natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The additional restructuring measures, together with their financial effect for 2014-2015, are the following: (a) […].
Komisija je med proučevanjem poročila, ki je določil vrednost delnic AAT, opazila, da je bila AAT vrednotena kot del službe za vzdrževanje Adrie (takrat je bilo njeno ime še SVL) ter da so se pri ocenjevanju vrednosti AAT upoštevale sinergije, ki izhajajo iz tega.
Measure 5: the acquisition of Adria Airways Tehnika d.d. in 2010-2011
Vendar je Komisija menila, da bi se morala v poročilu ocenjevati vrednost SLV/AAT kot samostojnega subjekta, pri čemer se ne bi smele upoštevati sinergije znotraj skupine, saj je bila AAT izločena iz Adrie in ustanovljena kot novo podjetje leta 2010 ter prodana kot ločen subjekt.
AAT, a 100 % subsidiary of Adria, was founded in 2010.
Poleg tega je Komisija izrazila pomisleke tudi o precejšni časovni vrzeli med vrednotenjem in prodajo delnic AAT.
Until then it had been Adria's in-house maintenance unit known as SVL.
Komisija je prav tako izrazila pomisleke o združljivosti petih ukrepov, ki se ocenjujejo, z notranjim trgom, zlasti, ker slovenski organi niso navedli nobenih morebitnih razlogov za združljivost.
AAT is active in the aircraft maintenance sector for Adria and other clients.
Ob upoštevanju obravnavanih ukrepov in dejstva, da bi se Adria lahko obravnavala kot podjetje v težavah v času odobritve ukrepov, je Komisija opozorila, da bi se združljivost ukrepov lahko ocenjevala le v skladu s členom 107(3)(c) PDEU in zlasti ob upoštevanju Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah [16] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice za reševanje in prestrukturiranje).
In the period November 2010 to March 2011, PDP and Aerodrom Ljubljana (the majority State-owned manager of Ljubljana's airport) respectively acquired 52,3 % and 47,7 % of AAT from Adria in two stages.
Komisija je najprej menila, da se zdi, da pogoji za reševanje iz oddelka 3.1 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje niso izpolnjeni.
At a first stage, PDP purchased a stake of 18,24 % in AAT in the form of 2676346 preference shares with no voting rights at EUR 1 per share.
V zvezi s pomočjo za prestrukturiranje, kot je opredeljena v oddelku 3.2 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, je Komisija izpostavila, da so bili opredeljeni ukrep izvedeni pred priglasitvijo Komisiji in brez verodostojnega načrta prestrukturiranja, ki bi izpolnjeval pogoje iz smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje, kar pomeni okoliščino, ki bi sama po sebi zadostovala za izključitev združljivosti ukrepov z notranjim trgom [17].
At the same time, Aerodrom Ljubljana acquired a 31,16 % stake in AAT (4570881 shares) through conversion of debt into preference shares with no voting rights for an amount of approximately EUR 4,6 million.
Komisija je tudi izrazila pomisleke o načrtu prestrukturiranja, saj se je zdelo, da ta ni bil dovolj trdna podlaga za ponovno doseganje dolgoročne rentabilnosti Adrie, ker so nekatere napovedi iz načrta temeljile na količinsko neopredeljenih, negotovih ali nejasnih predpostavkah.
At a second stage in early 2011, Adria sold its remaining shares in AAT as follows: PDP acquired 5000000 ordinary shares at EUR 1 per share and increased its stake in the company to 52,33 %, while Aerodrom Ljubljana increased its stake in AAT to 47,67 % by converting EUR 2,2 million of receivables from Adria.
Komisija je prav tako dvomila, da se bi lahko izravnalni ukrepi, ki so predvideni v načrtu o prestrukturiranju, obravnavali za ustrezne in/ali zadostne, saj se je zdelo, da so potrebni za ponovno doseganje rentabilnosti Adrie.
The total price paid was thus EUR 14,7 million, i.e. EUR 1 per share.
