natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Point 177 of the Report states that while rescue measures may be needed in order to provide a breathing space during which longer-term solutions to a company’s difficulties can be worked out, they should not frustrate any necessary reductions in capacity and should therefore be limited to cases where they are required to cope with acute social problems.
Točka 177 poročila navaja, da se, čeprav so reševalni ukrepi morda potrebni, da se pridobi določen čas, v katerem naj bi se uporabile dolgoročne rešitve za težave podjetij, ti ukrepi ne smejo uporabljati za preprečevanje potrebnih zmanjšanj proizvodnih zmogljivosti, razen v primerih, ko so nujni za reševanje perečih družbenih problemov.
Point 227 of the Report states that rescue aid can be warranted pursuant to the Treaty when linked to restructuring aimed to restore the firm and/or regions concerned to long-term viability and when applied specifically enough to a given region or industry to allow its effects to be assessed.
Točka 227 poročila navaja, da je pomoč za reševanje glede na Pogodbo upravičena takrat, ko je povezana s prestrukturiranjem, katerega cilj je trajno izboljšanje stanja podjetij v težavah in/ali zadevnih regij, ter če so ti ukrepi dovolj regionalne ali sektorske narave, ki omogoča oceno njihovih rezultatov.
Point 228 of the Report further clarifies the Commission’s position in respect of rescue aid and defines restructuring aid.
Točka 228 poročila podrobneje pojasnjuje stališče Komisije o pomoči za reševanje in določa vsebino „podpornih pomoči“.
Rescue aid must:
Pomoč za reševanje mora biti:
consist of liquidity in the form of loan guarantees or loans bearing the normal commercial interest rates;
likvidnostna pomoč v obliki jamstev za posojila ali posojil, ki se vračajo z obrestno mero, enako tržni;
be restricted to the amount needed to keep a firm in business, to cover wage and salary costs and routine supplies;
omejena na znesek, potreben za nadaljnje delovanje, kritje plač in odhodke za tekoče nabave;
be paid only for the time needed (generally six months) to draw up the necessary and feasible recovery measures;
omejena le za potreben čas (običajno šest mesecev), tako da se določijo potrebni in možni ukrepi za ponovno rast;
be warranted on the grounds of serious social difficulties and keeping the firm in operation must not have any adverse effects on the industrial situation in other Member States.
upravičena z resnimi socialnimi težavami in obstanek podjetja - prejemnika pomoči ne vodi v destabilizacijo razmer v industriji v drugih državah članicah.
Restructuring aid must also be strictly conditional on the implementation of a sound restructuring and/or conversion programme and duly and effectively serve to restore the viability of the production concerned, the intensity and amount of aid must be restricted to the strict minimum for supporting the firm during the inevitable transitional period before such a programme takes effect, and the period involved must therefore be limited and the assistance gradually reduced.
Podporna pomoč mora biti odvisna od strogega izvajanja celovitega programa prestrukturiranja in/ali reorganizacije podjetja, sposobna ponovne vzpostavitve uspešnega poslovanja zadevne proizvodnje, njena intenzivnost in znesek pa morata biti omejena na tisto, kar je nujno potrebno za zagotovitev stabilnosti podjetja med neizogibnim prehodnim obdobjem, preden program doseže rezultate, kar pomeni strogo omejen čas in dovolj postopno zmanjšanje programa.
These conditions were replaced by the 1994 Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty [40], which entered into force on 23 December 1994 (hereinafter ‘the 1994 Guidelines’), and subsequently by the 1997 Guidelines, which entered into force on 1 January 1998, and then by the 1999 Guidelines, which applied from 1 July onwards taking into account the adjustment period extended to Member States with regard to aid schemes (see recitals 98 and 102).
