natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Further, the relevance of the extent of the damage to the environment and expected restoration costs is also, at least implicitly, evident from the wording of the judgment of the Higher Court of Justice of Catalonia of 11 October 2011, which states with respect to the amount of the financial guarantees that: ‘the key and central provision is Article 8(2) of the Law No 12/1981 […] providing that in any case, in relation to the restoration, the amount should be established based on area affected by the restoration, overall costs of the restauration or by both these criteria […] (“el precepto cardinal y central del caso es el artículo 8.2 de Ley 12/1981[…] al disponer que en cualquier caso, en lo referente a la restauración, la cuantía debe fijarse en función de la superficie afectada por la restauración, por el coste global de la restauración o por ambos aspectos conjuntamente […]”)’ and which then concludes that the authorisation is not in conformity with the applicable law since it ‘has not set the guarantees in the present case in conformity with the legal limits […] (“no ha establecido une fianza ajustada al caso en los límites legales […]”)’.
Španski organi trdijo, da so se pri zneskih garancij upoštevala merila na podlagi nacionalnega prava, pri čemer so se upoštevali pričakovani stroški v skladu s takratnim sanacijskim načrtom.
Finally, such expected restoration costs are clearly relevant for the calculation of the guarantee according to Article 43 of the Royal Decree 975/2009 applicable to Iberpotash as of 1 May 2014.
Poleg tega je družba Iberpotash predložila svojo strokovno študijo, da bi dokazala, da je bila garancija zadostna glede na obe merili, navedeni v nacionalni zakonodaji, tj. velikost zadevnega območja in pričakovane stroške sanacije.
In addition, the Commission notes that, apart from general criticism of the alleged imprecise and incorrect assumptions of the ERF Study, neither the Spanish authorities nor Iberpotash identify those alleged imprecisions and incorrect assumptions or provide any specific arguments or propose any own alternative estimation of the total restoration costs for Iberpotash's sites.
Kot pa je bilo pojasnjeno zgoraj, skladnost z merili iz nacionalne zakonodaje očitno ni bila potrjena z odločbo sodišča.
The Spanish authorities argue that the amounts of the guarantees complied with the criteria under the national law by taking into account the expected costs according to the restoration plan existing at the time.
Poleg tega so bili ukrepi, vsebovani v sanacijskem načrtu in upoštevani v študiji, ki jo je predložila družba Iberpotash, omejeni na izgradnjo obodnih kanalov, bazenov za zbiranje slanice ob dežju in podobne ukrepe, namenjene omejevanju onesnaženja, vendar očitno niso privedli do trajne sanacije jalovišč.
In addition, Iberpotash submitted its own expert study with the aim to demonstrate that the guarantee was sufficient with respect to both criteria indicated in the national legislation, i.e. the size of the area affected and the expected costs of restoration.
Študija torej ne vključuje ustreznih sanacijskih ukrepov za izračun pričakovanih stroškov, niti jih količinsko ne opredeljuje.
However, as explained above, the compliance with the criteria under the national law was clearly not confirmed by the court judgment.
Ker so pričakovani dejanski stroški sanacije pomembni za izračun finančne garancije tako na podlagi katalonske zakonodaje (glej uvodno izjavo 75) kot tudi zakonodaje Unije, ugotovitve študije, ki jo je predložila družba Iberpotash, ne morejo biti podlaga za izračun celotnega in pravilnega zneska garancij.
In addition, the measures contained in the restoration plan and taken into account in the study submitted by Iberpotash were limited to building perimetric canals, basins for the rain brine collected and similar measures aimed at limiting pollution, but clearly not leading to a permanent restoration of the waste heaps.
Kot poleg študije ERF kažejo tudi primeri podobnih jalovišč v Franciji ali Nemčiji, taka sanacija običajno vključuje bodisi (a) popolno odstranitev jalovišč (npr. z zasutjem materiala pod zemljo), (b) bodisi postopno razsoljevanje jalovišča s črpanjem vode vanj in zbiranjem dobljene slanice, (c) bodisi s trajnim prekritjem jalovišč.
