB submitted its comments to the Commission by letter of 22 January 2011.
Podjetje Hammar Nordic Plugg AB je Komisiji predložilo svoje pripombe z dopisom z dne 22. januarja 2011.
On 1 February 2011, the Commission sent the observations of Hammar Nordic Plugg AB to the Swedish authorities for comments.
Komisija je 1. februarja 2011 ugotovitve podjetja Hammar Nordic Plugg AB poslala v presojo švedskim organom.
On 1 June 2011, the Commission sent a further request for information, to which Sweden replied by letter of 29 June 2011 and sent further clarifications by emails of 12 September 2011 and 30 September 2011.
Komisija je 1. junija 2011 poslala nadaljnjo zahtevo za informacije, na katero je Švedska odgovorila z dopisom z dne 29. junija 2011 ter poslala nadaljnja pojasnila po elektronski pošti 12. septembra 2011 in 30. septembra 2011.
On 6 June 2011, the Commission sent a questionnaire to Chips AB, to which the company did not reply directly.
Komisija je 6. junija 2011 podjetju Chips AB poslala vprašalnik, na katerega ni neposredno odgovorilo.
Some information was provided, however, by Chips AB to the Swedish authorities, which incorporated this information into their abovementioned comments of 12 September 2011.
Vendar je podjetje Chips AB nekatere informacije predložilo švedskim organom, ki so te informacije vključili v svoje pripombe z dne 12. septembra 2011, navedene zgoraj.
On 19 October 2011, a meeting took place between the Commission services and representatives of Hammar Nordic Plugg AB.
Dne 19. oktobra 2011 so se sestali službe Komisije in predstavniki podjetja Hammar Nordic Plugg AB.
By e-mail of 3 November 2011, Hammar Nordic Plugg AB submitted additional information to the Commission.
Podjetje Hammar Nordic Plugg AB je z elektronsko pošto z dne 3. novembra 2011 Komisiji predložilo dodatne informacije.
The Commission forwarded that information to the Swedish authorities for comments on 4 November 2011.
Komisija je 4. novembra 2011 te informacije posredovala v presojo švedskim organom.
Sweden confirmed on 28 November 2011 that the authorities had no comments.
Švedska je 28. novembra 2011 potrdila, da organi niso imeli pripomb.
The beneficiary and the parties involved
Upravičenec in vključene strani
The beneficiary of the measure is Hammar Nordic Plugg AB (‘Hammar’).
Upravičenec ukrepa je podjetje Hammar Nordic Plugg AB (v nadaljnjem besedilu: podjetje Hammar).
It is a limited company whose business consists of property rental and real estate management.
Gre za družbo z omejeno odgovornostjo, katere dejavnost sta najem in upravljanje nepremičnin.
The company is based in Trollhättan, in the province of Västra Götaland (Sweden).
Sedež podjetja je v mestu Trollhättan v okrožju Västra Götaland (Švedska).
Hammar is 100 % owned by its parent company Hammar Nordic Fastigheter AB, which in turn is wholly owned by a private individual, Anders Hammar [4].
Podjetje Hammar je v 100-odstotni lasti matične družbe Hammar Nordic Fastigheter AB, ki je v popolni lasti posameznika Andersa Hammarja [4].
The Municipality of Vänersborg (‘the Municipality’) is situated in the province of Västra Götaland in Sweden, close to Norway.
Občina Vänersborg (v nadaljnjem besedilu: občina) je v okrožju Västra Götaland na Švedskem blizu Norveške.
According to the Swedish Regional Aid map 2007-2013, the Municipality is not located in an assisted area.
Glede na švedsko karto regionalnih pomoči za obdobje 2007–2013 občina ni na območju, ki prejema pomoč.
Fastighets AB Vänersborg (‘FABV’) is a real estate company wholly owned by the Municipality.