Te pogoje so nadomestile smernice skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah iz leta 1994 [40], ki so začele veljati 23. decembra 1994 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice iz leta 1994), nato smernice iz leta 1997, ki so začele veljati 1. januarja 1998, in smernice iz leta 1999, ki veljajo od 1. julija 2000, ob upoštevanju obdobja prilagajanja sheme pomoči, dodeljene državam članicam (glej uvodni izjavi 98 in 102).
The 1994 Guidelines confirm Commission policy in respect of rescue aid (see recital 114) and define in more detail the content and implications of the restructuring plans to be submitted (prospect of the restoration of viability on the basis of realistic assumptions within a reasonable time-scale, mitigation of the effects on competitors, due regard for the ‘one time, last time’ principle, capacity reduction in the case of structural excess capacity in the sector in question and aid in proportion to the restructuring costs and benefit that also covers the social costs of restructuring).
Smernice iz leta 1994 so potrditev politike, ki ji je sledila Komisija pri pomoči za reševanje (glej uvodno izjavo 114), in natančno določajo vsebino ter posledice načrtov prestrukturiranja, ki jih je treba predložiti (možnosti vrnitve k stanju sposobnosti preživetja na realnih predpostavkah in v razumnem roku, ublažitev učinkov pomoči na konkurente, načelo enkratne pomoči, zmanjšanje proizvodnih zmogljivosti v primeru strukturnega presežka v zadevnem sektorju, sorazmernost med pomočjo in stroški ter koristmi prestrukturiranja, kritje socialnih stroškov prestrukturiranja).
In the non-agricultural sectors, the 1997 Guidelines, which were a result of the regular review of Commission policy on rescuing and restructuring of firms in difficulty, reiterate the content of the 1994 Guidelines.
Na drugih področjih, razen kmetijskem, smernice iz leta 1997, ki se oblikujejo z rednim pregledom politike Komisije za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah, potrjujejo vsebino smernic iz leta 1994.
The 1999 Guidelines apply stricter conditions to the granting of rescue aid by introducing a set time-frame for submitting the restructuring plan.
S smernicami iz leta 1999 postanejo pogoji za dodelitev pomoči za reševanje strožji, saj uvajajo konkreten rok za predložitev načrta za prestrukturiranje.
In terms of restructuring, the Guidelines are far more restrictive in respect of SMEs and provide for the possibility of compulsory capacity reduction even in the absence of structural excess capacity in the sector.
V zvezi s prestrukturiranjem so te smernice posebej stroge, še posebej glede na MSP, in dajejo možnost, da se zahteva zmanjšanje proizvodnih zmogljivosti, tudi če v sektorju ni strukturnih presežkov.
Since the explanations provided by the Greek authorities in their letter of 9 August 2004 apply equally to the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, the Commission can only conclude, as it has done in the case of the agricultural sector, that none of the information provided by the Greek authorities enables the Commission to establish that the various conditions laid down in the 1994, 1997 and 1999 Guidelines were fulfilled (to cite but one example, there is nothing to suggest that the beneficiary firms submitted a restructuring plan including the necessary compensatory measures).
Ker pojasnila, ki so jih grški organi posredovali z dopisom z dne 9. avgusta 2004, veljajo tako za kmetijski sektor kot tudi za druge sektorje, lahko Komisija samo sklene, kot je to naredila za kmetijski sektor, da nobena od informacij, ki so jih grški organi predložili, ne dokazuje, da so bili izpolnjeni različni pogoji, ki so bili določeni s smernicami iz let 1994, 1997 in 1999 (če naštejemo le en primer, nič ne kaže, da so podjetja, ki so prejemala pomoč, predložila načrt prestrukturiranja, ki vključuje potrebne spodbude).
This finding applies equally to compliance with the provisions set out in the Eighth Report on Competition Policy.
Ta ugotovitev velja tudi za spoštovanje določb iz 8. poročila o politiki konkurence.