The study does therefore not include nor quantify proper restoration measures for the calculation of expected costs.
Vendar so ti ustrezni sanacijski ukrepi bistveno dražji od izgradnje obodnih kanalov, bazenov za zbiranje deževnice ob dežju in podobnih ukrepov, ki so namenjeni zgolj omejevanju onesnaženja.
Since the expected actual costs of restoration are relevant for the calculation of the financial guarantee both under the Catalan (see recital 75 above) and under the Union legislation, the conclusions of the study provided by Iberpotash cannot serve as a basis for calculating the full and correct amount of the guarantees.
To dokazujejo tudi stroški prekritja jalovišča Vilafruns, ki so znašali 7,9 milijona EUR (pri čemer niso vključeni letni stroški vzdrževanja).
As shown not only by the ERF Study but also by examples of similar waste heaps in France or Germany, such restoration normally involves either (a) total removal of the heaps (e.g. by backfilling of the material underground), (b) gradual desalinisation of the heaps by pumping water into the heap and collecting the resulting brine, or (c) permanent covering of the heaps.
Glede na to, da je jalovišče Vilafruns s približno 3 milijoni ton slanega materiala majhno v primerjavi z delujočim jaloviščem Cogulló (Balsareny/Salent) z 41 milijoni ton ali jaloviščem Fusteret (Suria) z 22 milijoni ton, bodo skupni stroški sanacije teh delujočih rudnikov in prekritja zadevnih jalovišč verjetno bistveno višji od stroškov za jalovišče Vilafruns.
These proper restoration measures are, however, significantly more expensive than building perimetric canals, basins for the rain brine collected and similar measures aimed solely at limiting pollution.
Poleg tega družba Iberpotash trdi, da se bo količina odpadkov na jaloviščih bistveno zmanjšala zaradi načrta Phoenix, ki ga je napovedala v letu 2011 in je namenjen predelavi odpadkov na jaloviščih za pridobivanje industrijske soli, ki naj bi se prodajala na trgu.
This is also demonstrated by the costs of covering of the Vilafruns dump that amounted to EUR 7,9 million (not including the annual maintenance costs).
Družba Iberpotash namerava v okviru tega projekta zgraditi obrat za vakuumsko pridobivanje soli iz odpadnega materiala, ki ga proizvede pri rudarskih dejavnostih, in to sol prodajati na trgu.
Considering that Vilafruns with around 3 million tonnes of salt material is a small heap compared to the active Cogulló heap (Balsareny/Salent) with 41 million tonnes or Fusteret heap (Suria) with 22 million tonnes, the total costs of restoring these active mines and covering the corresponding waste heaps are likely to be significantly higher than the costs for Vilafruns.
Pričakuje, da bo na začetku letno prodala približno 750000 ton soli, pozneje pa načrtuje to količino povečati na največ 1,5 milijona ton soli na leto.
Further, Iberpotash argues that the amount of the waste on the heaps will be significantly reduced due to its Plan Phoenix announced in 2011 which aims at processing the waste on the heaps in order to produce technical salt to be sold on the market.
Čeprav bi se z načrtom za predelavo in trženje vsaj dela odpadnega materiala načeloma lahko zmanjšala obseg in slanost jalovišč ter tako tudi znižali pričakovani stroški njihove sanacije, je družba Iberpotash ta načrt napovedala šele leta 2011, njegovo izvajanje, ki se je začelo leta 2012, pa se še ni končalo.
As part of this project, Iberpotash plans to build a vacuum salt plant extracting salt from the waste material produced during its potash mining activities and sell this salt on the market.
Zato je jasno, da se načrt Phoenix ne bi smel upoštevati pri določitvi zneska garancij v letih 2006 in 2008, ker je bil takrat še vedno preveč negotov.