V zvezi s prodajo AAT Komisija poudarja, da je prodaja potekala več mesecev pred odobritvijo načrta prestrukturiranja konec leta 2010 in v začetku leta 2011, tj. v času, ko je Adria nujno potrebovala finančna sredstva.
In its opening decision, the Commission's preliminary view was that Adria could be considered a firm in difficulty at the time the measures identified were provided or at the very least since 2008.
PRIPOMBE O SKLEPU O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA
The Commission also expressed doubts as regards the five measures under assessment and came to the preliminary conclusion that all of them entailed State aid.
Pripombe Slovenije
As regards measures 1 and 2, the Commission was in its opening decision of the view that the Slovenian State had had a clear and direct influence on KAD and preliminarily concluded that the participation of KAD to the 2007 and 2009 capital increases consisted of State resources and were imputable to Slovenia.
Slovenija v svojih pripombah o sklepu o začetku postopka Komisije vztraja, da ukrepi 1, 2 in 3 niso vključevali državne pomoči, saj odločitev KAD in PDP ni mogoče pripisati državi.
Although the price of the shares actually paid by KAD was below the value determined by two valuation reports, the Commission expressed doubts on the reports having regard to the significant time gap between the moment when the shares were valued and the moment when the capital injections took place.
Zlasti je Slovenija opozorila, da 100-odstotni lastniški delež države ni dovolj za sprejetje sklepa, da se ukrepi pripišejo državi.
Bearing in mind that KAD was majority shareholder of Adria at the time, the Commission considered that the 2007 and 2009 capital increases were aimed at financing an existing investment for KAD in a company which could be considered to be in difficulty.
Slovenija poleg tega trdi, da so bila poročila o vrednotenju, v katerih je določena vrednost delnic, ustrezna in da je bilo na podlagi tega načelo vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji izpolnjeno, kar izključuje prednost Adrii.
When assessing measure 3, the Commission noted that PDP is the successor of KAD and SOD, whose actions the Commission preliminarily considered were imputable to the State.
Zlasti v zvezi z ukrepom 3 Slovenija trdi, da je bil enakovreden vpis 20 % delnic dveh zasebnih turističnih agencij poleg PDP bistvenega pomena in je pokazal, da trg ni dvomil v rentabilnost Adrie, kar bi izključilo obstoj državne pomoči.
In addition, the Commission highlighted as elements of imputability to the State the fact that the Slovenian State indirectly owns 100 % of PDP (through KAD, SOD and DSU (100 % State-owned company for management of assets)) and referred to some indirect evidence of imputability in the sense of the Stardust Marine case-law [14].
V zvezi z ukrepom 5 je Slovenija ponovno izpostavila, da ukrepov PDP ni mogoče pripisati državi.
Similarly to measures 1 and 2, although the price of the shares actually paid by PDP was below the value determined by a valuation report, the Commission expressed doubts on the report having regard to the significant time gap of 15 months between the moment when the shares were valued and the moment when the capital injection took place.
V zvezi z ukrepi Aerodroma Ljubljana Slovenija meni, da se državi ne more pripisati vpliv na njegovo odločitev, da kupi AAT, samo zaradi dejstva, da so nekatere člane nadzornega sveta predlagale država, KAD in SOD.
The Commission also preliminarily considered that the participation to the 2010 capital injection of two private tourist agencies (Kompas d.d. and Palma d.o.o.) alongside PDP was per se not sufficient to remove the Commission's doubts about a possible advantage for Adria [15].
Slovenija poleg tega meni, da se poročilo o vrednotenju iz aprila 2010, v katerem je bila vrednost AAT kot službe za vzdrževanje Adrie ocenjena med 14,4 milijona EUR in 14,9 milijona EUR, ne more obravnavati za zastarelo in da ni dokaza, da so se v poročilu o vrednotenju upoštevale sinergije z Adrio.
In relation to measure 4, the Commission noted that the investment by Slovenia clearly entailed State resources and reiterated its preliminary conclusion that PDP's actions were imputable to the State.
