natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On 31 January 2005, De Poli applied to the Italian authorities for aid under the Italian scheme in relation to the construction of vessel C 241, for an amount of EUR 1,3 million.
Ladjedelnica De Poli je 31. januarja 2005 italijanskim organom predložila zahtevo za odobritev 1,3 milijona EUR pomoči, predvidene v omenjeni shemi, za gradnjo ladje C 241.
On 25 January 2008, De Poli asked the Italian authorities for an extension to the delivery deadline for vessel C 241 from 31 December 2007 until 31 August 2008.
25. januarja 2008 je ladjedelnica De Poli prosila, da se rok za dobavo ladje C 241 podaljša z 31. decembra 2007 na 31. avgust 2008.
Italy confirmed that the aid has not been disbursed. It further noted that, following the Commission decision of 21 October 2008 [21], which did not find compatible the increase in the budget of the Italian TDM scheme by EUR 10 million, at present there are no funds available for providing this aid.
Italijanski organi so potrdili, da pomoč ni bila izplačana, in opozorili, da je na podlagi odločbe z dne 21. oktobra 2008 [21], Komisija ugotovila nezdružljivost nadaljnje dodelitve 10 milijonov EUR iz italijanske sheme, saj naj ne bi bilo zadostnih sredstev za izplačilo te pomoči.
THE DECISION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS
SKLEP O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
In the decision to initiate proceedings, the Commission doubted that the circumstances invoked by Italy and De Poli to justify the delay in the delivery of vessel C 241 (as well as vessels C 242, C 243 and C 244, no longer under assessment) qualified as "delays resulting from unexpected disruptions of a substantial and defensible nature in the working programme of the yard due to exceptional circumstances unforeseeable and external to the company" within the meaning of paragraph 29 of the Italian TDM scheme.
V sklepu o sprožitvi postopka Komisija dvomi, da bi okoliščine, ki po navedbah italijanskih organov in ladjedelnice De Poli opravičujejo zamudo z dobavo ladje C 241 (ter ladij C 242, C 243 in C 244, ki niso predmet te ocene), lahko opredelili kot „zamude zaradi nepričakovanih večjih in opravičljivih motenj delovnega programa ladjedelnice zaradi izjemnih nepredvidljivih okoliščin zunaj gospodarske družbe“ v smislu odstavka 29 italijanske sheme.
Although the doubts expressed in the decision to initiate proceedings concerned four vessels (C 241, C 242, C 243 and C 244), they remain relevant for the assessment of vessel C 241 on its own.
Čeprav se dvomi, izraženi v sklepu o sprožitvi postopka, nanašajo na vse štiri ladje (C 241, C 242, C 243 in C 244), ti še vedno ostajajo le pri oceni za ladjo C 241.
In the decision, the Commission questioned first whether the contracts signed with Arcoin SpA were final contracts or whether they were a means for De Poli to have the contracts secured before the final deadline for shipbuilding contracts to be eligible for aid, with a view to later finding final buyers for the ships.
V sklepu se Komisija najprej sprašuje, ali so pogodbe, sklenjene z Arcoin S.p.A., končne ali za družbo De Poli ne pomenijo le načina, da si ta zagotovi spoštovanje zadnjega roka za dopustnost pomoči in da šele nato poišče končne kupce.
Second, the Commission questioned whether the transfer of the sales contracts between shipowners was in itself another cause of the delay in delivery.
Drugič, Komisija se sprašuje, ali ni že sam prenos prodajnih pogodb med lastniki ladij eden od razlogov za zamudo z dobavo.
Third, the Commission deemed that De Poli might have taken more orders than its actual production capacity enabled it to deliver, since over the period 2005-2008 the shipyard planned to build 18 vessels, half of which were to be constructed on its two main slipways and the other half to be constructed in a smaller infrastructure.
Tretjič, Komisija domneva, da je družba De Poli prevzela naročila, ki presegajo njeno dejansko proizvodno zmogljivost, saj je v obdobju med letoma 2005 in 2008 ladjedelnica načrtovala gradnjo 18 ladij, od katerih naj bi bila polovica izdelana v dveh glavnih dokih, druga polovica pa v manjšem obratu.
Finally, the Commission doubted that the alleged delays in the supply of essential parts were indeed unforeseeable as claimed by Italy or whether they might constitute normal commercial risks which a diligent shipyard should anticipate in its working programme.
Končno, Komisija dvomi, da so bile domnevne zamude pri dobavi osnovnih delov resnično nepredvidljive, kot trdijo italijanski organi, ter domneva, da je šlo le za navadno poslovno tveganje, na katerega bi morali računati pri pripravi delovnega programa skrbne ladjedelnice.
