natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On 16 June 2011, the European Commission (‘Commission’) received a complaint concerning the alleged injurious dumping of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’), lodged pursuant to Article 5 of the basic Regulation by the Glass Fibre Fabrics Defence Coalition (‘GFFDC’ or ‘the complainant’) on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this case more than 25 %, of the total Union production of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics.
(1) Evropska komisija („Komisija“) je 16. junija 2011 prejela pritožbo o domnevnem škodljivem dampingu nekaterih tkanih in/ali šivanih tkanin iz steklenih vlaken s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske („LRK“), ki jo je v skladu s členom 5 osnovne uredbe vložilo združenje za zaščito proizvodnje tkanin iz steklenih vlaken (Glass Fibre Fabrics Defence Coalition, GFFDC) („pritožnik“) v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo glavni delež, v tem primeru več kot 25 %, celotne proizvodnje nekaterih tkanih in/ali šivanih tkanin iz steklenih vlaken v Uniji.
On 28 July 2011, the Commission, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2], the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Union of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics originating in the PRC.
Komisija je 28. julija 2011 po posvetovanju s svetovalnim odborom z objavo obvestila v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2] napovedala začetek protidampinškega postopka za uvoz nekaterih tkanih in/ali šivanih tkanin iz steklenih vlaken s poreklom iz LRK v Unijo.
The Commission officially advised the exporters/producers in the PRC, importers, users and any associations known to be concerned, the authorities of the PRC and all known Union producers of the initiation of the proceeding.
Komisija je o začetku postopka uradno obvestila proizvajalce izvoznike v LRK, uvoznike, uporabnike in vsa združenja, za katere je znano, da jih to zadeva, pristojne organe v LRK in vse znane proizvajalce Unije.
By a letter of 12 March 2012 to the Commission, the complainant formally withdrew its complaint.
Pritožnik je v pismu Komisiji z dne 12. marca 2012 uradno umaknil svojo pritožbo.
The investigation had not brought to light any considerations showing that such termination would be against the Union interest.
V preiskavi ni bilo ugotovljeno, da bi bila taka ustavitev v nasprotju z interesi Unije.
Therefore the Commission considered that the present proceeding should be terminated.
Komisija je zato menila, da bi bilo sedanji postopek treba ustaviti.
The Commission therefore concludes that the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Union of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics originating in the PRC should be terminated,
Komisija je zato sklenila, da bi bilo treba protidampinški postopek za uvoz nekaterih tkanih in/ali šivanih tkanin iz steklenih vlaken s poreklom iz LRK v Unijo ustaviti –
The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of fabrics of woven or stitched or woven and stitched continuous filament glass fibre rovings, excluding products which are impregnated or pre-impregnated (pre-preg), and excluding open mesh fabrics with cells with a size of more than 1,8 mm both in length and in width and weighing more than 35 g/m2 originating in the People’s Republic of China, currently falling within CN codes ex70193900, ex70194000 and ex70199000, is hereby terminated.
Protidampinški postopek za uvoz rovinga iz tkanih in/ali vezenih brezkončnih steklenih vlaken, razen izdelkov, ki so impregnirani ali predimpregnirani, ter tkanin z odprto mrežno strukturo z velikostjo celic več kot 1,8 mm po dolžini in širini ter težo več kot 35 g/m2, s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, trenutno uvrščenega pod oznake KN ex70193900, ex70194000 in ex70199000, se ustavi.
OJ C 222, 28.7.2011, p. 12.
UL C 222, 28.7.2011, str. 12.
Comments were received from one interested party.
Komisija je prejela pripombe ene zainteresirane strani.
However, these comments did not alter the finding that the termination of the proceeding would not be against the Union interest.