Podjetje Fastighets AB Vänersborg (v nadaljnjem besedilu: podjetje FABV) je nepremičninsko podjetje, ki je v popolni lasti občine.
Topp Livsmedel (‘Topp’) belonged to Chips AB [5], a division of the international business group Orkla ASA (‘Orkla’).
Podjetje Topp Livsmedel (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Topp) je pripadalo podjetju Chips AB [5], ki je oddelek mednarodne poslovne skupine Orkla ASA (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Orkla).
The property subject to the measure (‘the Facility’) comprises two plots of land, a production site, movable property and intellectual property rights (e.g. trademarks).
Lastnina, za katero velja ukrep (v nadaljnjem besedilu: obrat), obsega dve zemljišči, proizvodni obrat, premičnine in pravice intelektualne lastnine (npr. blagovne znamke).
It is located in Brålanda, a small community in the Municipality.
Lastnina je v kraju Brålanda, majhni skupnosti v občini.
Until 2007, Topp produced frozen vegetables in the Facility with about 30 employees.
Podjetje Topp je do leta 2007 v obratu s približno 30 zaposlenimi proizvajalo zamrznjeno zelenjavo.
Overview of the measure
Pregled ukrepa
By letter dated 26 May 2009, the Commission received a complaint concerning an alleged grant of State aid through the sale of public property (the Facility) below market price.
Z dopisom z dne 26. maja 2009 je Komisija prejela pritožbo v zvezi z domnevno dodelitvijo državne pomoči s prodajo javne lastnine (obrata) pod tržno ceno.
The facts are as follows.
Dejstva so naslednja.
At the end of 2007, Chips AB announced that it would shut down production at Topp and started the process of selling the Facility.
Podjetje Chips AB je konec leta 2007 naznanilo, da bo zaustavilo proizvodnjo v podjetju Topp in začelo s postopkom prodaje obrata.
On 13 February 2008, the Municipality — through FABV — bought the Facility from Chips AB for SEK 17 million (EUR 1,7 million) [6].
Občina je 13. februarja 2008 prek podjetja FABV od podjetja Chips AB kupila obrat za 17 milijonov SEK (1,7 milijona EUR) [6].
Also on 13 February 2008, FABV entered into two agreements with Hammar.
Prav tako 13. februarja 2008 je podjetje FABV sklenilo dva sporazuma s podjetjem Hammar.
The first agreement was a tenancy agreement by which FABV let the whole Facility to Hammar [7].
Prvi sporazum je bila najemna pogodba, s katero je podjetje FABV podjetju Hammar dalo v najem celotni obrat [7].
The second agreement consisted of an option allowing Hammar to buy the Facility from FABV for the set price of SEK 8 million (EUR 0,8 million) at any time between 1 March 2008 and 28 February 2010.
Drugi sporazum je vključeval možnost, da podjetje Hammar od podjetja FABV po določeni ceni 8 milijonov SEK (0,8 milijona EUR) kupi obrat kadar koli med 1. marcem 2008 in 28. februarjem 2010.
Hammar exercised its option and acquired the Facility from FABV for the set price on 11 August 2008.
Podjetje Hammar je svojo možnost uveljavilo in od podjetja FABV 11. avgusta 2008 kupilo obrat po določeni ceni.
By agreement of 1 March 2008, Hammar sub-let most of the Facility to local entrepreneurs at a rent [8] higher than the rent agreed between FABV and Hammar.
Podjetje Hammar je s sporazumom z dne 1. marca 2008 lokalnim podjetnikom dalo v podnajem večino obrata po najemnini [8], ki je bila višja od najemnine, dogovorjene med podjetjema FABV in Hammar.
In addition, as a condition for signing the tenancy agreement, the local entrepreneurs demanded an option to purchase the Facility in the future, should Hammar become owner of the Facility.
Poleg tega so lokalni podjetniki kot pogoj za podpis najemne pogodbe zahtevali možnost za nakup obrata v prihodnosti, če bi podjetje Hammar postalo lastnik obrata.