In particular, the Commission considered that De Poli might have increased the risk of delay by ordering some parts of the vessels too late.
Komisija zlasti meni, da je družba De Poli morda povečala tveganje za zamudo s tem, ko je prepozno naročila nekatere dele za ladje.
Comments of the Member State and arguments of the interested parties
Pripombe države članice in trditve zainteresiranih strani
As far as vessel C 241 is concerned, in its comments on the decision to initiate proceedings of 16 June 2008, Italy argues that De Poli had the capacity to deliver the vessel within 36 months from the date of signature of the sales contract.
Kar zadeva ladjo C 241, italijanski organi v pripombah glede sklepa o sprožitvi postopka z dne 16. junija 2008 trdijo, da je imela družba De Poli potrebno proizvodno zmogljivost za dobavo ladij v 36 mesecih od dneva sklenitve prodajne pogodbe.
The only reason that delivery was delayed was because of the late delivery of the gearbox by the supplier, a factor which Italy qualifies as substantial, exceptional, unforeseeable and external to the company within the meaning of paragraph 29 of the Italian TDM scheme.
Zamuda naj bi nastala samo zaradi dobaviteljeve prepozne dobave reduktorja, kar Italija opredeljuje kot resni, izjemni in nepredvidljivi dejavnik zunaj gospodarske družbe, v smislu odstavka 29 italijanske sheme.
On this point, De Poli contends that the practice of transferring sales contracts during the construction of vessels, or even after finalising the work, is not uncommon in the shipbuilding industry.
V zvezi s tem družba De Poli trdi, da v svetu ladjarjev ni redek pojav, da si ti naročajo ladje, ki jih pozneje prodajo na trg za izvedbo zaključnih del ali med gradnjo.
In relation to the scheduling of the work for vessel C 241, De Poli observes that, due to the technical complexity of shipbuilding projects, it is normal practice for work to begin several months after the conclusion of the sales contracts.
Kar zadeva načrtovanje del za ladjo C 241, družba De Poli opozarja, da zaradi zahtevnosti projektov v ladjedelništvu, od trenutka sklenitve pogodb o gradnji pa do začetka del ponavadi mine več mesecev.
The shipyard argues that it is common for a certain period of time to elapse between the signature of the contract and the actual start of the works, and this period of time is necessary for preparatory operations, such as drafting the technical project and carrying out negotiations with the various suppliers.
Po navedbah ladjedelnice je ustaljena praksa, da v času, ki preteče od podpisa pogodbe pa do dejanskega začetka del, ladjedelnica izvaja pripravljalne dejavnosti za začetek del, kot so določitev izvedbenega načrta in pogajanja z različnimi dobavitelji.
According to De Poli, delivery of the gearbox is an essential stage in the building of a vessel – it is followed by assembly of the gearbox with the engine, the fixing of the propeller and completion of the hull.
Dobava reduktorja je bila po navedbah družbe De Poli bistvena stopnja v procesu gradnje ladje, ki ji je sledila montaža reduktorja k motorju, namestitev ladijskega vijaka in dokončanje trupa.
Various assembly and preparation/construction operations can only be performed after installing the gearbox.
Različna montažna opravila in priprava/gradnja bi bili izvedljivi šele po namestitvi reduktorja.
De Poli claims that it is not normal practice to order the delivery of parts such as the gearbox in advance, to avoid outlays on storage and advance payment, and emphasises that the supplier it contacted is the sector leader with proven experience, so there was no reason to suspect that the gearbox would not be delivered on time.
Družba De Poli trdi, da se deli, kot je reduktor, navadno ne naročajo vnaprej, da ne bi zaradi tega nastali stroški skladiščenja in predplačil, ter na koncu poudarja, da je naročala pri dobavitelju, ki je vodilno podjetje v tem sektorju z dokazanimi izkušnjami, ter da zato ni bilo razloga za domnevo, da reduktor ne bo pravočasno dobavljen.
De Poli insists that it had the capacity to deliver the 18 vessels ordered during the 2005-2008 period on time, since the total deadweight capacity relating to those orders amounted to 10000 tonnes per year, whereas the shipyard's historical annual capacity was over 12000 tonnes per year.
Družba De Poli trdi, da je vedno imela zmogljivosti za pravočasno dobavo 18 ladij, ki so bile naročene v obdobju med letoma 2005 in 2008, saj je imela ladjedelnica že od nekdaj zmogljivosti za izdelavo ladij z nosilnostjo nad 12000 ton letno, medtem ko je bila skupna nosilnost teh ladij 10000 ton letno.