Vendar te pripombe niso spremenile ugotovitve, da ustavitev postopka ne bi bila v nasprotju z interesi Unije.
on State aid SA.14554 (C 7/04) implemented by Germany for the Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz (Wine Marketing Company)
o državni pomoči SA.14554 (C 7/04) Nemčije za družbo Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz (družba za trženje vina)
(notified under document C(2011) 4426)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2011) 4426)
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) [1] thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti prvega pododstavka člena 108(2) [1] Pogodbe,
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provision cited above [2],
po pozivu zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedeno določbo [2],
Germany sent additional information by letter dated 20 November 2002, received on 25 November 2002, by letter dated 28 April 2003, received on 2 May 2003, by letter dated 27 May 2003, received on 28 May 2003, and by fax dated 2 October 2003.
Nemčija je poslala dodatne informacije v dopisu z dne 20. novembra 2002, ki ga je Komisija prejela 25. novembra 2002, v dopisu z dne 28. aprila 2003, ki ga je Komisija prejela 2. maja 2003, v dopisu z dne 27. maja 2003, ki ga je Komisija prejela 28. maja 2003, in v telefaksu z dne 2. oktobra 2003.
By letter dated 19 February 2004, SG-Greffe (2004) D/200645, the Commission informed Germany that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in respect of the aid.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 19. februarja 2004, SG-Greffe (2004) D/200645, Nemčijo obvestila o odločitvi, da bo v zvezi s pomočjo sprožila postopek iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (PDEU).
The Commission received no comments from interested parties [4].
Komisija od zainteresiranih strani ni prejela pripomb [4].
By letter dated 21 October 2008, SG-Greffe (2008) D/206430, the Commission informed Germany that it had decided to extend the procedure which had been initiated under Article 108(2) of the TFEU in respect of the aid.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 21. oktobra 2008, SG-Greffe (2008) D/206430, obvestila Nemčijo, da se je v zvezi s pomočjo odločila za podaljšanje postopka, ki je bil sprožen v skladu s členom 108(2) PDEU.
The Commission decision to extend the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [5].
Odločitev Komisije o podaljšanju postopka je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [5].
The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Komisija je zainteresirane strani pozvala, naj predložijo pripombe v zvezi s pomočjo.
Germany submitted (after a request for delay extension of 17 November 2008, accepted by the Commission on 21 November 2008) comments to the Commission by letter of 23 December 2008, registered on 5 January 2009.
Nemčija je pripombe (po prošnji za podaljšanje odloga z dne 17. novembra 2008, ki jo je Komisija prejela 21. novembra 2008) Komisiji predložila v dopisu z dne 23. decembra 2008, ki ga je Komisija prejela 5. januarja 2009.
Kredit an die Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz mit nachfolgendem Forderungsverzicht [loan to the Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz (wine marketing company) and subsequent waiver of claims]
Kredit an die Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz mit nachfolgendem Forderungsverzicht (posojilo družbi Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz (družba za trženje vina) in naknadna odpoved terjatvam)
The measure was implemented on the basis of a contractual agreement between the Wiederaufbaukasse der rheinland-pfälzischen Weinbaugebiete (reconstruction fund for the Rhineland-Palatinate winegrowing areas, WAK) and the Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz Pfalz GmbH (Palatinate wine marketing company, GfW).
Ukrep se je izvajal na podlagi pogodbenega sporazuma med skladom Wiederaufbaukasse der rheinland-pfälzischen Weinbaugebiete (sklad za obnovo za vinogradniško območje dežele Porenje-Pfalška (v nadaljnjem besedilu: banka WAK)) in družbo Gesellschaft für Weinabsatz Pfalz GmbH (družba za trženje vina iz Pfalške (v nadaljnjem besedilu: družba GfW)).
The objective was to grant a loan to GfW to purchase must from winegrowing enterprises and merchants.
Cilj je bil odobritev posojila družbi GfW za nakup mošta od vinogradniških podjetij in trgovcev.
Secured assets were agreed as collateral.
Zavarovana sredstva so bila sprejeta kot zavarovanje.