The option agreement was signed on that same date, giving the local entrepreneurs the right to acquire the Facility for SEK 40 million (EUR 4 million).
Na navedeni datum je bila podpisana opcijska pogodba, s katero so lokalni podjetniki pridobili pravico, da kupijo obrat za 40 milijonov SEK (4 milijone EUR).
On 2 September 2008, a contract was concluded between Hammar and the local entrepreneurs selling the Facility to the latter for the agreed price of SEK 40 million.
Dne 2. septembra 2008 je bila sklenjena pogodba med podjetjem Hammar in lokalnimi podjetniki, s katero je podjetje slednjim prodalo obrat po dogovorjeni ceni v višini 40 milijonov SEK.
THE OPENING DECISION
SKLEP O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA
The Commission had reasons to believe that the FABV’s sale of the Facility to Hammar involved State aid.
Komisija je utemeljeno domnevala, da je prodaja obrata s strani podjetja FABV podjetju Hammar vključevala državno pomoč.
On 27 October 2010, therefore, the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure on that transaction [9].
Zato je Komisija 27. oktobra 2010 začela formalni postopek preiskave v zvezi z navedeno transakcijo [9].
Sweden and Hammar have provided comments to the opening of the formal investigation procedure.
Švedska in podjetje Hammar sta predložila pripombe glede začetka formalnega postopka preiskave.
Sweden is of the view that FABV’s sale of the Facility to Hammar does not constitute State aid.
Švedska meni, da prodaja obrata s strani podjetja FABV podjetju Hammar ne pomeni državne pomoči.
It maintains that the sole objective of the Municipality when buying the Facility through FABV was to secure continued production and jobs.
Trdi, da je bil edini cilj občine pri nakupu obrata prek podjetja FABV zaščititi stalno proizvodnjo in delovna mesta.
As it had no intention of running operations itself, the Municipality opted for the solution proposed by Hammar, i.e. a lease with an option to buy.
Ker občina ni nameravala sama voditi dejavnosti, je izbrala rešitev, ki jo je predlagalo podjetje Hammar, tj. zakup z možnostjo odkupa.
Sweden also notes that the option granted to Hammar required a capital injection of SEK 9 million (EUR 0,9 million) from the Municipality’s budget to FABV, to provision for the loss that would arise if Hammar exercised the option.
Švedska tudi ugotavlja, da je možnost, dana podjetju Hammar, zahtevala dokapitalizacijo v višini 9 milijonov SEK (0,9 milijona EUR) iz občinskega proračuna podjetju FABV za rezervacijo izgube, ki bi nastala, če bi podjetje Hammar uveljavilo možnost.
Hammar argues that FABV’s purchase of the Facility from Chips AB was undertaken at an excessively high price which could entail State aid to Orkla.
Podjetje Hammar trdi, da je podjetje FABV od podjetja Chips AB obrat kupilo po pretirano visoki ceni, kar bi lahko vključevalo državno pomoč skupini Orkla.
In addition, Hammar argues that its purchase of the Facility from FABV was carried out on market terms and that the sale neither affected trade between Member States nor distorted competition.
Poleg tega podjetje Hammar trdi, da je bil njegov nakup obrata od podjetja FABV izveden pod tržnimi pogoji in da prodaja ni vplivala niti na trgovino med državami članicami niti ni izkrivljala konkurence.
In order to support its allegations, Hammar provided an ex post assessment of the value of the Facility dated 20 January 2011, prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (‘the PwC report’).
Podjetje Hammar je v podporo svojim navedbam zagotovilo naknadno oceno vrednosti obrata z dne 20. januarja 2011, ki jo je pripravilo podjetje PricewaterhouseCoopers (v nadaljnjem besedilu: poročilo PwC).