Poleg tega Slovenija trdi, da zapisnika uprav PDP in Aerodroma Ljubljana kažeta, da je bila odločitev o prevzemu AAT sprejeta na podlagi ekonomsko smotrnih vidikov.
The Commission also expressed doubts about NLB's participation to measure 4, which could be seen as imputable to the State in view of the fact that: (a) NLB was at the time majority-owned by the State; (b) the State had majority of votes in the Management Board and Supervisory Board of the bank; and (c) the behaviour of a State-controlled bank could be influenced by the public authorities.
Zato bi bilo treba obstoj državne pomoči pri ukrepu 5 izključiti.
When assessing whether measure 4 entailed an undue selective advantage to Adria, the Commission noted in the opening decision that the fact that the banks agreed to the debt-to-equity conversion only in the case that the State would inject cash into Adria, and in particular the different nature of the contributions of the State and PDP when compared to that of the banks (cash v conversion of debt), was sufficient to create reasonable doubts about whether the 2011 capital increase was pari passu.
Slovenija prav tako nasprotuje obravnavanju Adrie kot podjetja v težavah in meni, da je bila Adria v težavah šele od januarja 2011, tj. v času ukrepa 4.
The Commission also noted that, contrary to the previous capital increases, the 2011 capital increase took place without a valuation report.
V zvezi z ukrepom 4 Slovenija izključuje tudi možnost obstoja pomoči, saj po njenih trditvah pretvorbe dolga v lastniški delež NLB ni mogoče pripisati državi.
As regards the claim of the Slovenian authorities that they had decided to participate in measure 4 on the basis of the restructuring plan dated September 2011, the Commission observed that the restructuring plan was in principle not sufficient to satisfy the private investor criteria since some of the restructuring plan's predictions appeared to be based on uncertain or unclear assumptions.
Poleg tega Slovenija meni, da so bila neodplačana posojila, pretvorjena v lastniški delež, v celoti zavarovana z zastavo letala in zgradb ter da so banke z njihovo pretvorbo v lastniški delež prevzele novo poslovno tveganje.
The Commission moreover highlighted that a private investor would have considered the risk that the previous capital increases constituted illegal State aid and would have assessed the impact of the risk of a possible recovery order by the Commission on the profitability of the investment.
Glede na to bi bila pretvorba dolga v lastniški delež enakovredna denarni dokapitalizaciji.
Finally, the Commission observed that the banks may have decided to participate in the capital injection because of the interest showed by Slovenia in Adria much before the date when the 2011 capital increase was decided.
Slovenija trdi tudi, da so banke in država vplivale druga na drugo, da bi sprejele odločitev o naložbi, ki je po mnenju Slovenije temeljila na zanesljivem načrtu prestrukturiranja, in da so bile odločitve o naložbi istočasne, kar izključuje kakršno koli neupravičeno prednost Adrii.
In relation to measure 5, the Commission reiterated its preliminary view that the actions of PDP were imputable to the State and that State resources were involved.
Ker Slovenija meni, da ukrepi 1, 2, 3 in 5 niso vsebovali državnih sredstev, ni navedla razlogov za združljivost za te ukrepe.
Regarding Aerodrom Ljubljana, the Commission came to the same preliminary conclusion in view of the fact that it was majority State-owned already at the time of the acquisition of AAT.
Vendar pa je navedla razloge za združljivost za ukrep 4, če bi Komisija ugotovila, da vključuje državno pomoč.
The Commission also considered it unlikely that the public authorities were not involved in important decisions taken by Aerodrom Ljubljana, the manager of Ljubljana's airport, due to the latter's strategic importance for the country as the main gate for international flights.
Ker naj bi bila Adria po navedbah Slovenije v težavah šele od januarja 2011 (glej uvodno izjavo 48), bi ukrep 4 pomenil združljivo pomoč za prestrukturiranje v skladu z oddelkom 3.2 smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje na podlagi predloženega načrta prestrukturiranja.
