natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission therefore concluded that Hämmerling's individual position in the proceeding and its rights of defence were not affected by the new General Data Protection Regulation.
Komisija je zato sklenila, da nova splošna uredba o varstvu podatkov ni vplivala na individualno stališče družbe Hämmerling v postopku in na njene pravice do obrambe.
Claims regarding the segmentation of the Union market for tyres
Trditve glede segmentacije trga Unije za pnevmatike
Several interested parties reiterated their claim that new and retreaded tyres could not be a single product concerned or be part of one single segment.
Več zainteresiranih strani je znova trdilo, da nove in protektirane pnevmatike niso mogle biti en sam zadevni izdelek ali del enega samega segmenta.
Moreover, several interested parties claimed that the Union market should be divided into at least four tiers: three tiers for new tyres and a fourth, new category for retreaded tyres should be established.
Poleg tega je več zainteresiranih strani trdilo, da bi bilo treba trg Unije razdeliti na vsaj štiri razrede: določiti bi bilo treba tri razrede za nove pnevmatike in četrto, novo kategorijo za protektirane pnevmatike.
Alternatively a new tier for cheap imported tyres should be introduced.
Druga možnost bi bila uvedba novega razreda za poceni uvožene pnevmatike.
The CRIA and the CCCMC also claimed that an additional segmentation should be made for original equipment and replacement tyres.
Združenje CRIA in zbornica CCCMC sta trdila tudi, da bi bilo treba uvesti dodaten segment za pnevmatike, ki so originalna oprema, in nadomestne pnevmatike.
As mentioned in recitals (72) to (74) of the provisional Regulation, new (retreadable or non-retreadable) and retreaded tyres have no different technical, basic physical and chemical characteristics.
Kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah od 72 do 74 začasne uredbe, nove pnevmatike (ki jih je mogoče protektirati ali ne) in protektirane pnevmatike nimajo različnih tehničnih ter osnovnih fizikalnih in kemičnih lastnosti.
After provisional disclosure, no additional evidence was provided by the interested parties to the contrary.
Zainteresirane strani po začasnem razkritju niso predložile dodatnih dokazov o nasprotnem.
Therefore, the Commission rejected the claim of the CRIA and the CCCMC that new and retreaded tyres cannot be the same product concerned.
Komisija je zato zavrnila trditev združenja CRIA in zbornice CCCMC, da nove in protektirane pnevmatike ne morejo biti isti zadevni izdelek.
Concerning the request to establish a fourth tier for retreaded tyres, the Commission stressed that new and retreaded tyres share the same basic characteristics and are largely interchangeable.
Kar zadeva zahtevo glede določitve četrtega razreda za protektirane pnevmatike, je Komisija poudarila, da imajo nove in protektirane pnevmatike enake osnovne lastnosti in so večinoma medsebojno zamenljive.
The Commission thus rejected that claim as well.
Sklicevala se je na poročilo pritožbenega organa STO v zadevi Evropske skupnosti – ukrepi, ki vplivajo na azbest in izdelke, ki vsebujejo azbest, v skladu s katerim je ugotavljanje, ali sta si izdelka podobna, v bistvu ugotavljanje, ali zadevna izdelka medsebojno konkurirata.
The Aeolus Group claimed that the Commission should exclude new tyres from the scope of the investigation.
Skupina Aeolus Group je trdila, da bi morala Komisija pri ugotavljanju, ali se izdelka lahko štejeta za podobna ali ne, upoštevati navedeni pristop.
It referred to the WTO Appellate Body Report in European Communities — Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos, according to which the determination of whether two products are alike is fundamentally a determination as to whether the products are in competition with one another.
Komisija je menila, da med novimi in protektiranimi pnevmatikami obstaja konkurenčno razmerje.
The Aeolus Group claimed that that approach should be taken into consideration by the Commission in determining whether two products may or may not be considered alike.