Furthermore, it emphasised that 9 of the 18 vessels ordered over this period were small (of lengths overall of 20 metres and deadweight capacities of 25 tonnes), while only the other 9 vessels were of the same general size as vessel C 241.
Poleg tega predstavniki ladjedelnice trdijo, da je bilo v zadevnem obdobju od 18 naročenih ladij devet manjših (20 metrov skupne dolžine in z nosilnostjo 25 ton), medtem ko je bilo samo preostalih devet ladij enake velikosti kot ladja C 241.
According to De Poli, this demonstrates that the shipyard had the capacity to deliver all the orders it took within the deadlines set and that it did not take on orders beyond its production capacity.
Po mnenju družbe De Poli vse navedeno dokazuje, da je imela ladjedelnica De Poli zadostne zmogljivosti za izvedbo vseh naročil v predpisanih rokih in da niso prevzeli obveznosti, ki bi presegale njeno proizvodno zmogljivost.
De Poli further notes that in the past the Commission had on several occasions – including for De Poli itself – approved requests for extensions to delivery deadlines arising from the late delivery of critical components.
Družba De Poli na koncu opozarja, da je Komisija v preteklosti v več primerih (tudi v primeru ladjedelnice De Poli) odobrila prošnje za podaljšanje dobavnega roka, če so bile utemeljene zaradi prepoznih dobav bistvenih delov.
As a preliminary point, in the light of the formal withdrawal by Italy of the notifications consisting of requests for extension to the delivery deadlines for vessels C 242, C 243 and C 244, and the fact that no monies were disbursed, the formal investigation procedure concerning the requests submitted by Italy in relation to the aforementioned three vessels has become devoid of purpose, and will be closed without any assessment being necessary.
Na začetku je treba pripomniti, da je glede na uradni umik priglašenih prošenj Italije za podaljšanje roka za dobavo ladij C 242, C 243 in C 244 ter ker ni prišlo do izplačil, formalni postopek preiskave o prošnjah, ki jih je Italija predložila v zvezi s tremi zgoraj omenjenimi ladjami, zdaj že brezpredmeten in bo zaključen brez nadaljnjih ocenjevanj.
The following assessment therefore relates only to vessel C 241 and any references to vessels C 242, C 243 and C 244 will be made only in so far as is relevant to this assessment.
Ta ocena se tako nanaša le na ladjo C 241 ter bo vključevala ladje C 242, C 243 in C 244 le, če bo to pomembno za samo oceno.
Existence of state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU
Obstoj državne pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU
Under Article 107(1) TFEU, 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 the Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.
V skladu s členom 107(1) PDEU je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali katera 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, če prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
Article 107(1) TFEU therefore establishes the cumulative conditions under which a state measure qualifies as state aid: the measure confers a selective advantage, involves state resources, generates competition-distorting effects and has a negative impact on trade between Member States.
V členu 107(1) PDEU so zato navedeni kumulativni pogoji, da nacionalni ukrep lahko pomeni državno pomoč: ukrep daje selektivno prednost, sredstva se črpajo iz državnih virov, ustvarja izkrivljanje konkurence in negativno vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
There is no dispute that the measure which Italy plans to implement to support the construction of vessel C 241 by De Poli, consisting of a financial contribution of up to 6 % of the value of the contract before aid (approximately EUR 1,3 million), constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Ukrep, ki ga Italija namerava izvesti v korist družbe De Poli za pomoč pri gradnji ladje C 241 v obliki finančnega prispevka do največ 6 % pogodbene vrednosti pred pomočjo (približno 1,3 milijona EUR), je nesporno državna pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
The measure is financed by the Italian Government.
Ukrep se financira s sredstvi italijanske države.
The monies confer an advantage on De Poli in so far as they are designed to cover costs normally borne by the shipyard when building a ship.
Sredstva za kritje stroškov, ki navadno nastanejo v ladjedelnici med gradnjo ladje, dajejo prednost družbi De Poli.
The measure is selective since it benefits De Poli alone, and to the extent that it enhances the position of De Poli vis-à-vis its European competitors, it has the potential to distort competition in the European shipbuilding market and affect trade between Member States.
Ukrep je selektiven, ker je namenjen izključni koristi družbe De Poli in ker ji daje prednost pred evropskimi konkurenti, izkrivlja konkurenco na evropskem ladjedelniškem trgu in vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
Compatibility of the aid with the TFEU
Združljivost pomoči s PDEU
Two aspects of the case under consideration prompted the Commission to have doubts as to the compatibility of the aid to De Poli with the internal market.