Given that the first stage of the acquisition of shares of AAT took place immediately after the 2010 capital increase, the Commission was of the view that both measures should not be assessed in isolation but as part of a larger operation aimed at supporting Adria.
V zvezi s ponovnim doseganjem rentabilnosti Slovenija meni, da načrt prestrukturiranja zagotavlja dolgoročno rentabilnost Adrie, in izpostavlja, da v skladu s smernicam za reševanje in prestrukturiranje vključuje raziskavo trga in analizo vzrokov za težave podjetja, ter predvideva opustitev dejavnosti, ki bi strukturno še naprej prinašale izgubo po prestrukturiranju.
When examining the report fixing the value of ATT's shares, the Commission noted that it valued AAT as being part of Adria's maintenance unit (it was at the time SVL) and that it took into account the synergies derived from this when assessing the value of AAT.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 31, je Slovenija predložila številne spremembe k načrtu prestrukturiranja, ki trenutno predvideva, da bo prestrukturiranje potekalo do leta 2015, in vsebuje več dodatnih ukrepov za prestrukturiranje, da se zagotovi bolj trajnostna rentabilnost.
However, the Commission considered that the report should have assessed the value of SLV/AAT as a stand-alone entity discarding intra-group synergies, since AAT was spun-off from Adria in 2010 and sold as a separate entity.
Slovenija izpostavlja tudi, da spremenjen načrt prestrukturiranja zagotavlja dolgoročno rentabilnost družbe do leta 2015 tudi v najbolj pesimističnem scenariju s […]-odstotno donosnostjo lastniškega kapitala (ROE) leta 2014 in […]-odstotno donosnostjo lastniškega kapitala leta 2015, ki je višja od stopenj, ki jih je Komisija sprejela v sklepu o državni pomoči za Air Malta [18].
In addition, the Commission also expressed concerns about the considerable gap between the time of the valuation and the time of the sale of the shares of AAT.
Slovenija meni, da so zmanjšanje zmogljivosti (v obliki ukinitve rednih storitev) za […] % in […] % v zimski in poletni sezoni, prepustitev slotov na nekaterih letališčih, vključno na koordiniranih (prezasedenih) letališčih, in prodaja AAT ustrezni in sorazmerni izravnalni ukrepi.
The Commission also expressed doubts on the compatibility with the internal market of the five measures under assessment, in particular since the Slovenian authorities did not provide any possible grounds for compatibility.
Slovenija trdi tudi, da so bile ukinjene proge dejansko donosne na podlagi tako imenovane „bruto marže“ (pozitivna stopnja kritja C1), ki jo je Komisija sprejela v zadevah Air Malta in České aerolinie [19].
In view of the nature of the measures at issue and of the fact that Adria could be considered a firm in difficulty at the time of the granting of the measures, the Commission noted that the compatibility of the measures could only be assessed under Article 107(3)(c) TFEU, and in particular in the light of the Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty [16] (‘the R&R Guidelines’).
V zvezi z omejenostjo pomoči na najmanjši znesek (lastni prispevek) Slovenija v skladu z že pojasnjenim trdi, da prodaja AAT ni vsebovala pomoči, zato bi bilo treba prihodke od prodaje v višini 14,7 milijona EUR sprejeti kot lastni prispevek.
The Commission first noted that the conditions for rescue aid laid down in Section 3.1 of the R&R Guidelines did not seem to be met.
Če se k temu prišteje še prodaja številnih sredstev […], bi lastni prispevek presegel [50–54] % na podlagi posodobljenega načrta prestrukturiranja.
In relation to restructuring aid as defined in Section 3.2 of the R&R Guidelines, the Commission highlighted that the measures identified had been granted before notification to the Commission and in the absence of a credible restructuring plan satisfying the conditions laid down in the R&R Guidelines, a circumstance that in itself would be sufficient to exclude compatibility of the measures with the internal market [17].