In the absence of evidence of compliance with the abovementioned provisions, the Commission is unable to find that the aid was granted following the submission of a restructuring plan which included all the elements required by the various rules referred to above (in particular, the prospect of the restoration of viability on the basis of realistic assumptions within a reasonable time-scale, mitigation of the effects on competitors, due regard for the ‘one time, last time’ principle, capacity reduction and aid in proportion to the restructuring costs and benefit that also covers the social costs of restructuring).
Ker ni dokazov, da se potrdi skladnost z zgoraj navedenimi določbami, Komisija ne more ugotoviti, da je bila pomoč dodeljena na podlagi predložitve načrta prestrukturiranja z vsemi značilnostmi, ki jih opredeljujejo zgoraj omenjeni različni predpisi (zlasti možnost ponovne vzpostavitve uspešnega poslovanja, ki temelji na realističnih predpostavkah in v razumnem roku, ublažitev učinkov pomoči na konkurente, načelo enkratne pomoči, zmanjšanje proizvodnih zmogljivosti, sorazmernost med pomočjo in stroški ter koristmi prestrukturiranja in kritje socialnih stroškov prestrukturiranja).
The doubts that the Commission expressed when it initiated the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty therefore persist and the Commission can only conclude that the scheme in question is incompatible with the common market.
Ker ni mogoče odpraviti dvomov, izraženih na začetku postopka v skladu s členom 108(2) Pogodbe, lahko samo sklene, da je zadevna shema nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
AID TO FIRMS IN THE PREFECTURES OF FLORINA AND KILKIS, ADDRESSED WHEN THE SECOND PROCEDURE WAS OPENED
2 POMOČ PODJETJEM V REGIJAH FLORINA IN KILKIS, NA KATERO SE NANAŠA DRUGI KORAK POSTOPKA
In their letter of 18 August 2005, the Greek authorities argued that the basic Decision governing the granting of aid (Ministerial Decision No 66336/B.1398/1993) concerned industrial and craft enterprises and that none of the provisions thereof concerned agricultural firms.
V dopisu z dne 18. avgusta 2005 so grški organi navedli, da se je ključni sklep, ki ureja dodelitev pomoči (ministrski sklep št. 66336/B.1398/1993), nanašal na industrijska in obrtna podjetja ter da se določbe tega sklepa niso nanašale na nobeno kmetijsko podjetje.
The Commission notes this information and considers it unnecessary, therefore, to examine the scheme in question in the light of the rules applicable to State aid to the agricultural sector at the time the aid was granted.
Komisija je seznanjena s temi pojasnili, zato meni, da ji ni treba analizirati te sheme v luči pravil o državni pomoči, ki se uporabljajo v kmetijskem sektorju v času dodelitve te pomoči.
The Commission, which considered at the time the procedure was initiated that the scheme was aimed at firms in difficulty because Ministerial Decision No 66336/B.1398/1993 stipulated that the firms must be viable after restructuring (which in itself did not exclude the possibility that the firms were in difficulty when admitted to the aid scheme), must analyse the compatibility of the aid in question in the light of the rules on rescue and restructuring aid to firms in difficulty in place at the time the aid was granted.
Komisija, ki je na začetku postopka ocenila, da je bila shema pomoči predvidena za podjetja v težavah, saj je sklep Ministrskega sveta št. 66336/B.1398/1993 določal, da bi morala biti podjetja po prestrukturiranju uspešna (dejstvo, ki ni izključevalo, da so bila v težavah v času sprejetja za pomoč), mora preučiti združljivost zadevnih pomoči s pravili, ki so veljala za pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah na dan dodelitve.
The rules on rescue and restructuring aid to firms in difficulty in place at the time the aid in question was granted were, in chronological order, the provisions set out in points 177, 227 and 228 of the Eighth Report on Competition Policy, the 1994 Guidelines and the 1997 Guidelines.
Pravila, ki so veljala za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah v času dodelitve omenjenih pomoči, so bila v kronološkem vrstnem redu točke 177, 227 in 228 8. poročila o politiki konkurence, smernice iz leta 1994 in smernice iz leta 1997.