It expects to start by selling annually around 750 thousand tonnes of salt and later plans to increase this amount up to 1,5 million tonnes of salt per year.
Sklepna ugotovitev o obstoju selektivne gospodarske prednosti
However, even though the plan to process and commercialise at least part of the waste material could in principle reduce the volume and salinity of the heaps and thus also the expected costs of their restoration, this plan was announced by Iberpotash only in 2011 and its implementation starting as of 2012 is still ongoing.
Komisija glede na navedeno ugotavlja, da zbrani dokazi in predložena strokovna poročila potrjujejo ugotovitev nacionalnega sodišča, da sta bila prvotna zneska finančnih garancij očitno nezadostna za zagotovitev pravilne sanacije.
Therefore, the Plan Phoenix clearly should not have been taken into account for the establishment of the amount of the guarantees in 2006 and 2008, as it was still too uncertain at this point in time.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da sta bili finančni garanciji, ki so ju španski organi določili v letih 2006 in 2008, dejansko nižji od ravni, ki se običajno zahteva v skladu z veljavno nacionalno zakonodajo.
Conclusion on existence of selective economic advantage
Družbi Iberpotash je bila tako dodeljena gospodarska prednost v obliki nižjih bančnih provizij, ki se letno plačujejo za finančno garancijo.
In view of the above, the Commission considers that the collected evidence and submitted expert reports corroborate the finding of the national court that the original amounts of the financial guarantees were clearly insufficient to ensure proper restoration.
Ker so po navedbah družbe Iberpotash njene bančne provizije za garancije znašale 1 % zneska garancij na leto, so se zaradi bistveno nižje skupne ravni garancij ustrezno znižale zadevne bančne provizije, ki jih plačuje družba Iberpotash, tako da so se znižali njeni stroški v primerjavi z drugimi upravljavci, katerih garancije so morale biti v skladu z zakonodajo.
Therefore, the Commission considers that the financial guarantees set by the Spanish authorities in 2006 and 2008 were indeed lower than the level normally required under the applicable national legislation.
Komisija zato meni, da je družba Iberpotash uživala gospodarsko prednost zaradi znižane ravni finančnih garancij.
Therefore, Iberpotash has been granted an economic advantage in the form of lower banking fees paid annually for the financial guarantee.
Trditve španskih organov in družbe Iberpotash, da javni organi družbi Iberpotash zaradi stroge uporabe zadevnih pravil niso dodelili nobene prednosti ali prednostne obravnave, ni mogoče sprejeti, saj je bilo zgoraj dokazano, da je bila zaradi teh odločitev javnih organov raven finančnih garancij nižja, kot se običajno zahteva.
Since according to Iberpotash its bank fees for the guarantees amounted to 1 % of the amount of the guarantees per year, a significantly lower total level of the guarantees decreased the relevant bank fees paid by Iberpotash accordingly and thus reduced its costs as compared to other operators whose guarantees had to comply with the law.
Poleg tega trditev, da je bila katalonska zakonodaja dejansko strožja od podobnih pravil na ravni države ali v drugih španskih pokrajinah, je brezpredmetna, ker so taki stroški odvisni od območja, pravila, ki jih je bilo treba upoštevati v zvezi s finančnimi garancijami, ki jih je morala zagotoviti družba Iberpotash, pa so bila pravila, ki so veljala v Kataloniji, kjer so bila jalovišča.
Therefore, the Commission considers that Iberpotash enjoyed an economic advantage due to the reduced level of the financial guarantees.
Javni organi so družbi Iberpotash dovolili ohraniti nižje finančne garancije, kot so se običajno zahtevale s katalonsko zakonodajo, ki se je zanjo uporabljala, zato je prejela selektivno prednost v obliki nižjih bančnih provizij za nižje garancije v primerjavi z drugimi upravljavci v podobnem položaju.
