natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Firstly, the applicant referred to the changes in the export sales structure of the group, which, coupled with the exploration of new growing markets, would have contributed to higher export prices of ferro-silicon to all export markets, including in the EU, in comparison to the prices during the original investigation.
Najprej se je vložnik skliceval na spremembe v strukturi izvoza skupine, ki bi skupaj s prodiranjem na nove rastoče trge prispevala k višjim izvoznim cenam fero-silicija za vse izvozne trge, vključno z EU, v primerjavi s cenami med prvotno preiskavo.
However, the applicant did not provide any substantiated evidence in order to show the link between the new corporate structure, exploration of new growing markets and higher prices on the EU market.
Vendar vložnik ni predložil nobenih dokazov, ki bi potrdili povezavo med novo poslovno strukturo, prodiranjem na nove rastoče trge in višjimi cenami na trgu EU.
Nor did the findings of the investigation indicate such a link.
Niti ugotovitve preiskave niso potrdile take povezave.
On the contrary, while export prices were clearly higher in the RIP as compared to the prices observed during the investigation period of the original investigation, they have nevertheless been extremely volatile.
Nasprotno, medtem ko so bile izvozne cene očitno višje v OPP v primerjavi s cenami v obdobju prvotne preiskave, so bile vendarle zelo nestabilne.
As an example, within the RIP, the difference between the lowest and highest transaction price per tonne of the most sold model on the EU market was more than 100 %.
Na primer v OPP je bila razlika med najnižjo in najvišjo transakcijsko ceno na tono najbolj prodajanega modela na trgu EU več kot 100-odstotna.
A similar volatility could be observed on the domestic market, but the price trend on the EU market was not comparable to the price trend on the domestic market.
Podobno nestabilnost je bilo mogoče opaziti na domačem trgu, vendar cenovni trend na trgu EU ni bil primerljiv s cenovnim trendom na domačem trgu.
This is also true for the 12-month period preceding the RIP which was closely looked at in the framework of a parallel refund investigation.
To velja tudi za 12-mesečno obdobje pred OPP, ki je bilo podrobno preučeno v okviru hkratne preiskave v zvezi z vračilom.
Indeed, the export sales prices appear to have simply followed the global market prices.
Za izvozne cene dejansko kaže, da so preprosto sledile cenam na svetovnem trgu.
Following disclosure, similar arguments were used by the applicant.
Po razkritju je vložnik uporabil podobne argumente.
However, again insufficient evidence was provided.
Vendar tudi tokrat ni bilo dovolj dokazov.
It is therefore concluded that there is insufficient evidence, at this point in time, that these higher export prices by the applicant are anything other than a consequence of the prevailing market prices (in particular those on the EU market) during the RIP.
Zato se sklene, da trenutno ni zadostnih dokazov, da so te višje izvozne cene vložnika kar koli drugega kot posledica prevladujočih tržnih cen (zlasti cen na trgu EU) v OPP.
In other words, there is insufficient evidence that the changes by the applicant in its corporate export structure were the cause of these higher prices, and that therefore these prices can be expected to remain at similar (or higher) levels in the future.
Drugače povedano, ni dovolj dokazov, da so spremembe poslovne strukture za izvoz vložnika povzročile te visoke cene, zaradi česar se lahko predvideva, da bodo te cene v prihodnje ostale na enaki (ali višji) ravni.
In particular, contrary to what the applicant implies, even assuming that the new structure has made the group more efficient, this does not mean that in the future its export prices to the EU will be high and not result in dumping.
V nasprotju z navedbami vložnika in ob predpostavki, da je skupina učinkovitejša zaradi nove strukture, to še ne pomeni, da bodo izvozne cene vložnika za EU v prihodnosti višje in da ne bodo povzročile dampinga.
Secondly, the applicant declared that its export prices to other markets were in line with or even higher than its sales prices to the Union.
Drugič je vložnik trdil, da so bile njegove izvozne cene za druge trge skladne s prodajnimi cenami za Unijo ali celo višje od njih.
Significant investments had been made to better supply other markets.
Z namenom izboljšanja dobave na druge trge je izvedel znatne naložbe.
Thus, a reduction or removal of the antidumping measures in relation to the applicant would not create an incentive to increase exports to the EU and/or reduce prices thereof.
Zato zmanjšanje ali ukinitev protidampinških ukrepov v zvezi z vložnikom ne bi spodbudile povečanega izvoza v EU oziroma znižanja cen izvoza.
However, this claim cannot lead to a removal or decrease of the measures in force.