Načelo enkratne pomoči je bilo po mnenju Slovenije upoštevano, saj ukrepi 1, 2, 3 in 5, ki so bili odobreni pred ukrepom 4, niso vsebovali državne pomoči Adrii.
The Commission also expressed doubts on the restructuring plan, since it appeared not to be sufficiently solid to restore the long-term viability of Adria, as some of its predictions are based on non-quantified, uncertain or unclear assumptions.
Pripombe zainteresiranih strani
The Commission also considered doubtful whether the compensatory measures foreseen in the restructuring plan could be considered appropriate and/or sufficient, given that they appeared to be necessary to restore the viability of Adria.
Med formalnim postopkom preiskave je Komisija prejela pripombe le od družbe Ryanair, ki podpira predhodne ugotovitve Komisije, da so ukrepi, ki se ocenjujejo, vsebovali pomoč in da niso združljivi z notranjim trgom.
Regarding the sale of AAT, it took place several months before the restructuring plan was approved, at a time — end of 2010, beginning of 2011 — when Adria apparently was in dire need of financing.
Vendar je družba Ryanair trdila, da ocena načela vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji, ki jo je opravila Komisija, v sklepu o začetku postopka ni bila popolna, saj bi Komisija morala obravnavati vprašanje, ali bi zasebni vlagatelj najprej izbral možnost likvidacije Adrie, namesto da bi ji zagotovil dodatni kapital [21].
Also, the cancellation of scheduled routes did not appear to be acceptable as compensatory measures given that most of these routes (27 out of 31) were reported in the restructuring plan to be loss-making and their termination would in any case be required to ensure viability of the company.
Družba Ryanair trdi, da bi morala Komisija v sklepu o začetku postopka oceniti, ali bi bila likvidacija Adrie za državo donosnejša od zagotovitve dodatnih sredstev.
The Commission also had doubts on whether the proposed own contribution from Adria of EUR […] could be fully accepted, in particular, since it is unclear whether the amounts from the sale of AAT and the debt-to-equity conversion of bank loans could be counted as own contribution.
Čeprav je družba Ryanair menila, da nima dovolj informacij za pripombe o načrtu prestrukturiranja, je izrazila pomisleke, da bo Adria ponovno postala donosna.
Given that Adria seemed to be in difficulty at the time the measures were granted and that firms in difficulty can only receive rescue and/or restructuring aid, the Commission also raised doubts on whether the ‘one time, last time’ principle would be respected, notably as regards the 2011 capital increase.
Družba Ryanair je trdila tudi, da bi vsaka pomoč Adrii škodila njenemu tržnemu položaju, saj spodkopava njena prizadevanja, da razvije svoj trg, in zanjo pomeni izgubo prihodka.
COMMENTS ON THE OPENING DECISION
Pripombe Slovenije o pripombah zainteresirane tretje strani
Comments from Slovenia
Slovenija je podrobno obravnavala trditve, ki jih je v svojih pripombah navedla družba Ryanair.
In its comments on the Commission's opening decision, Slovenia maintains that measures 1, 2 and 3 did not entail State aid because the decisions of KAD and PDP cannot be deemed imputable to the State.
Slovenija je zlasti pojasnila, da pri dokapitalizacijah v korist Adrii ni sodelovala le država, temveč tudi zasebni vlagatelji in subjekti, katerih ukrepi se po navedbah Slovenije ne morejo pripisati državi.
In particular, Slovenia noted that a 100 % shareholding of the State is not sufficient to conclude that the measures are imputable to the State.
Poleg tega Slovenija meni, da družba Ryanair napačno interpretira sodno prakso, ko trdi, da bi se morala Slovenija odločiti za stečaj namesto za prestrukturiranje in dolgoročno rentabilnost Adrie.
Slovenia moreover notes that the valuation reports determining the value of the shares were appropriate and that on that basis the market economy investor principle (‘MEIP’) was met, thereby excluding an advantage to Adria.