Kot bo prikazano v nadaljevanju v oddelku 4.6 v analizi medsebojne povezave med razredi, uvožene (nove) pnevmatike tretjega razreda konkurirajo pnevmatikam, protektiranim v Uniji, in trenutno prevzemajo tržni delež protektiranih pnevmatik tretjega razreda.
The Commission considered that there is a competitive relationship between new and retreaded tyres.
To ima obratni kaskadni učinek tudi na pnevmatike prvega in drugega razreda ter je zato vplivalo na konkurenčni položaj proizvajalcev pnevmatik prvega in drugega razreda iz Uniji.
As will be shown below under Section 4.6 in the analysis of the interconnection between tiers, imported (new) tier 3 tyres are in competition with tyres that are retreaded in the Union and are currently taking over the market share of tier 3 retreaded tyres.
Skupina Hankook Group je trdila, da bi morala biti njena blagovna znamka Hankook razvrščena v drugi razred, saj do istega rezultata vodijo vsa tri merila, ki jih je uporabila Komisija: (i) prepoznavnost blagovne znamke; (ii) možnost protektiranja in (iii) prodaja pnevmatik neposredno proizvajalcem avtobusov in tovornjakov, tj. prodaja originalne opreme.
That, in turn, has a reverse cascading effect also on tier 2 and tier 1 tyres, and so affected the competitive position of Union tyre producers in tiers 1 and 2.
V zvezi s prvim merilom, tj. prepoznavnostjo blagovne znamke, je skupina Hankook Group trdila, da je bila blagovna znamka Hankook kot blagovna znamka drugega razreda obravnavana v poročilih združenja ETRMA iz let 2017 in 2018, pa tudi v poročilu Global Tire Intelligence report iz junija 2016 in poročilu komisije Združenih držav za mednarodno trgovino iz marca 2016.
The Hankook Group claimed that its brand Hankook should be classified as tier 2 as all three criteria used by the Commission lead to the same result: (i) brand recognition; (ii) retreadability; and (iii) the sales of tyres directly to manufacturers of buses and lorries, i.e. Original Equipment (‘OE’) sales.
Komisija je priznala, da dojemanje blagovne znamke v teh štirih poročilih kaže na to, da je blagovna znamka drugega razreda.
With respect to the first criterion — brand recognition, the Hankook Group maintained that not only ETRMA (in its reports of 2017 and 2018), but also the Global Tire Intelligence report of June 2016 and the US International Trade Commission in March 2016 treated Hankook as a tier 2 brand.
Hkrati se skupina Hankook Group na spletišču skupine trži kot znamka vrhunske kakovosti.
The Commission accepted that the recognition of Hankook in the four reports pointed to it as a tier 2 brand.
Poleg tega je bilo, kot je že opozorjeno v uvodni izjavi 63 začasne uredbe, iz internega dokumenta družbe, ki je bil Komisiji predložen med preveritvenim obiskom, razvidno, da je znamka prestopila v prvi razred.
At the same time, the Hankook Group markets itself as a ‘premium’ brand on its group website.
Zato je Komisija ugotovila, da se tržno dojemanje in lastno dojemanje skupine Hankook ne ujemata popolnoma.
In addition, as already noted in recital (63) of the provisional Regulation, the company's internal document provided to the Commission during the verification visit indicated that the brand has moved into tier 1.
Skupina Hankook Group je predložila tudi zaupne interne raziskave o pnevmatikah za osebne avtomobile, ki so bile za njeno ekipo za globalno trženjsko strategijo leta 2017 opravljene v Združenem kraljestvu, Nemčiji, Španiji in Italiji.
Hence, the Commission found that the market perception and the self-perception of the Hankook Group do not fully coincide.
Po navedbah družbe je iz teh dokumentov razvidno, da so med strankami v teh državah druge blagovne znamke prvega razreda bolj znane.
The Hankook Group also presented confidential internal surveys done in 2017 for Hankook's Global Marketing Strategy Team in the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy on passenger car tyres.
Komisija je ugotovila, da je mogoče iz teh podatkov povzeti dva glavna sklepa.