That report maintains that the degree of uncertainty when estimating the market price of this type of property is so great that the price could be said to have been close to market terms each time the Facility was sold (i.e. FABV’s purchase from Chips AB, the subsequent sale to Hammar and finally Hammar’s sale to the local entrepreneurs).
V tem poročilu je navedeno, da je stopnja negotovosti pri ocenjevanju tržne cene tega tipa lastnine tako visoka, da bi bilo mogoče ob vsaki prodaji obrata (tj. nakup od podjetja Chips AB s strani podjetja FABV, poznejša prodaja podjetju Hammar in končno prodaja lokalnim podjetnikom s strani podjetja Hammar) ugotoviti, da je cena blizu tržnim pogojem.
In particular, in relation to FABV’s sale to Hammar and to the subsequent sale to local entrepreneurs, the PwC report considers that the prices paid were market-conform, given the financial conditions in the two tenancy agreements (i.e. between FABV and Hammar on the one hand and between Hammar and the local entrepreneurs on the other).
V poročilu PwC je zlasti v zvezi s prodajo podjetju Hammar s strani podjetja FABV in poznejšo prodajo lokalnim podjetnikom ugotovljeno, da so bile glede na finančne pogoje iz dveh najemnih pogodb (tj. med podjetjema FABV in Hammar na eni strani ter med podjetjem Hammar in lokalnimi podjetniki na drugi strani) plačane cene v skladu s trgom.
At the meeting with the Commission services on 19 October 2011 and in its submission to the Commission of additional information of 3 November 2011, Hammar argued that, at the time the Municipality and Hammar agreed to give the latter an option to acquire the Facility for SEK 8 million, there were no other bids for the Facility and thus this price should be considered the market price, irrespective of any valuations which are necessarily hypothetical.
Podjetje Hammar je na srečanju s službami Komisije 19. oktobra 2011 in v svoji predložitvi dodatnih informacij Komisiji z dne 3. novembra 2011 trdilo, da v času dogovora med občino in podjetjem Hammar, s katerim je slednje dobilo možnost za nakup obrata za 8 milijonov SEK, ni bilo drugih ponudb za obrat in se mora zato navedena cena obravnavati kot tržna cena ne glede na kakršne koli druge cenitve, ki so nujno hipotetične.
On 3 November 2011, Hammar submitted a report to the Commission prepared by Copenhagen Economics A/S [10] (‘Copenhagen Economics’) concerning the possible effect on trade between Member States of both FABV’s purchase of the Facility from Chips AB and the subsequent sale of the Facility to Hammar.
Podjetje Hammar je 3. novembra 2011 Komisiji predložilo poročilo, ki ga je pripravilo podjetje Copenhagen Economics A/S [10] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: podjetje Copenhagen Economics), o morebitnih učinkih nakupa obrata od podjetja Chips AB s strani podjetja FABV in poznejše prodaje obrata podjetju Hammar na trgovino med državami članicami.
The report concludes that the first transaction had the potential to affect intra-Union trade, because the seller Chips AB is an international company — the Finnish subsidiary of the Norwegian group Orkla — that competes internationally.
V poročilu je ugotovljeno, da bi prva transakcija lahko vplivala na trgovino znotraj Unije, ker je prodajalec, podjetje Chips AB, mednarodno podjetje (finsko hčerinsko podjetje norveške skupine Orkla), ki konkurira na mednarodnem trgu.
By contrast, the report argues that FABV’s sale of the Facility to Hammar had no or an insignificant effect on intra-Union trade, as Hammar operates only at local level and does not encounter international competitors on the relevant market(s).
V nasprotju s tem je v poročilu navedeno, da prodaja obrata podjetju Hammar s strani podjetja FABV ni imela vpliva na trgovino znotraj Unije oziroma je bil ta vpliv zanemarljiv, ker podjetje Hammar deluje samo na lokalni ravni in se na upoštevnih trgih ne srečuje z mednarodnimi konkurenti.