The arguments of the Spanish authorities and Iberpotash that the public authorities did not provide to Iberpotash any advantage or preferential treatment as a result of a rigorous application of the relevant rules cannot be accepted since it has been established above that these decisions of public authorities led to a level of the financial guarantees which was lower than normally required.
Komisija tako ugotavlja, da je bila z ukrepom 1 družbi Iberpotash dodeljena selektivna gospodarska prednost.
Further, the argument that the Catalan legislation was in fact stricter than similar rules at the State level or in other regions of Spain is not relevant since such costs are site-specific and the rules concerning the financial guarantees to be established by Iberpotash which had to be respected were the ones applicable in Catalonia where the waste heaps were located.
Prenos državnih sredstev
Iberpotash was allowed by the public authorities to maintain lower financial guarantees than was normally required by the Catalan legislation applicable to it and thus received a selective advantage in the form of lower bank fees for the reduced guarantees as compared to other operators in a similar position.
Kar zadeva merilo državnih sredstev, pritožnik trdi, da (lahko) prenizka garancija, ki ne pokriva vseh sanacijskih stroškov, pomeni prenos državnih sredstev.
The Commission thus concludes that Measure 1 provided a selective economic advantage to Iberpotash.
Domnevno naj bi to vključevalo tveganje, da bo morala, če družba Iberpotash ne bo izpolnila svojih obveznosti v zvezi s sanacijo območij svojih rudnikov, te stroške kriti država.
Transfer of State resources
Pritožnik se sklicuje na odločitev Komisije v zadevi Georgsmarienhütte, v kateri je ta ugotovila, da izvzetje proizvajalca jekla iz okoljskih obveznosti, kar zadeva recikliranje in odlaganje industrijskega prahu, pomeni državno pomoč.
As regards the State resources criterion, the Complainant submits that a too low guarantee not covering the full restoration costs presents a (potential) transfer of State resources.
Španski organi in družba Iberpotash trdijo, da bi, tudi če bi bila garancija nižja od zahtevane, za družbo Iberpotash še vedno veljala splošna obveznost, da sanira območja svojih rudnikov, in da bi morala plačati stroške take sanacije.
It would allegedly consist of a risk that in case Iberpotash does not fulfil its obligations regarding the restoration of its sites, the State would have to bear these costs.
Ti stroški nikakor niso omejeni z zneskom finančne garancije.
The complainant refers to the Commission decision in the Georgsmarienhütte case where the Commission considered as State aid an exemption from a steel producer's environmental obligations with regard to the recycling and disposal of industrial dust.
Država torej družbe Iberpotash ne razbremenjuje finančnih obveznosti.
The Spanish authorities and Iberpotash argue that even in case the guarantee would be lower than required, Iberpotash would still have the general obligation to restore its sites and would be obliged to pay the costs of such restoration.
Poleg tega je vsakršno tveganje, da družba Iberpotash v prihodnje ne bo mogla kriti vseh teh stroškov in bo morala država posredovati z državnimi sredstvi, izjemno majhno in glede na trden finančni položaj matične družbe družbe Iberpotash ni verjetno.
These costs are in no way limited by the amount of the financial guarantee.
Španski organi trdijo, da ima družba Iberpotash, če v prihodnje ne bo izpolnila teh obveznosti, v Španiji dovolj premoženja, ki bi ga lahko organi zasegli, da bi se pokrili stroški sanacije.
Therefore, the State does not relieve Iberpotash of its financial obligations.
Komisija opozarja, da se sporne garancije v tej zadevi v okviru pravil o državni pomoči ne preiskujejo v zvezi z zneskom provizije, ki bi se mu izdajatelj garancije (tj. zasebna banka, ne država) morda odpovedal glede na prevzeto tveganje ali izpostavljenost, temveč v zvezi s tveganjem za državo, če je znesek garancije nižji od dejanskih stroškov okoljske škode in če družba, ki je prejela garancijo, ne bo plačala ali ne bo mogla plačati celotnih stroškov sanacije.