Vendar se zaradi te trditve veljavni ukrepi ne morejo ukiniti ali zmanjšati.
It is recalled that, even according to the applicant itself, during the RIP it was still dumping.
Treba je opozoriti, da je vložnik tudi sam trdil, da je v OPP še vedno izvajal damping.
Moreover, the applicant itself highlighted that the EU remains one of its traditional markets.
Poleg tega je vložnik sam poudaril, da EU ostaja eden od njegovih tradicionalnih trgov. To potrjuje tudi dejstvo, da je obseg prodaje vložnika v EU še vedno znaten.
This is corroborated by the fact that the volumes sold by the applicant in the EU are still very significant; if one compares the sales volumes with the EU consumption during the IP of the original investigation [8], they would represent a significant market share (between 5 and 20 %, the precise figures cannot be disclose for reasons of confidentiality).
Pri primerjavi obsega prodaje s potrošnjo EU v OP prvotne preiskave [8] je obseg prodaje predstavljal znatni tržni delež (in sicer med 5 % in 20 %, podrobnih številk pa zaradi zaupnosti ni mogoče razkriti).
After disclosure the applicant reiterated its position that the new market opportunities would be in other markets (India, Asia and United States) rather in the EU.
Po razkritju je vložnik ponovil svoje stališče, da so njegove nove tržne priložnosti na drugih trgih (v Indiji, Aziji in ZDA) in ne v EU.
However, the applicant did not provide any substantial evidence to support its market strategies.
Vendar vložnik ni predložil nobenih trdnih dokazov glede tržnih strategij.
The still existing dumping margin during the RIP, the lack of data on other markets and the volatility of the export sales price in the international market are all elements that do not support this claim which, therefore, has to be rejected.
Ohranitev stopnje dampinga v OPP, pomanjkanje podatkov o drugih trgih in nestabilnost izvoznih cen na mednarodnih trgih te trditve ne podpirajo, zato jo je treba zavrniti.
Thirdly, in the applicant’s view, the Russian domestic market, with significant steel production, remains one of its most important markets and the demand for the like product in Russia is expected to grow.
Tretjič ruski domači trg z znatno proizvodnjo jekla po mnenju vložnika ostaja eden njegovih najpomembnejših trgov, pričakuje pa se, da se bo povpraševanje po podobnem izdelku v Rusiji povečalo.
Domestic and export prices of ferro-silicon would also grow much faster than cost of production.
Prav tako bi se domače in izvozne cene fero-silicija višale hitreje kot stroški proizvodnje.
The applicant would thus be likely to increase its sales on the domestic market further, also because, according to the applicant, the sole other Russian producer of ferro-silicon would since a recent change of ownership produce predominantly for captive consumption.
Zato je verjetno, da bi moral vložnik še nadalje povečati prodajo na domačem trgu, tudi zato, ker je po njegovem mnenju v Rusiji samo še en proizvajalec fero-silicija, ki naj bi zaradi nedavne spremembe lastništva proizvajal zlasti za lastno porabo.
Even if all these allegations are assumed to be true, it nevertheless remains the case that during the RIP, the applicant was dumping at a considerable margin, and at volatile prices.
Četudi so vsi ti argumenti domnevno pravilni, še vedno ostaja dejstvo, da je vložnik v OPP izvajal damping po znatni stopnji in nestabilnih cenah.
Moreover, as explained above, the volumes sold by the applicant to the EU during the RIP do not suggest that it has shifted away from that market or that it intends to do so in the near future.
Kot je že navedeno, obseg prodaje vložnika na trgu EU v OPP ne kaže, da se je preusmeril z navedenega trga ali da to namerava storiti v bližnji prihodnosti.
In its comments to the disclosure, the applicant asserted that the only reasoning presented in the disclosure by the Commission to deny the relevance of the increasing demand on the domestic market would be the significance of the dumping margin found.
V pripombah k razkritju je vložnik trdil, da je v razkritju Komisija zavrnitev pomembnosti vedno večjega povpraševanja na domačem trgu utemeljila le z ugotovljeno znatno stopnjo dampinga.
Furthermore, the applicant sustained that the Commission, although it acknowledged many of the key points relating to the Russian market, fails to draw the adequate conclusion from these arguments.
Poleg tega je vložnik trdil, da Komisija kljub temu, da je priznala številne ključne navedbe glede ruskega trga, na podlagi teh argumentov ne sprejme ustrezne ugotovitve.
These assertions have to be rejected.
Te trditve je treba zavrniti.
Firstly, not only the dumping findings but also the volumes findings speak against this argument.