According to the company, these documents show that other tier 1 brands have higher brand awareness among customers in these countries.
Prvič, skupina Hankook Group je sama priznala, da je razvrstitev blagovnih znamk v razrede dinamičen koncept za vse blagovne znamke.
The Commission found that two main conclusions could be distilled from these data.
V Združenem kraljestvu je bil na primer eden od njenih konkurentov obravnavan kot blagovna znamka drugega razreda, v Nemčiji, Španiji in Italiji pa se uvršča med „najboljše akterje“ ali „prvi razred“.
First, the Hankook Group itself acknowledged that the classification of brands into tiers is a dynamic concept for all brands.
Drugič, zdi se, da je skupina Hankook Group glede na zaznave strank o osebnih avtomobilih „med“ obema razredoma: „prepoznavnost blagovne znamke“ je bila pri blagovni znamki Hankook na splošno manjša kot pri blagovnih znamkah prvega razreda, „priklic blagovne znamke“ pa je bil – razen v Združenem kraljestvu – na isti ravni ali celo nekoliko večji kot pri blagovnih znamkah drugih konkurentov, ki jih je Komisija opredelila kot blagovne znamke prvega razreda.
For example, in the UK, one of its competitors was regarded as a tier 2 brand, while the same competitor ranks among the ‘top players’ or ‘tier 1’ in Germany, Spain and Italy.
Komisija je nato obravnavala drugo merilo.
Second, the Hankook Group seems to be ‘in between’ the two tiers according to customer perceptions on passenger cars: ‘Aided awareness’ for Hankook was generally lower than for tier 1 brands, while ‘unaided awareness’ was — with the exception of the UK — on the same level or even slightly higher than other competitor brands classified by the Commission as falling into tier 1.
Opozorila je, da so pnevmatike prvega razreda zasnovane tako, da so pnevmatike „z več življenjskimi cikli“, s čimer se dodatno poveča znatno večje število prevoženih kilometrov originalnega izdelka (do treh protektiranj za običajno uporabo), kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 55 začasne uredbe.
The Commission then turned to the second criterion.
V zvezi s tem je skupina Hankook Group navedla, da s pogodbeno garancijo zagotavlja največ eno protektiranje pnevmatik Hankook ter da je tržni delež njene lastne blagovne znamke protektiranih pnevmatik Alphatread zanemarljiv in se zmanjšuje.
It recalled that tier 1 tyres are designed to be ‘multi-life’ tyres, further increasing the significantly higher mileage of the original product (up to three retreadings for a normal use), as laid down in recital (55) of the provisional Regulation.
Poleg tega so cene njenih karkas nižje od cen karkas vodilnih akterjev na trgu.
In that respect, the Hankook Group submitted that it takes a contractual warranty that Hankook tyres can be retreaded no more than once and that the market share of its own retreaded brand Alphatread is negligible and decreasing.
Komisija se je seznanila s položajem blagovne znamke Alphatread na trgu, vendar je ugotovila, da je lahko to dejstvo bolj vprašanje odločitve družbe, ali naj sama izvaja vertikalno integrirano dejavnost protektiranja.
Moreover, the pricing of its casings is below the one for casings of the market leaders.
Komisija se je strinjala tudi s trditvijo, da pravno jamstvo za pnevmatike Hankook zajema le eno protektiranje.
On the one hand, the Commission took note of Alphatread's position in the market, but found that this fact may be more a question of the company's decision whether or not to operate a vertically integrated retreading business itself.
Vendar možnost protektiranja ni odvisna le od protektiranja pnevmatike blagovne znamke Alphatread ali pravnega jamstva, ki ga izda skupina Hankook Group in je po naravi zadržano.
The Commission also accepted that the legal guarantee for Hankook tyres only covers one retreading operation.
Za razvrstitev je namreč pomembneje, kako pogosto se pnevmatike dejansko protektirajo na trgu in tako pri tem konkurirajo drugim pnevmatikam prvega razreda.