These assets were also subject to varying degrees of retention of title (Eigentumsvorbehalt) by the winegrowing enterprises and merchants (Weinbaugetriebe und Kommissionäre) in the form of simple, extended or prolonged retention of title.
Ta sredstva so bila odvisna tudi od različnih stopenj pridržkov lastninske pravice (Eigentumsvorbehalt) vinogradniških podjetij in trgovcev (Weinbaugetriebe und Kommissionäre) v obliki navadnega, razširjenega ali podaljšanega pridržka lastninske pravice.
The waiver of claims took place when GfW got into financial difficulty due to a slump in market prices.
Odpoved terjatvam se je izvedla, ko se je družba GfW zaradi znižanja tržnih cen znašla v finančnih težavah.
Public body
Javni organ
WAK is a public-law corporation of the federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate registered in Mainz.
Banka WAK je družba javnega prava zvezne dežele Porenje-Pfalška, registrirana v Mainzu.
It operates in the winegrowing sector in a similar manner as a bank.
Deluje v vinogradniškem sektorju na podoben način kot banka.
WAK’s customary trade is the granting of loans for land reparcelling (Flurbereinigung).
Običajno delovanje banke WAK je odobritev posojil za arondacijo zemljišč (Flurbereinigung).
WAK is financed from contributions, fees, loans and grants (Article 8(1) of the Weinbergsaufbaugesetz [winegrowing enterprise development act]).
Banka WAK se financira iz prispevkov, provizij, posojil in podpor (člen 8(1) zakona Weinbergsaufbaugesetz (zakon o razvoju vinogradniških podjetij)).
Beneficiary of the measure was GfW, which was granted a loan by WAK on terms which were not in conformity with market conditions.
Upravičenec ukrepa je bila družba GfW, ki ji je banka WAK odobrila posojilo pod pogoji, ki niso bili v skladu s tržnimi pogoji.
GfW was a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Pfalz Süd (southern Rhineland-Palatinate farmers’ and winegrowing enterprises’ association).
Družba GfW je bila podružnica v popolni lasti združenja Bauern- und Winzerverband Rheinland-Pfalz Süd (združenje kmetov in vinogradnikov južnega dela dežele Porenje-Pfalška).
It was founded in 1984 for the purpose of marketing wine and its trade was the production and marketing of sparkling wine, grape juice, grape jelly, grape spirit and brandy.
Ustanovljena je bila leta 1984 z namenom trženja vina, pri čemer se je ukvarjala s pridelavo in trženjem penečega vina, grozdnega soka, grozdnega želeja, grozdnega žganja in konjaka.
GfW also provided services for winegrowing enterprises in connection with distillation measures (Destillationsmaßnahmen).
Družba GfW je opravljala tudi storitve za vinogradniška podjetja v zvezi z ukrepi za destilacijo (Destillationsmaßnahmen).
These distillation measures involved the measures covered by the common market organisation [6] and state-funded distillation normally carried out on the basis of Council decisions [7].
Ti ukrepi za destilacijo so vključevali ukrepe, ki jih zajema skupna ureditev trga [6], ter destilacijo, ki jo financira država in se običajno izvaja na podlagi sklepov Sveta [7].
In connection to this GfW advised small wine producers and organised the transport of wine to the distilleries.
V zvezi s tem je družba GfW svetovala malim pridelovalcem vina in organizirala prevoz vina do destilarn.
Other possible beneficiaries are the winegrowing enterprises and merchants from whom, as a result of the loan, GfW was placed in a position to buy must and who did not waive any of their claims on GfW when WAK decided to do so at the time GfW got into financial difficulty.
Drugi mogoči upravičenci so vinogradniška podjetja in trgovci, od katerih je morala družba GfW zaradi posojila kupovati mošt in ki se niso odpovedali nobenim terjatvam do družbe GfW, ko se je ob začetku finančnih težav družbe GfW za to odločila banka WAK.
Background of the aid
Ozadje pomoči
In 1999, using a loan of EUR 15302696,25 from WAK and its own resources, GfW purchased 44 million litres of must.