In order to assess whether FABV’s sale of the Facility to Hammar entailed State aid, it needs to be assessed in the light of Article 107(1) TFEU, which provides 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 shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market’.
Za oceno, ali je prodaja obrata podjetju Hammar s strani podjetja FABV vključevala državno pomoč, jo je treba oceniti glede na člen 107(1) PDEU, ki 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, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The Commission notes that the beneficiary of the measure, i.e. Hammar, qualifies as an undertaking since it pursues economic activities, offering real estate and real-estate-related services on the market.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se upravičenec ukrepa, tj. podjetje Hammar, šteje za podjetje, ker izvaja gospodarske dejavnosti, s katerimi na trgu nudi nepremičninske in z nepremičninami povezane storitve.
The transaction was concluded by the Municipality through FABV.
Transakcija je bila sklenjena z občino prek podjetja FABV.
FABV is wholly owned by the Municipality, which covers FAVB’s potential losses from its normal budget.
Podjetje FABV je v popolni lasti občine, ki iz svojega rednega proračuna krije morebitne izgube podjetja FABV.
FABV’s board is made up of members taken from the Municipality’s ruling body.
Odbor podjetja FABV je sestavljen iz članov vodstvenega organa občine.
Thus, the decisions of FABV are imputable to the State and, to the extent that they have financial implications, they imply the use of State resources.
Tako je za odločitve podjetja FABV odgovorna država, pri čemer take odločitve pomenijo uporabo državnih sredstev, kolikor imajo finančne posledice.
Moreover, the Municipality was clearly involved in this operation, as the option granted to Hammar required a capital injection of SEK 9 million from the Municipality to FABV to provision for the loss that would arise if Hammar exercised the option.
Poleg tega je bila občina očitno vpletena v to transakcijo, ker je možnost, dana podjetju Hammar, zahtevala, da občina dokapitalizira podjetje FABV za 9 milijonov SEK za rezervacijo izgube, ki bi nastala, če bi podjetje Hammar uveljavilo možnost.
In this respect, the Commission concludes that the sale of the Facility to Hammar involved State resources.
Komisija v zvezi s tem ugotavlja, da je prodaja obrata podjetju Hammar vključevala državna sredstva.
Since the transaction benefited a specific undertaking (i.e. Hammar), it has to be considered a selective measure.
Ker je transakcija koristila določenemu podjetju (tj. podjetju Hammar), jo je treba obravnavati kot selektivni ukrep.
The measure distorts or has the potential to distort competition and affect trade within the Union and the European Economic Area (‘EEA trade’) within the meaning of the State aid case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Ukrep izkrivlja oziroma bi lahko izkrivljal konkurenco in vplival na trgovino znotraj Unije in Evropskega gospodarskega prostora (v nadaljnjem besedilu: trgovina EGP) v smislu sodne prakse Sodišča Evropske unije glede državne pomoči.
In order to maintain that the selective advantage entailed in the sale of the Facility to Hammar had no or an insignificant effect on trade, the report prepared by Copenhagen Economics (see recital 30) argues that the real estate market in which Hammar is active is purely local.
V podporo trditvi, da selektivna prednost, vključena v prodajo obrata podjetju Hammar, ni imela vpliva na trgovino oziroma je bil ta vpliv zanemarljiv, je v poročilu podjetja Copenhagen Economics (glej uvodno izjavo 30) navedeno, da je nepremičninski trg, na katerem je dejavno podjetje Hammar, zgolj lokalen.
However, the potential effect on trade does not depend on whether a particular aid recipient happens to be active internationally or only nationally, but on whether the goods or services in which he trades are or could be subject to intra-Union trade [11].
Vendar morebitni vpliv na trgovino ni odvisen od tega, ali je določen prejemnik pomoči dejaven na mednarodni ali le na nacionalni ravni, ampak od tega, ali so oziroma bi lahko bili blago ali storitve, s katerimi trguje, predmet trgovine znotraj Unije [11].