On the other hand, the retreadability does not only depend on the retreading of Alphatread or a legal warranty issued by the Hankook Group, which is by its nature conservative.
Komisija se je zato pri izvajalcih protektiranja v Uniji pozanimala, ali se lahko pnevmatike Hankook protektirajo le enkrat, dvakrat ali več kot dvakrat.
Rather, it is more important for the classification how often the tyres are actually retreaded in the market and are thus in competition with other tier 1 tyres on that account.
Združenje izvajalcev protektiranja BIPAVER je Komisijo obvestilo, da je vseh sedem izvajalcev protektiranja, s katerimi se je posvetovalo (trije iz Nemčije, eden iz Portugalske, eden iz Španije, eden iz Italije in eden iz Združenega kraljestva), odgovorilo, da se lahko pnevmatike Hankook protektirajo dvakrat.
The Commission hence inquired with the retreading operators in the Union whether Hankook tyres can be retreaded only once, twice or more than twice.
Poleg tega lahko izvajalci protektiranja iz Portugalske, Španije in Združenega kraljestva, ki so odgovorili združenju BIPAVER, pnevmatike Hankook določene dimenzije protektirajo tudi več kot dvakrat.
The Association of retreaders BIPAVER informed the Commission that all seven consulted retreaders (three from Germany, one from Portugal, one from Spain, one from Italy, and one from the UK) replied that Hankook tyres can be retreaded twice.
Drug izvajalec protektiranja iz Italije je individualno odgovoril, da se pnevmatike družbe Hankook z nizkim presečnim razmerjem protektirajo le enkrat, pnevmatike z večjim presečnim razmerjem pa dvakrat.
Moreover, for tyres of a certain dimension, Hankook tyres can also be retreaded more than twice by the consulted retreaders in Portugal, Spain and in the UK which replied to BIPAVER.
Francoski izvajalec protektiranja je individualno odgovoril, da se pnevmatike Hankook protektirajo dvakrat ali več kot dvakrat.
Another retreader from Italy responded individually that low aspect ratio tyres from Hankook are retreaded only once, but bigger aspect ratios are retreaded twice.
Še en španski izvajalec protektiranja je sporočil, da so karkase družbe Hankook enake kakovosti kot pnevmatike vrhunske kakovosti, kot so Michelin, Continental, Goodyear in Bridgestone.
A French retreader answered individually that Hankook tyres are retreaded twice or more than twice.
Komisija je glede na navedeno ugotovila, da se pnevmatike Hankook v Uniji večinoma protektirajo dvakrat, zaradi kakovosti njihovih karkas pa je pri nekaterih dimenzijah mogoče še dodatno protektiranje.
Another Spanish retreader informed that the casings of Hankook have the same quality as premium tyres such as Michelin, Continental, Goodyear and Bridgestone.
Komisija se s to oceno ni strinjala.
Against this background, the Commission established that Hankook tyres are predominantly retreaded twice in the Union, while the quality of their casings allows even further retreading for certain dimensions.
Opozorila je, da je trend prodaje originalne opreme skupine Hankook Group usmerjen navzgor.
Such a small market share is not sufficient to qualify them into tier 1.
Skupina Hankook Group je na zaslišanju 20. junija 2018 nadalje trdila, da te pnevmatike za prodajo originalne opreme niso bile dobavljene iz LRK, ampak iz Južne Koreje.
The Commission disagreed with this assessment.
Zato kitajskim izvoženim pnevmatikam ni bilo mogoče pripisati, da se prodajajo kot originalna oprema.
While the Hankook Group had no OE sales contracts in 2014, its OE business has so far grown every year until 2017.
Tudi če je ta trditev dejansko pravilna, ne pojasnjuje, zakaj skupina Hankook Group ne bi mogla svojega znanja in izkušenj uporabiti tudi v kitajskih proizvodnih zmogljivostih ter v bližnji prihodnosti pnevmatik, proizvedenih v LRK, prodajati kot originalno opremo.
Moreover, while the 1,6 % appears small in absolute terms, it includes a more significant share of [7-12] % with one of the European leading lorry manufacturers.