Regarding compliance with the provisions of points 177, 227 and 228 of the Eighth Report on Competition Policy and the 1994, 1997 and 1999 Guidelines, the explanations offered by the Greek authorities in their letter of 18 August 2005 are identical to those put forward to justify the granting of aid in the Prefectures of Kastoria and Evia (the arguments of the Greek authorities detailed in recital 57(a) to (f) are the same as those set out in recital 56(a) to (e)).
V zvezi s spoštovanjem točk 177, 227 in 228 8. poročila o politiki konkurence, smernic iz leta 1994, smernic iz leta 1997 in smernic iz leta 1999, so grški organi v svojem dopisu z dne 18. avgusta 2005 predstavili razlage, enake tistim, ki so jih uporabili, da upravičijo dodelitev pomoči regijam Kastoria in Euboia (utemeljitve grških organov iz točk od (a) do (f) uvodne izjave 57 so že navedene v točkah od (a) do (e) uvodne izjave 56).
The Commission’s analysis in recitals 110 to 121 therefore applies equally to the case in question, meaning that the doubts expressed by the Commission when it initiated the procedure provided for in Article 108(2) of the Treaty have not been removed and that the Commission can only conclude that the scheme in question is incompatible with the common market.
Torej tudi tukaj velja analiza Komisije, navedena v uvodnih izjavah od 110 do 121, kar pomeni, da Komisija ne more ovreči dvomov, izraženih na začetku postopka v skladu s členom 108(2) Pogodbe, in da zato sklepa, da je zadevna shema nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
In their letter of 18 August 2005, the Greek authorities also sought to justify the aid in question on the grounds that the Prefectures of Florina and Kilkis border on the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and that the local firms suffered greatly as a result of the instability and the state of war in that region.
V dopisu z dne 18. avgusta 2005 so grški organi prav tako poskušali upravičiti pomoči s tem, da se sklicujejo na dejstvo, da regiji Florina in Kilkis mejita na Nekdanjo jugoslovansko republiko Makedonijo ter da so bila lokalna podjetja hudo prizadeta zaradi nestabilnosti ter vojnih razmer, ki so prevladovale v regiji.
This reference to exceptional occurrences might have permitted the application of Article 107(2)(b) of the Treaty under which aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences is compatible with the internal market.
Zaradi tega sklicevanja na izjemne dogodke bi lahko veljal člen 107(2)(b) Pogodbe, po katerem je pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izjemni dogodki, združljiva z notranjim trgom.
However, the Greek authorities have not supplied any evidence of the difficulties they claim the firms in the two Prefectures experienced or establishing a causal link between those difficulties and the instability in the region caused by events in Yugoslavia.
Vendar grški organi niso predložili nobenih dokazov za težave, ki naj bi jih podjetja imela v teh regijah, kakor tudi ne povezave teh z nestabilnostjo, ki je prevladovala na območju zaradi dogodkov v Jugoslaviji.
Furthermore, the Commission does not have any information which suggests that the events referred to by the Greek authorities could have had the effects described throughout the life-span of the scheme.
Poleg tega Komisija nima nobenih informacij, na podlagi katerih bi se potrdilo, da so dejstva, na katera se sklicujejo grški organi, povzročila posledice v času trajanja sheme.
Finally, the Commission wonders why the scheme applied only to certain sectors of the economy in the two Prefectures whereas the events referred to would logically have affected all local firms, irrespective of sector.
Na koncu se Komisija sprašuje, zakaj se je ta shema uporabljala le za določene sektorje gospodarstva v obeh regijah, glede na to, da bi morala omenjena dejstva vplivati na vsa lokalna podjetja v vseh sektorjih dejavnosti.
In view of these factors, the Commission cannot see how Article 107(2)(b) of the Treaty could be applied to the aid scheme in question.
