natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Authority has not been provided with such subsequent risk assessments as the Council prescribed.
Nadzornemu organu ta naknadna ocena tveganja, ki jo je odredil občinski svet, ni bila predložena. Vendar je občina pojasnila, da je cenilec nepremičnine.
The calculations of 2 May 2006, which will be described in more detail below, have been submitted in order to demonstrate that the municipality sold the 29 buildings for a price above its own primary cost.
Izračuna z dne 2. maja 2006, ki bosta podrobneje opisana v nadaljevanju, sta bila predložena v dokaz, da je občina 29 zgradb prodala po ceni, višji od lastnih osnovnih stroškov.
However, it is not clear to the Authority whether these calculations were presented to and considered by the municipality before the contract was finally signed.
Vendar Nadzornemu organu ni jasno, ali je občina ta izračuna prejela in ju obravnavala pred dokončnim podpisom pogodbe.
The municipality has in the correspondence with the Authority indicated that the assessments were taken into account before the sales agreement was formally approved.
V korespondenci z Nadzornim organom je občina navedla, da sta se oceni upoštevali pred uradno odobritvijo prodajne pogodbe.
However, there are no references to such assessments in any of the transcripts or preparatory documents from meetings of the municipal council or the municipal executive committee, which, as mentioned above, was empowered to assess the risk of potential competition concerns.
Vendar v zapisnikih ali pripravljalnih dokumentih s sej občinskega sveta ali izvršnega občinskega odbora, ki je bil, kot je navedeno zgoraj, pooblaščen za oceno tveganja v zvezi z morebitnimi pomisleki glede konkurence, ni nobenih sklicevanj na ti oceni.
In the first of the two sales price assessments of 2 May 2006, it was estimated that the amount that was initially paid by the municipality for acquiring the Inner Camp in 2005, was NOK 12,4 million.
V prvi od dveh ocen prodajnih cen z dne 2. maja 2006 je bilo ocenjeno, da je bil znesek, ki ga je občina prvotno plačala za nakup ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča leta 2005, 12,4 milijona NOK.
The starting point for the assessment was the second Agdestein report, in which the value of the Inner Camp was estimated at NOK 15,5 million, see Paragraph 11 above.
Izhodiščna točka za oceno je bilo drugo Agdesteinovo poročilo, v katerem je bila vrednost ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča ocenjena na 15,5 milijona NOK (glej odstavek 11 zgoraj).
From that amount, NOK 3,1 million was deducted.
Od tega zneska je bilo odštetih 3,1 milijona NOK.
That deduction was for the rebate of approximately 20 % given to the municipality for acquiring the entire Haslemoen Leir as one entity, see Paragraphs 10 and 12 above.
Ta odbitek je bil približno 20-odstotni popust, ki se je občini priznal zaradi nakupa celotnega oporišča Haslemoen Leir kot ene enote (glej odstavka 10 in 12 zgoraj).
Based on this, the assessment concluded that NOK 12,4 million represented an “average” value of the Inner Camp.
Na podlagi tega je bilo v oceni sklenjeno, da je 12,4 milijona NOK „povprečna“ vrednost ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča.
The second assessment dated the same day, 2 May 2006, contains a calculation of the value of the buildings in the Inner Camp, including the 29 buildings subject to the contract with Haslemoen AS.
Druga ocena z istega dne, tj. 2. maja 2006, vsebuje izračun vrednosti zgradb v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, vključno z 29 zgradbami iz pogodbe s podjetjem Haslemoen AS.
The calculation was not based on a value assessment of the buildings as such but the calculation applied instead the primary cost of the Inner Camp at NOK 12,4 million as a starting point, before deducting the estimated value of the buildings in the Inner Camp that were not sold to Haslemoen AS.
Izračun ni temeljil na oceni vrednosti zgradb kot takih, temveč so se pri izračunu kot izhodiščna točka uporabili osnovni stroški ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča v znesku 12,4 milijona NOK, potem pa se je odbila ocenjena vrednost zgradb v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, ki se niso prodale podjetju Haslemoen AS.
Firstly, the calculation estimated that the total value of 5 buildings [16] that remained in Våler Municipality’s ownership was approximately NOK 3,67 million.
Pri izračunu je bilo ocenjeno, da je skupna vrednost 5 zgradb [16], ki so ostale v lasti občine Våler, približno 3,67 milijona NOK.
This value was partly based on the bridge value (or 50 %) of the values established by the first Agdestein Report, see Paragraph 11 above.
Ta vrednost je delno temeljila na premostitveni vrednosti (ali 50 %) vrednosti, določenih v prvem Agdesteinovem poročilu (glej odstavek 11 zgoraj).
For two of the buildings the calculation instead applied more recent and higher individual value assessments.
Za dve od teh zgradb sta se pri izračunu namesto tega uporabili novejši in višji oceni posameznih vrednosti.