Komisija je zato ugotovila, da je skupini Hankook Group uspelo dogovoriti prodajo originalne opreme z znanimi evropskimi proizvajalci tovornjakov in bi lahko v bližnji prihodnosti okrepila to dejavnost.
The Commission found that the very fact that this important lorry producer trusts in the premium quality of the Hankook brand is significant.
Komisija je ob upoštevanju vseh treh meril skupaj potrdila svojo ugotovitev iz začasne faze, da je blagovna znamka Hankook prestopila iz drugega razreda v prvi razred.
At a hearing held on 20 June 2018, the Hankook Group further argued that the tyres for OE sales were delivered from South Korea rather than from the PRC.
Čeprav glede na prevladujočo prepoznavnost na trgu še vedno spada v drugi razred, so dva elementa samoocene skupine Hankook, ugotovljena med preiskavo, in analiza raziskav znamčenja pokazali, da pnevmatike Hankook spadajo v prvi razred.
Hence, the OE sales could not be attributed to the Chinese exported tyres.
Zato dojemanje skupine Hankook Group spada „med“ zadevna razreda.
The Commission did not verify that statement.
Vendar je iz odzivov izvajalcev protektiranja razvidno, da se pnevmatike Hankook v Uniji zdaj protektirajo vsaj dvakrat, kakovost njenih pnevmatik pa ji je omogočila tudi sklenitev prodaje originalne opreme z znanimi evropskimi proizvajalci tovornjakov.
However, even if it is factually correct, it does not explain why the Hankook Group would be unable to apply its know-how also in the Chinese production facilities and have OE sales of the tyres manufactured in the PRC in the near future.
Komisija je zato skupino Hankook Group za namen te preiskave razvrstila kot proizvajalca prvega razreda.
The Commission hence established that the Hankook Group was able to establish OE sales with well-known European lorry makers with a potential to increase this business in the near future.
Skupina Hankook Group je trdila tudi, da bi morala biti njena blagovna znamka Aurora razvrščena v tretji razred.
In light of all three criteria taken into account together, the Commission confirmed its finding at provisional stage that Hankook brand has moved from tier 2 into tier 1.
Ker razlika med znamkama Aurora in Hankook ni tako velika, Komisija pa je potrdila svojo razvrstitev blagovne znamke Hankook kot blagovne znamke prvega razreda, je Komisija ohranila tudi svojo razvrstitev blagovne znamke Aurora v drugi razred.
While the predominant market recognition still puts it into tier 2, two elements of the Hankook Group's self-assessment found during the investigation and an analysis of the branding surveys indicate that Hankook tyres belong rather to tier 1.
Skupina Giti Group je trdila, da bi morala biti njena blagovna znamka Primewell razvrščena v tretji razred.
Hence the Hankook Group's perception is ‘in between’ the tiers.
Komisija je to trditev sprejela, saj je blagovna znamka Primewell izpolnila merila za razvrstitev v tretji razred: je blagovna znamka nižje kakovosti z zelo omejeno možnostjo protektiranja in se ne prodaja kot originalna oprema.
However, the responses from retreaders show that Hankook tyres are nowadays retreaded at least twice in the Union and the quality of its tyres have enabled it to develop OE sales with well-known European lorry makers as well.
Zahtevki za izključitev izdelka
The Commission therefore classified the Hankook Group as a tier 1 producer for the purpose of this investigation.
Več zainteresiranih strani je trdilo, da se zadeve s področja konkurence iz uvodnih izjav od 68 do 83 začasne uredbe in preiskave, ki so jih izvedle tretje države, ne bi smele zavrniti, ter te pomisleke ponovilo po končnem razkritju.
The Hankook Group also asserted that its brand Aurora should be classified as tier 3.
Namesto da je Komisija navedene sklepe zavrnila iz postopkovnih razlogov, bi morala analizirati njihove ugotovitve o vsebini.