Furthermore, any risk that Iberpotash would not in the future be able to cover all these costs and that the State would need to intervene from the State resources, is extremely remote and unlikely in view of Iberpotash's mother company's healthy financial situation.
Kar zadeva precedenčni primer, na katerega je opozoril pritožnik, se je zadeva Georgsmarienhütte bistveno razlikovala, saj je dežela Spodnja Saška nedvomno prevzela odgovornost za odlaganje prahu in je dejansko plačala 64,64 milijona DEM za tako odlaganje.
The Spanish authorities argue that in case Iberpotash in the future does not fulfil these obligations, there are enough Iberpotash assets in Spain that could be seized by the authorities in order to cover the costs of restoration.
V obravnavani zadevi ne gre za to, saj je družba Iberpotash ne glede na znesek garancije še naprej odgovorna za sanacijo območij svojih rudnikov, španski organi pa se še niso zavezali, da bodo namesto nje plačali kakršne koli stroške sanacije.
The Commission notes that the guarantees at issue in this case are not examined under State aid rules as to the amount of fee possibly foregone in light of the risk or exposure incurred by the guarantor (i.e. a private bank, not the State) but as to the risk for the State in case the guaranteed amount is lower than the actual costs of the environmental damage and in case the guaranteed company does not or cannot pay the full restoration costs.
Zadeve Georgsmarienhütte torej ni mogoče uporabiti kot precedenčni primer za obravnavano zadevo.
As regards the precedent case raised by the complainant, the Georgsmarienhütte case was significantly different since the land of Lower Saxony clearly assumed the responsibility for the disposal of the dust and actually paid DEM 64,64 million for such disposal.
Finančna garancija družbe Iberpotash je zagotovljena v obliki bančne garancije, ki državi ni prosto na voljo.
This is not the case here since, irrespective of the amount of the guarantee, Iberpotash remains responsible for the restoration of its mining sites and the Spanish authorities have until now not committed to pay any restoration costs instead of Iberpotash.
Uporabi se lahko le za ukrepe, ki so strogo opredeljeni z zakonom, zlasti za financiranje odstranjevanja odpadkov, sanacijo območja rudnika in druge okoljske ukrepe, če družba Iberpotash ne izpolni svojih okoljskih obveznosti.
The Georgsmarienhütte case thus cannot serve as any precedent for the present case.
Država ne dobi obresti na sredstva garancije niti katere koli druge finančne ugodnosti, ki bi se v primeru nižjega zneska garancije zmanjšala.
The financial guarantee by Iberpotash is provided in the form of a bank guarantee which is not freely available to the State.
Poleg tega država še ni bila v položaju, ko bi morala garancijo uporabiti za katerega od zgoraj navedenih namenov.
It can be used only for measures strictly defined by the law, in particular for financing the removal of waste, restoration of the site and other environmental measures in case Iberpotash does not fulfil its environmental obligations.
Čeprav znižani znesek garancije do zdaj še ni imel dejanskega učinka na državna sredstva, pa to samo po sebi ne izključuje obstoja potencialnega učinka na državna sredstva zaradi povečanega tveganja države, da bo morala v prihodnje porabiti svoja sredstva.
The State does not acquire any interest on the funds of the guarantee or any other financial advantage which would be reduced in case of a lower amount of the guarantee.
Ustvarjanje dejanskega tveganja, da bo državi v prihodnje naloženo dodatno breme, namreč zadostuje za opredelitev državne pomoči v skladu s členom 107(1) Pogodbe.
Further, the State has so far not been in a position where it would need to make any use of the guarantee for any of the above purposes.
Sodišče je tudi odločilo, da za izpolnitev tega merila ni nujno, da sta povezava ukrepa državne pomoči z državnimi sredstvi in njegov učinek nanje neposredna.