Prvič temu argumentu nasprotujejo ugotovitve o dampingu in obsegu.
Secondly, the Institutions note that no acknowledgment was made by the Commission and no conclusive independent data was provided to support the claim that the demand for the product concerned is expected to grow in Russia and that export prices of the group would grow much faster than cost of production.
Drugič institucije opozarjajo, da trditve, da se v Rusiji pričakuje povečanje povpraševanja po zadevnem izdelku in da bi se izvozne cene skupine višale hitreje kot stroški proizvodnje, Komisija ni priznala ter v zvezi s tem ni bilo nobenih prepričljivih neodvisnih dokazov.
Fourthly, the applicant pointed out that its Russian production sites of ferro-silicon had been working at full capacity for years, that it had no plans to increase its overall production capacity of ferro-silicon in the foreseeable future and that there were no indications to the contrary.
Četrtič je vložnik poudaril, da so njegovi proizvodni obrati fero-silicija v Rusiji že leta obratovali s polno zmogljivostjo, da v bližnji prihodnosti ne načrtuje povečati splošne proizvodne zmogljivosti fero-silicija in da nič ne kaže na nasprotno.
However, a significant recovery of capacities after the financial crisis of 2009 was noted and the applicant reported an expansion of capacities by 10 %-20 % (range provided for reasons of confidentiality) as compared to the period prior to the 2009 financial crisis.
Vendar je bilo ugotovljeno znatno izboljšanje zmogljivosti po finančni krizi leta 2009, vložnik pa je prijavil povečanje zmogljivosti za 10 % – 20 % (razpon je naveden zaradi zaupnosti) v primerjavi z obdobjem pred finančno krizo leta 2009.
Following disclosure, the applicant submitted that a comparison of the post-RIP production capacity with that during the reference period was not appropriate as the applicant would have anticipated the 2009 financial crisis and, therefore, already reduced the production capacity.
Po razkritju je vložnik trdil, da primerjava proizvodne zmogljivosti po OPP s proizvodno zmogljivostjo v referenčnem obdobju ni bila primerna, saj je vložnik pričakoval finančno krizo v letu 2009 in je zato že zmanjšal svojo proizvodno zmogljivost. Tega argumenta ni mogoče sprejeti.
This argument cannot be accepted; an expansion of reported capacities by 10 %-20 % can be observed as compared to 2007 — not 2009 when capacities were at their lowest levels.
Opaziti je bilo razširitev prijavljenih zmogljivosti za 10 % – 20 % v primerjavi z letom 2007 in ne v letu 2009, ko so bile zmogljivosti na najnižjih stopnjah.
Moreover, the 2009 financial crisis cannot yet have impacted the 2007 production capacity of the applicant.
Poleg tega finančna kriza iz leta 2009 še ni mogla vplivati na proizvodno zmogljivost vložnika v letu 2007.
Conclusion: insufficient evidence of lasting nature of changed circumstances
Sklep: dokazi o trajnosti spremenjenih okoliščin so nezadostni
The analysis of the applicant’s claims with regard to the lasting nature of the changed circumstances, as summarised above, lead to the conclusion that there is currently insufficient evidence that any changed circumstances are of a lasting nature.
Na podlagi analize vložnikovih trditev glede trajnosti spremenjenih okoliščin, kot je povzeto zgoraj, se lahko sklene, da trenutno ni dovolj dokazov, da bi bile kakršne koli spremenjene okoliščine trajne.
The applicant’s export prices, and therefore its dumping margin, appear likely to continue to fluctuate, following, in particular, the development of world market prices.
Za izvozne cene vložnika in posledično stopnjo dampinga se zdi verjetno, da bodo še naprej nihale, zlasti zaradi razvoja cen na svetovnem trgu.
To the extent that the applicant has shown certain changed circumstances they can, therefore, not be considered to show that the pricing behaviour of the applicant during the RIP is of a lasting nature.
Vložnik je sicer prikazal nekatere spremenjene okoliščine, vendar se jih ne more šteti kot take, ki izražajo, da je ravnanje vložnika pri določanju cen v OPP trajno.
It is therefore concluded that it would be premature and therefore unjustified to lower the duty at this point in time.
Zato se sklene, da je še prezgodaj in zato neutemeljeno znižati dajatev.
The applicant together with its related importer offered a price undertaking in accordance with Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation.
Vložnik je skupaj s svojim povezanim uvoznikom ponudil cenovno zavezo v skladu s členom 8(1) osnovne uredbe.
The investigation confirmed that the price of the product is highly volatile.