V zadevnem primeru sta dva vidika, zaradi katerih je Komisija podvomila, ali je pomoč družbi De Poli združljiva z notranjim trgom.
Paragraph 29 of the Italian TDM scheme stipulates that aid can only be granted concerning vessels delivered within three years of the date of signing the final contract and paragraph 33 that the final contracts must have been signed before the expiry of the TDM Regulation (i.e. 31 March 2005).
Po eni strani je v italijanski shemi v odstavku 29 določeno, da se pomoč lahko odobri za ladje, dobavljene v treh letih od dneva podpisa končne pogodbe, po drugi strani pa je v odstavku 33 določeno, da morajo biti končne pogodbe sklenjene pred iztekom veljavnosti Uredbe o začasnem obrambnem mehanizmu oziroma do 31. marca 2005.
With respect to the second point, the Italian authorities have explained that the transfer of contracts between shipowners after the expiry of the TDM Regulation cannot be interpreted as indicating that the original contract for vessel C 241, signed on 28 January 2005, was not the "final contract" within the meaning of paragraph 29 of the Italian TDM scheme.
Kar zadeva zadnjo točko, so italijanski organi pojasnili, da prenosa pogodb med lastniki ladij po izteku veljavnosti Uredbe o začasnem obrambnem mehanizmu ni mogoče razlagati kot znak, da izvirna pogodba za ladjo C 241, podpisana 28. januarja 2005, ni bila „končna pogodba“ v smislu odstavka 29 italijanske sheme.
The Commission acknowledges that the practice of transferring a contract to a third party appears to be a common one in the shipbuilding industry.
Komisija priznava, da je prenos pogodbenih obveznosti na tretje osebe v ladjedelništvu menda običajna praksa.
For instance, in a previous decision [23] also concerning the extension of the three-year delivery limit for two ships, the Commission concluded that, despite the transfer of contracts, the first contract could be considered final, given that the product type remained the same and the new owner took over the rights and obligations from the previous owner.
Komisija je v eni izmed svojih predhodnih odločb [23], ki se je prav tako nanašala na podaljšanje triletnega roka za dobavo dveh ladij, na primer odločila, da se kljub prenosu pogodbenih obveznosti prva pogodba lahko obravnava kot končna, saj je vrsta proizvoda ostala nespremenjena, novi lastnik pa je od prejšnjega prevzel vse pravice in obveznosti.
In that case the Commission thus concluded that the transfer of ownership had not in itself changed the nature of the contracts and therefore their eligibility for aid.
V navedenem primeru je Komisija zato sklenila, da prenos lastništva sam po sebi ni spremenil vsebine pogodb in posledično pogojev za dopustnost pomoči.
In the present case, the transfer of the contract between shipowners did not involve a change in the product type or the nature of the contract and the new owner essentially took on the same rights and obligations as the original contracting party.
Tudi v zadevnem primeru prenos pogodbenih obveznosti med lastniki ladij ni spremenil vrste proizvoda ali vsebine pogodbe, novi lastnik pa je v bistvu nasledil prvotno pogodbeno stranko s prevzemom njenih pravic in obveznosti.
On this basis, the Commission holds that the original contract can be regarded as final, and thus eligible for aid under the Italian TDM scheme.
V tem smislu Komisija meni, da je izvirna pogodba tudi končna in zato pomoč šteje kot dopustno na podlagi italijanske sheme.
As for the doubts expressed in relation to the conditions for granting an extension to the three-year delivery deadline, the Italian TDM scheme stipulates that the Commission may grant an extension when justified by "the technical complexity of the individual shipbuilding project concerned or by delays resulting from unexpected disruptions of a substantial and defensible nature in the working programme of a yard due to exceptional circumstances, unforeseeable and external to the company".
Kar zadeva dvome, izražene glede pogojev za podaljšanje triletnega dobavnega roka, je v italijanski shemi predvideno, da Komisija lahko odobri tako podaljšanje, kadar ugotovi, da je to utemeljeno zaradi „tehnične zahtevnosti zadevnega posameznega ladjedelniškega projekta ali zaradi zamud zaradi nepričakovanih večjih in opravičljivih motenj delovnega programa ladjedelnice zaradi izjemnih nepredvidljivih okoliščin zunaj gospodarske družbe“.
The Commission must therefore assess whether Italy has satisfactorily demonstrated that the conditions for granting the exception stipulated in the Italian TDM scheme have been met in the case of the delays incurred in the delivery of vessel C 241.