However, even if the reduced amount of the guarantee has so far not led to any actual effect on State resources, this fact alone does not exclude the existence of a potential effect on State resources due to increased risk for the State to be obliged to spend its resources in the future.
Take finančne garancije so namenjene prav zagotovitvi, da imajo rudarske družbe prihranjena zadostna sredstva za kritje prihodnjih stroškov sanacije, ne glede na to, v kakšnem finančnem položaju bi se lahko znašle v (pogosto precej oddaljeni) prihodnosti.
Indeed, the creation of a concrete risk of imposing an additional burden on the State in the future is sufficient for the purposes of fulfilling the notion of State aid, pursuant to Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Zato je jasno, da če je znesek garancije bistveno nižji od pričakovanih stroškov sanacije, obstaja vsaj povečano tveganje, da bo to lahko v prihodnje vplivalo na državna sredstva.
The Court of Justice has also held that the link to and effect on State resources of a State aid measure needs not to be direct for this criterion to be met.
Tveganje morebitnih stroškov za javni proračun je nedvomno večje, kot če bi bil znesek garancije pravilno določen v skladu z veljavno zakonodajo ob ustreznem upoštevanju pričakovanih stroškov sanacije.
The very purpose of such financial guarantees is to make sure that the mining companies have sufficient resources kept aside to cover future restoration costs whatever their financial situation in the (often rather distant) future might be.
Če so ta sredstva bistveno nižja od potrebnih, bi bilo treba z državnimi sredstvi nazadnje pokriti večji del teh stroškov, če družba Iberpotash iz katerega koli razloga tega ne bi bila pripravljena ali zmožna storiti.
It is thus evident that in case the amount of the guarantee is significantly lower than expected restoration costs, there is at the least an increased risk that State resources might be affected in the future.
Poleg tega v primeru nezmožnosti družbe Iberpotash, da v prihodnje plača stroške sanacije, domnevna možnost španskih organov, da zasežejo njeno premoženje, verjetno ne bo prinesla veliko dodatnih sredstev, saj sta edino premoženje družbe Iberpotash (in celotne skupine ICL) v Španiji njena rudnika kalijevega oksida.
This risk of potential costs to public budget is clearly higher than in case the guaranteed amount would have been correctly set in line with the applicable legislation, taking due account of the expected restoration costs.
Ko pa bosta rudnika kalijevega oksida zaprta, bo vrednost tega premoženja vprašljiva.
If these resources are significantly lower than necessary, State resources would ultimately have to cover a greater part of these costs in case Iberpotash is for whatever reason not willing or able to do so.
Dejstvo, da bi morala država vskočiti za svoj račun, če družba Iberpotash ne bi bila pripravljena ali zmožna sprejeti potrebnih sanacijskih ukrepov v zvezi s svojimi jalovišči, je dobro uveljavljeno v veljavni zakonodaji.
In addition, in case of Iberpotash's inability to pay the restoration costs in the future, the alleged possibility for the Spanish authorities to seize assets of Iberpotash is unlikely to bring significant additional resources since the only Spanish assets of Iberpotash (and the whole ICL group) are its potash mining facilities.
Prvič, v skladu s členom 102 zakona št. 39/2015 lahko država sprejme ukrepe namesto stranke, ki je pravno odgovorna za sprejetje takih ukrepov.
However, once the potash mines are closed the value of these assets is doubtful.
Španija bi morala (i) družbi Iberpotash ukazati sprejetje izrecno opredeljenih ukrepov; (ii) družbo Iberpotash obvestiti, da bo uprava v nasprotnem primeru take ukrepe sprejela sama in za kakšno ceno; (iii) izvesti take ukrepe in (iv) poskušati izterjati stroške od družbe Iberpotash, kar po definiciji ne bo mogoče, če mora Španija uveljaviti nezadostno finančno garancijo.