Glede na te podatke Komisija ne razume, kako bi lahko to shemo pomoči vključila v člen 107(2)(b) Pogodbe.
Therefore, the Commission can only conclude, once again, that the scheme in question is incompatible with the common market.
Zato ponovno sklepa, da je zadevna shema nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
AID IN THE PREFECTURES OF RODOPI, EVROS, XANTHI, LESBOS, SAMOS, CHIOS AND THE DODECANESE, ADDRESSED WHEN THE THIRD PROCEDURE WAS OPENED
3 POMOČI, KI SE NANAŠAJO NA REGIJE RODOPI, EVROS, XANTHI, LESBOS, SAMOS, CHIOS IN DODEKANEZ TER NA KATERE SE NANAŠA TRETJI KORAK POSTOPKA
In view of the fact that the Commission had indicated in the decision to initiate the procedure that, based on the information available, it would be unable to determine whether the two Ministerial Decisions of 1989 and those which followed (detailed in recitals 50 to 52 above) constituted an independent aid scheme or whether they formed an integral part of the overall system which has been analysed in the various procedures opened, and given that the letter of 10 May 2006 from the Greek authorities provided no explanation in this regard, the compatibility with the internal market of the aid provided for in the Ministerial Decisions under scrutiny will be assessed separately.
Ker je Komisija v sklepu o sprožitvi postopka navedla, da na podlagi informacij, ki jih je imela, ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali sta ministrska sklepa iz leta 1989 in tisti, ki so sledili ter so omenjeni v uvodnih izjavah od 50 do 52, predstavljali neodvisno shemo pomoči ali sestavni del celotne sheme, ki je bila obravnavana med različnimi sproženimi postopki, in glede na to, da grški organi z dopisom z dne 10. maja 2006 v zvezi s tem niso ničesar pojasnili, bo združljivost z notranjim trgom pomoči, ki jih predvidevajo ministrski sklepi, obravnavana posebej.
The guarantees provided for in Ministerial Decision No 2/82257/0025 of 18 December 2000 (see recital 49) will also be examined separately since the latter provides that the beneficiary firms must be viable and not viable after restructuring as in the other cases referred to here.
Tudi jamstva, ki jih predvideva sklep Ministrskega sveta št. 2/82257/0025/18.12.2000 (glej uvodno izjavo 49), bodo predmet ločenega pregleda, saj ta sklep določa, da mora biti prejemnik poslovno uspešen in ne uspešen po prestrukturiranju, kot v drugih primerih, o katerih se je poročalo.
With regard to the Ministerial Decisions referred to in recitals 44 to 52, the analysis will consist of two main parts, an agricultural and a non-agricultural one, as in the case of the schemes examined in the first two procedures, but the non-agricultural part will be divided into several sub-parts — the industrial, hotel and craft sectors on the one hand, and the shipping sector on the other.
V zvezi z ministrskimi sklepi, ki so omenjeni v uvodnih izjavah od 44 do 52, bo njihova analiza vključevala dva glavna vidika, in sicer kmetijski ter nekmetijski, kot v primeru shem, obravnavanih v prvih dveh postopkih, vendar bo nekmetijski vidik razdeljen na več delov: industrijski, hotelski in obrtniški vidik na eni strani, vidik ladijskega prometa pa na drugi strani.
The coal sector, which was also addressed by the opening of the procedure provided for in Article 108(2) of the Treaty will not be examined here because the Greek authorities explained in their letters of 15 and 29 March 2011 that the relevant extraction activities concerned marble and stone, which means the firms involved fall within the scope of the analysis of the industrial sector.
Sektor premoga, na katerega se tudi nanaša sprožitev postopka na podlagi člena 108(2) Pogodbe, ne bo več obravnavan v tem dokumentu, saj so grški organi v svojih dopisih z dne 15. in 29. marca 2011 poročali, da so bile v kategoriji izkopavanja rude mišljene dejavnosti v podjetjih marmorja in kamna, kar vključuje zadevna podjetja v analizo za pomoč v industrijskem sektorju.