S preiskavo je bilo potrjeno, da je cena izdelka zelo nestabilna.
As already mentioned in recital 42 above, it was established that the applicant’s sales prices in the Union during the RIP varied very significantly.
Kot je že navedeno v uvodni izjavi 42, je bilo ugotovljeno, da so se vložnikove prodajne cene v Unijo v OPP znatno spreminjale.
The product is therefore not suited for a fixed price undertaking.
Izdelek zato ni primeren za fiksno cenovno zavezo.
Although an indexation mechanism was proposed by the exporter, it was not possible to establish a correlation between the price volatility of the finished product and the indexation source proposed, in particular as it also related to the finished product and referred to prices which were influenced by dumped imports.
Čeprav je izvoznik predlagal mehanizem indeksacije, ni bilo mogoče vzpostaviti korelacije med nestabilnostjo cen končnega izdelka in predlaganim virom indeksacije, zlasti zato, ker je povezan tudi s končnim izdelkom in se nanaša na cene, na katere je vplival dampinški uvoz.
Therefore, the proposed indexation was considered not appropriate.
Zato se je predlagana indeksacija štela za neprimerno.
As regards company specific risks, it was established that due to the complexity of the company structure, the risk of cross-compensation is very high: other products than the product concerned could be sold via a trader outside the Union to another related third country branch and then be re-sold to the Union.
Glede tveganj, specifičnih za družbo, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je tveganje navzkrižne kompenzacije zaradi zapletenosti strukture družbe zelo veliko. Izdelki, ki niso zadevni izdelki, se lahko prodajajo prek trgovca zunaj Unije v drugo povezano podružnico iz tretje države in se nato ponovno prodajo v Unijo.
Finally, as the product itself exists in different qualities and is mainly imported in bulk form, it would not be possible for customs authorities to distinguish the chemical specification (potentially subject to different Minimum Import Prices) without individual analysis of each transaction, thus rendering the monitoring very burdensome, if not impracticable.
Ker so izdelki različne kakovosti in se večinoma uvažajo v razsutem stanju, carinski organi ne bi mogli razlikovati kemijskih specifikacij (za katere bi se morebiti uporabljale različne minimalne uvozne cene) brez individualne analize vsake transakcije, zaradi česar bi bilo spremljanje zelo težavno ali celo neizvedljivo.
The undertaking offer was therefore rejected.
Zato je bila ponujena zaveza zavrnjena.
In view of the findings of dumping as well as the absence of a proven lasting nature of the changed circumstances, it is concluded that JSC Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant and its related company JSC Kuznetsk Ferroalloy Works should continue to be subject to the duty level specified in the original Regulation, i.e. 22,7 %,
Glede na ugotovitve dampinga in odsotnosti dokazane trajne narave spremenjenih okoliščin se sklene, da mora za družbo JSC Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant in njeno povezano družbo JSC Kuznetsk Ferroalloy Works še naprej veljati stopnja dajatve, določena v prvotni preiskavi, torej 22,7 % –
The partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of ferro-silicon originating, inter alia, in Russia, initiated pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 is hereby terminated without amending the level of the anti-dumping measure in force.
Delni vmesni pregled protidampinških ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo za uvoz fero-silicija s poreklom med drugim iz Rusije, ki se je začel na podlagi člena 11(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009, se zaključi brez spremembe ravni veljavnega protidampinškega ukrepa.
OJ C 290, 27.10.2010, p. 15.
UL C 290, 27.10.2010, str. 15.
See, in particular [2009] ECR II-4133.
Glej zlasti (2009) ECR II-4133.
Case T-143/06 MTZ Polyfilms Ltd v Council.
Zadeva T-143/06 MTZ Polyfilms Ltd proti Svetu.
As will be explained below, normal value, export price and their comparison were first calculated/performed for CHEM and KF, separately.
Kot bo pojasnjeno, so bile normalna vrednost, izvozna cena in njuna primerjava izračunane ločeno za družbi CHEM in KF.
To clarify this, in this part, the word ‘company’ is sometimes used rather than ‘applicant’, since ‘applicant’, as stated above, refers to CHEM and KF jointly.
Zaradi večje jasnosti v tem delu se namesto besede „vložnik“ uporablja beseda „družba“, ker se beseda „vložnik“ nanaša skupaj na CHEM in KF, kot je pojasnjeno zgoraj.
See recital 23.
Glej uvodno izjavo 23.
See recital 27.
Glej uvodno izjavo 27.
The Institutions use the data on EU consumption during the IP of the original investigation rather than the RIP.