Leta 1999 je družba GfW s posojilom banke WAK v višini 15302696,25 EUR in z lastnimi viri kupila 44 milijonov litrov mošta.
60 % of this must had a minimum of 60 degree Oechsle and an average of 81 degree Oechsle.
60 % tega mošta je imelo najmanj 60 stopinj Oechsleja in povprečno 81 stopinj Oechsleja.
40 % of the must was ordinary table wine must with a minimum of 44 degree Oechsle which was bought to take advantage of the beneficial conditions of preventive distillation.
40 % mošta je bilo namenjenih za navadno namizno vino z najmanj 44 stopinjami Oechsleja, pri čemer je bil mošt kupljen, da bi se izkoristili ugodni pogoji preventivne destilacije.
An average price of EUR 0,38 per litre was paid for all the must purchased.
Za celoten kupljen mošt je bila plačana povprečna cena 0,38 EUR na liter.
No finished wine was purchased.
Gotovega vina družba GfW ni kupila.
The purchase was carried out on the basis of simple, extended or prolonged retention of title (einfache, erweiterte, verlängerte Eigentumsvorbehalte) by the winegrowing enterprises and merchants.
Nakup je bil izveden na podlagi navadnega, razširjenega ali podaljšanega pridržka lastninske pravice (einfache, erweiterte, verlängerte Eigentumsvorbehalte) vinogradniškim podjetjem in trgovcem.
At the same time these secured assets were agreed as collateral for WAK.
Hkrati so bila ta zavarovana sredstva sprejeta kot zavarovanje za banko WAK.
According to the information submitted by Germany, GfW’s business plan was to take advantage of the distillation opportunities in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 for 40 % of the must and process 60 % of the must into raw wine for the production of sparkling wine and to sell it to sparkling wine producers.
Na podlagi informacij, ki jih je predložila Nemčija, je bil poslovni načrt družbe GfW izkoristiti ugodnosti destilacije v skladu z Uredbo (EGS) št. 822/87 za 40 % mošta ter predelati 60 % mošta v vino kot osnovo za proizvodnjo penečega vina in ga prodati proizvajalcem penečega vina.
In addition, GfW were planning to stock 20 % of the raw wine for nine months to one year in order to take advantage of EU subsidies for stocking of wine in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, before it would be sold on the market for raw wine for the production of sparkling wine.
Poleg tega je družba GfW 20 % vina nameravala uskladiščiti za devet mesecev do enega leta, da bi izkoristila subvencije EU za skladiščenje vina v skladu z Uredbo (EGS) št. 822/87, nato pa ga prodati na trgu za vino kot osnovo za proizvodnjo penečega vina.
On 11 November 1999 the winegrowing enterprises and merchants received a down payment of 80 % of the purchase price.
Vinogradniška podjetja in trgovci so 11. novembra 1999 prejeli predplačilo v vrednosti 80 % nakupne cene.
A down payment of EUR 0,31 per litre was paid on average.
V povprečju je bilo izplačano predplačilo 0,31 EUR na liter.
In 1999, GfW sent 40 % of its stocks to preventive distillation.
Leta 1999 je družba GfW 40 % svojih zalog poslala v preventivno destilacijo.
In view of the fall in prices on the market for raw wine at the end of 1999 GfW decided not to sell any of the raw wine that year but to wait for the market to recover in 2000.
Družba GfW se je zaradi padca cen na trgu za vino kot osnovo proti koncu leta 1999 odločila, da tisto leto vina kot osnovo ne bo več prodajala, ampak bo počakala na izboljšanje stanja na trgu v letu 2000.
In 2000, due to the comparatively large harvests and falling sales of sparkling wine the market in white wine slumped even further (average prices falling in some instances by as much as EUR 0,20).
Zaradi sorazmerno velikega pridelka in vse manjše prodaje penečega vina se je leta 2000 prodaja belega vina še bolj zmanjšala (povprečne cene so se v nekaterih primerih znižale celo na 0,20 EUR).