Komisija mora zato oceniti, ali so italijanski organi predložili dovolj dokazov, da zamude z dobavo ladje C 241 ustrezajo pogojem, ki so v italijanski shemi predvideni za podaljšanje roka.
The Court therefore held that it is for the Member State concerned to demonstrate that the alleged exceptional circumstances constituted a sufficient disruption as to affect the working programme of the yard and delay delivery of the vessel by establishing a causal link between the two events.
Sodišče je zato menilo, da mora zadevna država članica dokazati, da so domnevne izjemne okoliščine povzročile take motnje, da so se te izražale na delovnem programu ladjedelnice in povzročile zamudo z dobavo ladje, pri čemer je nastala vzročna povezava med obema dogodkoma.
The Italian authorities contend that the delay in the delivery of vessel C 241 is due to the delay (6 months) in supplying the gearbox and the ensuing one-month delay in the assembly operations.
Po mnenju Italije je zamuda z dobavo ladje C 241 nastala zaradi prepozne dobave reduktorja (6 mesecev) in posledične enomesečne preložitve dejavnosti montaže.
The Commission notes that this is the only ground for delay invoked by Italy; in particular, the request for an extension does not refer to the new specifications deriving from the transfer of the contract.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je to edini razlog, ki ga Italija navaja v zvezi z zamudo, saj v prošnji za podaljšanje niso omenjene nove posebnosti, ki izhajajo iz prenosa pogodbe.
According to established Commission practice [25], the condition that the circumstances must be "exceptional" excludes common or at least normal events with which the shipyard should reasonably have reckoned in its working programme.
Glede na dosedanjo prakso Komisije [25] so iz pogoja, da morajo biti okoliščine „izjemne“, izključeni običajni ali vsaj normalni dogodki, ki bi jih bilo mogoče predvideti v delovnem programu ladjedelnice.
Long delays in the delivery of critical parts could be considered exceptional, but minor delays are not necessarily viewed as exceptional in processes as long and complex as shipbuilding projects.
Kot izjemne se lahko štejejo večje zamude z dobavo bistvenih delov, manjše zamude pa se ne štejejo nujno kot izjemne, ne glede na to, kako dolgotrajni in kompleksni so lahko ladjedelniški projekti.
Moreover, in the light of the restrictive interpretation to be given to the exception, the Commission assesses carefully whether indications exist that the shipyard concerned could have anticipated and avoided, or at least mitigated, these delays, looking for instance at the timing of orders in view of the relevant work programme.
Poleg tega Komisija pozorno ocenjuje obstoj morebitnih elementov, ki bi dokazovali, da bi ladjedelnica zamude lahko že prej predvidela, se jim izognila ali jih vsaj zmanjšala, na primer vsaj, kar zadeva roke naročil glede na zadevni delovni načrt, v smislu restriktivne razlage, ki jo je treba predložiti za tako izjemo.
The condition that the event must be unforeseeable excludes any factor that the parties could reasonably have anticipated.
Pogoj nepredvidljivosti dogodka namreč izključuje kateri koli dejavnik, ki bi ga stranki lahko predvideli.
The Commission acknowledges that there may be a causal link between the late delivery of critical components for the production of the vessel and the request for extension of the delivery deadline [26].
Komisija se strinja z možnostjo, da obstaja vzročna povezava med zamudo z dobavo bistvenih delov za izdelavo ladje in prošnjo za podaljšanje roka njene dobave [26].
However, in the specific circumstances of the present case, it is primarily the existence of the alleged exceptional and unforeseeable circumstances which the Commission doubts: the elements necessary to conclude that the delay invoked complies with the conditions laid down in paragraph 29 of the Italian TDM scheme do not appear to be present in this case.
Vendar pa v posebnih okoliščinah zadevnega primera Komisija dvomi o obstoju domnevnih izjemnih in nepredvidljivih okoliščin: v danem primeru ni potrebnih elementov, na podlagi katerih bi lahko sklepali, da je do zamude prišlo zaradi pogojev iz odstavka 29 italijanske sheme.
As noted above, the Commission has, in the past, acknowledged that long delays in the delivery of critical parts could be considered exceptional.
Kot je bilo že omenjeno, je Komisija v preteklosti že priznala, da se večje zamude z dobavo bistvenih delov lahko obravnavajo kot izjemne.
However, a request for extension must always be assessed in the specific circumstances of each case.
Vseeno pa mora biti prošnja za podaljšanje vselej ocenjena v skladu s posebnimi okoliščinami vsakega posameznega primera.