Institucije uporabljajo podatke o potrošnji EU v OP prvotne preiskave in ne v OPP.
That is because, since this review is limited to the examination of dumping — and does not cover injury issues — the Institutions do not have verified data regarding EU consumption during the RIP.
Razlog je v tem, da zaradi omejitve pregleda na preiskavo dampinga (ki ne zajema vprašanj glede škode) institucije nimajo preverjenih podatkov o potrošnji EU v OPP.
Regarding the second claim, it is not necessary to take a final position on this matter in the context of this review investigation. This results from the combination of two reasons.
Za drugo trditev ni nujno, da se v okviru te preiskave v zvezi s pregledom sprejme dokončno stališče, razloga za to pa sta dva.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 61/2012
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) št. 61/2012
amending Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 as regards the administration of the CXL concessions sugar
o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 891/2009 glede upravljanja s sladkorjem iz koncesij CXL
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) [1] and in particular Articles 144(1), 148 and 156 in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1234/2007 z dne 22. oktobra 2007 o vzpostavitvi skupne ureditve kmetijskih trgov in o posebnih določbah za nekatere kmetijske proizvode („Uredba o enotni SUT“) [1] ter zlasti členov 144(1), 148 in 156 v povezavi s členom 4 Uredbe,
Article 7(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 of 25 September 2009 opening and providing for the administration of certain Community tariff quotas in the sugar sector [2] provides that for CXL concessions sugar with order number 09.4317, 09.4318, 09.4319, 09.4321 (country specific) and Balkan sugar import licence applications are to be accompanied by the original of the export licence.
Člen 7(4) Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 891/2009 z dne 25. septembra 2009 o odprtju in upravljanju nekaterih tarifnih kvot Skupnosti v sektorju sladkorja [2] določa, da se za sladkor iz koncesij CXL z zaporednimi številkami 09.4317, 09.4318, 09.4319, 09.4321 (določenimi za posamezne države) ter za balkanski sladkor zahtevku za uvozno dovoljenje priloži izvirnik izvoznega dovoljenja.
For CXL concession sugar with order number 09.4320 (any third country) the presentation of the export licence is not required.
Za sladkor iz koncesij CXL z zaporedno številko 09.4320 (katera koli tretja država) izvozno dovoljenje ni potrebno.
By simplifying the administrative requirements to have access to CXL concessions sugar for imports into the Union through the elimination of the requirement to present the export licence for country specific concessions it is possible to encourage competition between operators and secure a smoother functioning of the market.
S poenostavitvijo administrativnih zahtev za dostop do sladkorja iz koncesij CXL za uvoze v Unijo, tj. z odpravo zahteve po predložitvi izvoznega dovoljenja za koncesije, ki veljajo posebej za določeno državo, je mogoče spodbuditi konkurenco med izvajalci in zagotoviti boljše delovanje trga.
Since the release for free circulation would continue to be subject to the presentation of a certificate of origin, this simplification can be attained without prejudice to the possibility for Member States to take the necessary measures to satisfy themselves that the transactions have been carried out correctly.
Ker bi se za sprostitev v prosti promet še naprej zahtevala predložitev potrdila o poreklu, bi se takšna poenostavitev lahko izvedla brez poseganja v možnost držav članic, da sprejmejo potrebne ukrepe, s katerimi se lahko prepričajo, da so transakcije bile izvedene pravilno.
In order to ensure a smooth transition to the simplified administrative requirements, it is appropriate to foresee to defer their application to 1 February 2012.
Da bi se zagotovil neoviran prehod na poenostavljene administrativne zahteve, bi bilo primerno predvideti, da se njihova uporaba odloži do 1. februarja 2012.
Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly
Uredbo (ES) št. 891/2009 je treba zato ustrezno spremeniti.
In Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 891/2009, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:
V členu 7 Uredbe (ES) št. 891/2009 se odstavek 4 nadomesti z naslednjim:
For Balkan sugar, import licence applications shall be accompanied by the original of the export licence, in accordance with the model in Annex II, issued by the competent authorities of the third country concerned.
Za balkanski sladkor se zahtevku za uvozno dovoljenje priloži izvirnik izvoznega dovoljenja v skladu z vzorcem iz Priloge II, ki ga izdajo pristojni organi zadevne tretje države.
The quantity mentioned in the import licence applications may not exceed the quantity shown on the export licences.’
Količina, navedena v zahtevkih za uvozna dovoljenja, ne sme presegati količin iz izvoznih dovoljenj.“
Commission Regulation (EU) No 62/2012
Uredba Komisije (EU) št. 62/2012