The Commission must examine the scheme in the light of the rules applicable to State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty when the aid was granted.
Komisija mora analizirati zadevno shemo na podlagi pravil, ki veljajo za državne pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah v času dodelitve pomoči.
With regard to the agricultural sector, the rules in question have been set out in recitals 90, and 98 to 103.
V kmetijskem sektorju so ta pravila že navedena v uvodnih izjavah 90 in od 98 do 103.
Given that the scheme in question expired on 31 December 2005, the 2004 Community Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty [41] (hereinafter: ‘2004 Guidelines’) should be added to the list of applicable regulations; the 2004 Guidelines came into force on 10 October 2004 tightening the conditions established in the 1999 Guidelines (notably by reaffirming that the contribution of the beneficiary to the restructuring must be real and free from aid).
Ker je v tem primeru shema prenehala veljati 31. decembra 2005, je treba dodati na seznam veljavnih predpisov smernice skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah iz leta 2004 [41] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Smernice iz leta 2004), ki so začele veljati 10. oktobra 2004 in zaostrujejo pogoje uporabe smernic iz leta 1999 (ponovno poudarjajo, da mora biti zlasti lastni prispevek upravičenca pri prestrukturiranju resničen in brez podpore).
Moreover, in view of the nature of the beneficiaries (industrial livestock firms and dairy farms), there are grounds for considering that the scheme could have covered both primary production (livestock breeding alone) and processing/marketing (such as farms with a on-site processing line).
Poleg tega je treba glede na naravo upravičencev (živinorejska podjetja v industrijskem sektorju in kmetije za proizvodnjo mleka) smatrati, da je lahko shema pokrivala tako primarna podjetja za proizvodnjo (a le za živinorejske dejavnosti) kakor tudi podjetja za predelavo/trženje (npr. kmetije s predelavo na samem mestu).
In terms of compliance with the conditions themselves, the Commission finds that Ministerial Decision No 1648/B22 of 13 January 1994 and its subsequent amendments provided for the restructuring of loans that could be used for investment or working capital.
Kar zadeva skladnost s pravili, Komisija ugotavlja, da sklep Ministrskega sveta št. 1648/B22/13.1.1994 in njegove spremembe urejajo prestrukturiranje dolgov, ki se nanašajo na naložbe ali obratni kapital.
Regarding the restructuring of loans linked to investments, the Greek authorities, in their letter of 10 May 2006, provided no information allowing the Commission to confirm that the restructured loans were actually linked to investments that had been already carried out. Consequently, the Commission cannot find that the condition set out in recital 90(a) has been satisfied.
V zvezi s prestrukturiranjem dolgov, povezanih z naložbami, grški organi v dopisu z dne 10. maja 2006 niso predložili nobenih informacij, na podlagi katerih bi lahko Komisija ugotovila, da so bili dolgovi, ki so predmet prestrukturiranja, dejansko v povezavi z že realiziranimi naložbami.
Similarly, the Commission is not able to conclude without any doubt, on the basis of the information available, that there has been full compliance with the condition set out in recital 90(b), since Greece provided no details in this connection in its letter of 10 May 2006.
Zato Komisija ne more sklepati, da je pogoj iz točke (a) uvodne izjave 90 izpolnjen.
With regard to the requirement set out in recital 90(c), the Commission finds that the second alternative has been satisfied, since the beneficiary firms had to be viable after restructuring based on an assessment carried out by the banks.
Komisija na osnovi razpoložljivih informacij tudi ne more nedvoumno sklepati, da je bil izpolnjen pogoj iz točke (b) uvodne izjave 90, saj grški organi v dopisu z dne 10. maja 2006 niso predložili nobenih pojasnil v zvezi s tem.