Much of the cask wine still in storage had to be sent for another round of distillation.
Veliko vina, ki je bilo uskladiščenega v sodih, je bilo treba znova poslati v destilacijo.
As a result of an amendment of the common organisation of the market in wine adopted in 1999 and entered into force on 1 August 2000, preventive distillation in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 was replaced by distillation to supply the potable alcohol market in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999.
Zaradi spremembe skupne ureditve trga za vino, ki je bila sprejeta leta 1999 in je začela veljati 1. avgusta 2000, je preventivno destilacijo v skladu z Uredbo (EGS) št. 822/87 nadomestila destilacija za oskrbo trga s pitnim alkoholom v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 1493/1999.
The terms were considerably poorer, and only around half the previous price of EUR 0,50-0,55 per litre for preventive distillation could be achieved.
Pogoji so bili znatno slabši in doseči je bilo mogoče le približno polovico prejšnje cene 0,50–0,55 EUR na liter za preventivno destilacijo.
Following on the slump in prices in 2000 it proved impossible for GfW to achieve the expected profits neither on the wine market nor in distillation to supply the potable alcohol market.
Po padcu cen leta 2000 je bilo nemogoče, da bi družba GfW dosegla pričakovane dobičke tako na trgu z vinom kot pri destilaciji za oskrbo trga s pitnim alkoholom.
As a result, the book value of GfW’s stocks had to be reduced significantly and as a result, GfW’s liabilities exceeded its assets.
Zato je bilo treba knjigovodsko vrednost zalog družbe GfW bistveno zmanjšati, zaradi česar so obveznosti družbe GfW presegle njena sredstva.
In view of the commercial problems described above, an interim statement of account was drawn up for the year until 31 October 2000 and examined by an auditor.
Zaradi navedenih poslovnih težav je bil do 31. oktobra 2000 pripravljen vmesni obračun poslovanja za tekoče leto, ki ga je pregledal revizor.
On 31 October 2000 GfW’s liabilities (EUR 15670155) exceeded its current assets (EUR 9886856) with EUR 5783299 and GfW had the liabilities as expressed in the table below.
Obveznosti družbe GfW (15670155 EUR) so 31. oktobra 2000 presegale njena takratna sredstva (9886856 EUR) za 5783299 EUR, pri čemer so bile takšne, kot je navedeno v spodnji preglednici.
According to a report prepared by Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Falk & Co. GmbH, GfW would very soon be facing insolvency proceedings due to its liabilities exceeding its assets (Überschuldung) if nothing was done to avoid this.
V skladu s poročilom, ki ga je pripravila revizorska družba Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft Falk & Co. GmbH, bi se v primeru neukrepanja za družbo GfW zaradi njenih obveznosti, ki so presegale sredstva (Überschuldung), v kratkem začeli postopki zaradi nesolventnosti.
Liabilities to
Obveznosti do
Winegrowing enterprises and merchants
Vinogradniška podjetja in trgovci
According to §19 of the German insolvency law (Insolvenzordnung) liabilities exceeding the assets of a company is cause for opening the insolvency proceedings.
V skladu s členom 19 nemškega zakona o nesolventnosti (Insolvenzordnung) so obveznosti, ki presegajo sredstva družbe, razlog za začetek postopkov zaradi nesolventnosti.
Because of this, the Executive board of GfW was under the obligation in accordance with § 64 GmbHG a.F. i. V. m. § 19 InsO, to within three weeks of entering into the state of its liabilities exceeding its assets (Überschuldung) to apply for the opening of the insolvency proceedings.
Zato je bil izvršni odbor družbe GfW v skladu s členom 64 nemškega zakona o družbah z omejeno odgovornostjo (stara različica) v povezavi s členom 19 nemškega zakona o nesolventnosti obvezan, da v treh tednih po tem, ko obveznosti družbe presežejo njena sredstva (Überschuldung), vloži predlog za začetek postopkov zaradi nesolventnosti.