However, as the difference between the brands Aurora and Hankook is not so enormous, and as the Commission confirmed its classification for Hankook as a tier 1 brand, it also maintained its classification for Aurora as tier 2.
Navedene strani so znova poudarile, da bi bilo treba upoštevati preiskave, ki so jih izvedli ZDA, Indija, Evrazijska gospodarska komisija in Egipt, ter da je za sedanji postopek pomemben postopek o konkurenci, ki se je začel maja 1996.
The Giti Group claimed that its Primewell brand should be classified as tier 3.
Poleg tega sta združenje CRIA in zbornica CCCMC trdila, da Komisija ne more enostavno odpraviti svojih ugotovitev v zadevi o združitvi, da poceni nove nadomestne pnevmatike niso nadomestki za protektirane pnevmatike.
The Commission accepted that claim since the brand Primewell fulfilled the tier 3 criteria: it is a lower quality brand with a very limited retreadability and there are no OE sales of this brand.
Navedeni strani sta menili, da so navedene ugotovitve zelo pomembne za segmentacijo, ki jo je izvedla Komisija, in splošneje za analizo škode.
Product exclusion requests
Kar zadeva navedene trditve, je Komisije znova poudarila, da se preiskava v zvezi s konkurenco in protidampinška preiskava glede opredelitve ustreznega zadevnega izdelka bistveno razlikujeta.
Several interested parties claimed that the competition cases referred to in recitals (68) to (83) of the provisional Regulation and investigations carried out by third countries should not be dismissed and reiterated the same concerns following final disclosure.
Poleg tega imajo člani na podlagi Protidampinškega sporazuma STO široko diskrecijsko pravico pri opredelitvi zadevnega izdelka in podobnega izdelka.
Rather than dismissing those decisions on procedural grounds, the Commission should have analysed their findings on the substance.
Zato se v zadevni preiskavi neposredno ne uporabljajo niti zadeve s področja konkurence niti druge protidampinške zadeve v tretjih državah.
Those parties reiterated that the investigations carried-out by the US, India, the Eurasian Economic Commission and Egypt should be considered and also that the competition proceeding initiated in May 1996 was relevant for the current proceeding.
V skladu s tem so bile navedene trditve zavrnjene.
Moreover, the CRIA and the CCCMC claimed that the Commission cannot simply dismiss the Commission's findings in a merger case that low-budget new replacement tyres are not substitutes for retreaded tyres.
Več zainteresiranih strani je trdilo, da so med novimi in protektiranimi pnevmatikami razlike glede osnovnih fizikalnih, kemičnih in tehničnih lastnosti, uporabe in prodajnih kanalov, ter podobno trditev ponovilo po končnem razkritju.
Those parties considered that those findings were highly relevant for the Commission's segmentation and more generally, for the injury analysis.
Navedene strani so trdile, da se surovine za proizvodnjo novih pnevmatik precej razlikujejo od tistih, potrebnih za proizvodnjo protektiranih pnevmatik.
With respect to those claims, the Commission reiterated that competition and anti-dumping investigations differ substantially with respect to how the relevant product concerned is defined.
Pnevmatike, ki jih je mogoče protektirati, ali pnevmatike z več življenjskimi cikli bi bilo zato treba izključiti iz opredelitve zadevnega izdelka.
Furthermore, under the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement members enjoy a wide discretion when defining the product concerned and the like product.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 72 začasne uredbe, imajo nove in protektirane pnevmatike enake tehnične lastnosti in sestavne dele ter strukturo nove pnevmatike.
Therefore, neither the competition cases nor other anti-dumping cases in third countries are directly applicable to the investigation at hand.
Industrija protektiranja uporabi karkaso, na katero je bila pritrjena nova pnevmatika.
Accordingly, those claims were rejected.
Tekalna plast je podobna novi pnevmatiki.
Several interested parties claimed that there are differences in terms of essential physical, chemical and technical characteristics, applications and sales channels between new and retreaded tyres and reiterated a similar claim following the final disclosure.
Komisija je zato to trditev zavrnila.