Po navedbah Slovenije so bile pripombe družbe Ryanair o načelu vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji napačne, saj bi veljale le za upnike in ne za vlagatelje Adrie: ker Slovenija ni bila upnik družbe, ni mogla zahtevati njene likvidacije.
Concerning in particular measure 3, Slovenia argues that the pari passu subscription of 20 % of the shares by two private tourist agencies alongside PDP was significant and showed that the market did not doubt about Adria's viability, which would exclude the presence of State aid.
Slovenija je trdila, da je Komisija obravnavala predpostavko iz načrta prestrukturiranja Adrie, in poudarila, da so pomisleki družbe Ryanair, ali bo Adria lahko ponovno dosegla rentabilnost, neutemeljeni.
In relation to measure 5, Slovenia reiterates that the actions of PDP cannot be deemed imputable to the State.
Slovenija je trdila tudi, da trditev o domnevni škodi tržnemu položaju družbe Ryanair ni bila utemeljena.
As regards Aerodrom Ljubljana's actions, Slovenia considers that the State influence on its decision to purchase AAT cannot be inferred from the fact that certain members of the Supervisory Board were proposed by the State, KAD and SOD.
OCENA UKREPOV
Slovenia furthermore considers that the valuation report dated April 2010,which had set the value of AAT as Adria's maintenance unit at a range between EUR 14,4 million and EUR 14,9 million, cannot be deemed outdated and that there is no indication that the valuation report took into consideration the synergies with Adria.
V tem sklepu je kot predhodna točka izpostavljeno vprašanje, ali je Adria podjetje v težavah v smislu smernic za reševanje in prestrukturiranje (oddelek 7.1).
In addition, Slovenia claims that the minutes of the boards of both PDP and Aerodrom Ljubljana demonstrate that the decision to acquire ATT was taken on the basis of economically-rational considerations.
Nato je proučeno, ali ukrepi, ki se proučujejo, vsebujejo državno pomoč Adrii v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU (oddelek 7.2), in ali je taka pomoč, če obstaja, zakonita (oddelek 7.4) in združljiva z notranjim trgom (oddelek 7.5 tega dokumenta).
For these reasons, the presence of State aid in measure 5 would be excluded.
Težave Adrie
Slovenia also contests the qualification of Adria as a firm in difficulty and considers that Adria would be in difficulty only as of January 2011, i.e. at the time of measure 4.
Po podatkih slovenskih organov so bili ključni finančni parametri Adrie v obdobju 2007–2011 naslednji:
Concerning measure 4, Slovenia excludes the presence of aid arguing that the debt-to-equity swap of NLB is not imputable to the State.
Preglednica 6
Moreover, Slovenia is of the opinion that the outstanding loans converted into equity were fully collateralised with pledges on aircraft and buildings and that, by converting them into equity, the banks assumed new business risk.
Ključni finančni podatki Adrie v obdobju 2007–junij 2011 (v mio.
In this sense, the debt-to-equity conversion would be equivalent to a cash injection.
EUR)
Slovenia also notes that the banks and the State influenced each other in order to take the investment decision, which — in Slovenia's view — was based on a reliable restructuring plan, and concludes that the investment decisions were concomitant, thereby excluding any undue advantage to Adria.
Junij 2011
Since, according to Slovenia, Adria would be in difficulty only as of January 2011 (see recital 48), measure 4 would constitute compatible restructuring aid under Section 3.2 of the R&R Guidelines on the basis of the submitted restructuring plan.
Osnovni kapital
As regards return to viability, Slovenia considers that the restructuring plan ensures the long-term viability of Adria and highlights that, in accordance with the R&R Guidelines, the restructuring plan includes a market survey and an analysis of the causes that led to the company's difficulties, and that it foresees the abandonment of activities which would remain structurally loss-making after restructuring.
Lastniški kapital
As indicated in recital 31, Slovenia submitted a number of updates to the restructuring plan, which currently foresees duration of the restructuring until 2015 and includes several additional restructuring measures in order to ensure a more sustainable viability.
Razmerje med dolgom in lastniškim kapitalom