As a result of the impending insolvency, GfW asked some creditors (WAK, the winegrowing enterprises and around 130 merchants involved in the purchase described in recital 18) to waive part of their outstanding claims to enable the company to continue trading.
Zaradi grozeče nesolventnosti je družba GfW nekatere upnike (banko WAK, vinogradniška podjetja in približno 130 trgovcev, ki so sodelovali pri nakupu iz uvodne izjave 18) prosila, da se odpovejo delu svojih neporavnanih terjatev in družbi tako omogočijo nadaljevanje poslovanja.
In the case of the winegrowing enterprises and merchants, the waiver was to cover 90 % of their outstanding claims, meaning they would only receive an additional 2 % of the agreed purchase price.
V primeru vinogradniških podjetij in trgovcev bi odpoved obsegala 90 % neporavnanih terjatev, kar bi pomenilo, da bi prejeli le 2 % več od dogovorjene nakupne cene.
The remaining deficit was to be eliminated by the necessary subordination of claims and waiver of claims by WAK.
Preostali primanjkljaj naj bi se odpravil z obvezno podreditvijo in odpovedjo terjatvam s strani banke WAK.
As principle creditor (see table 1) with a weaker security position, WAK had a considerable interest in avoiding the impending insolvency.
Banka WAK je imela kot glavna upnica (glej preglednico 1) s slabšim položajem zavarovanja velik interes, da se prepreči grozeča nesolventnost.
It therefore tried to convince the winegrowing enterprises and merchants to agree to waive a part of their claims.
Zato je poskušala vinogradniška podjetja in trgovce prepričati, da se strinjajo z odpovedjo delu svojih terjatev.
WAK also signed a written agreement with GfW, dated 4 December 2000, where it agrees to subordinate a part of its outstanding claims — corresponding to GfW’s deficit — in favour of the other creditors.
Banka WAK je 4. decembra 2000 podpisala tudi pisni sporazum z družbo GfW, v katerem se je strinjala s podreditvijo dela svojih neporavnanih terjatev (v skladu s primanjkljajem družbe GfW) v korist drugih upnikov.
The final amount of the subordination of claims was only to be specified once the waiver of claims declarations of the winegrowing enterprises and merchants had been received, so as to minimise the amount subordinated.
Končni znesek podreditve terjatev bi se določil šele ob prejetju izjav o odpovedi terjatev vinogradniških podjetij in trgovcev, da bi se zmanjšal podrejeni znesek.
It was also agreed that WAK would, if it would prove necessary at a later stage to avoid insolvency proceedings, waive the same amount of claims as it had subordinated.
Prav tako je bilo dogovorjeno, da bi se banka WAK, če bi se pozneje izkazalo, da je to nujno za preprečitev postopkov zaradi nesolventnosti, odpovedala enakemu znesku terjatev, kot jih je podredila.
1700 out of the 2700 winegrowing enterprises and merchants declared their willingness to waive 90 % of their remaining claims, corresponding to around 60 % of the outstanding claims of the group as a whole.
1700 od 2700 vinogradniških podjetij in trgovcev je izjavilo, da so se pripravljeni odpovedati 90 % svojih preostalih terjatev, kar je približno 60 % neporavnanih terjatev skupine kot celote.
However, the remaining winegrowing enterprises and merchants either specifically refused the offer or did not answer the request.
Preostala vinogradniška podjetja in trgovci pa so izrecno zavrnili ponudbo ali pa niso odgovorili na prošnjo.
It was clear that some of them decided not to waive their claims because of their stronger security position — some had prolonged retention of title and had already received down payment of 80 % of the agreed price.
Nekateri so se odločili, da se svojim terjatvam ne odpovejo zaradi svojega močnejšega položaja zavarovanja – nekateri so imeli podaljšan pridržek lastninske pravice in so že prejeli predplačilo v višini 80 % dogovorjene cene.