This concerned building No 3 (gym building) and No 45 (a combined building with storage rooms, offices and workshop).
To sta bili zgradba št. 3 (telovadnica) in zgradba št. 45 (kombinirana zgradba s skladišči, pisarnami in delavnico).
In the first Agdestein report building No 45 was assessed to have a value of NOK 1,9 million [17].
V prvem Agdesteinovem poročilu je bila vrednost zgradbe št. 45 ocenjena na 1,9 milijona NOK [17].
Thus, the bridge value was NOK 950000.
Premostitvena vrednost je bila torej 950000 NOK.
However, the newer value assessment of building No 45 that the calculation referred to had estimated the value at NOK 3 million.
Vendar je bila v okviru novejše ocene vrednosti zgradbe št. 45, na katero se je izračun skliceval, vrednost ocenjena na 3 milijone NOK.
The 4 other buildings that the municipality kept (Building No 32, 34, 44 and 3) were valued at NOK 662500.
Vrednost ostalih 4 zgradb, ki jih je občina obdržala (zgradbe št. 32, 34, 44 in 3), je bila ocenjena na 662500 NOK.
Thus, the total value of the municipality’s 5 buildings was set at NOK 3662500 (= approximately 3,67 million).
Skupna vrednost 5 občinskih zgradb je bila torej določena na 3662500 NOK (tj. približno 3,67 milijona).
The next deduction in the calculation concerned 11 other buildings at the Inner Camp for which the calculation referred to an offer from Norsk Trafikksenter dated 26 April 2006 of NOK 5 million [18].
Naslednji odbitek v izračunu se je nanašal na 11 drugih zgradb v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, v zvezi s katerimi se je izračun skliceval na ponudbo podjetja Norsk Trafikksenter z dne 26. aprila 2006 za 5 milijonov NOK [18].
By adding the contract price of NOK 4 million for the 29 buildings in the contract with Haslemoen AS, Mr. Bakke estimated a total sales value of the Inner Camp of NOK 12,67 million (3,67 + 5 + 4 = 12,67
Ob upoštevanju pogodbene cene v višini 4 milijonov NOK za 29 zgradb v pogodbi s podjetjem Haslemoen AS je cenilec Bakke skupno prodajno ceno ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča ocenil na 12,67 milijona NOK (3,67 + 5 + 4 = 12,67
The contract between the municipality and Haslemoen AS was signed on 22 May 2006.
Občina in podjetje Haslemoen AS sta pogodbo podpisala 22. maja 2006.
In its opening decision of 24 March 2010 the Authority expressed its doubts as to whether the price of NOK 4 million that Haslemoen AS paid for acquiring the 29 buildings from Våler Municipality represented the market value, and therefore whether the sale was concluded in accordance with the market investor principle.
Nadzorni organ je v sklepu o začetku postopka z dne 24. marca 2010 izrazil svoje dvome v zvezi s tem, ali je cena v višini 4 milijone NOK, ki jo je podjetje Haslemoen AS plačalo za nakup 29 zgradb od občine Våler, predstavljala tržno vrednost in ali je bila torej prodaja izvedena v skladu z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji.
The Norwegian authorities have in response to the opening decision forwarded two letters from Våler Municipality [19].
Norveški organi so v odziv na sklep o začetku postopka poslali dva dopisa občine Våler [19].
Våler Municipality has acknowledged that it did not apply one of the methods in the Authority’s sale of land guidelines to determine market price in order to exclude the presence of state aid but that such is not tantamount to the fact that state aid was involved.
Občina Våler je priznala, da pri določitvi tržne cene ni uporabila ene od metod iz smernic Nadzornega organa za prodajo zemljišč, da bi izključila prisotnost državne pomoči, vendar to še ne pomeni, da je bila državna pomoč prisotna.
The municipality has explained that “when selling the buildings, the municipalities was eager to establish new activity in the camp area. Thus in establishing the price of the buildings, the municipality looked more to the buyers promised plans for establishing jobs than on the principles that were used for establishing the price when buying” [20].
Občina je pojasnila, da „si je pri prodaji zgradb resnično želela, da bi na območju oporišča vzpostavila novo dejavnost. Zato je občina pri določanju cene zgradb bolj upoštevala obljubljene načrte kupca o vzpostavitvi delovnih mest, kot pa načela, ki so se uporabljala za določitev cene pri nakupu“ [20].
The municipality referred moreover to the opening decision in which the Authority explained that to the extent a preceding sales process has determined the market value, a public authority may use its primary cost as an indication of the market value unless a significant period of time has elapsed since the acquisition.
Poleg tega se je občina sklicevala na sklep o začetku postopka, v katerem je Nadzorni organ pojasnil, da lahko javni organ v primeru, ko predhodni prodajni postopek določi tržno vrednost, uporabi osnovne stroške kot kazalnik tržne vrednosti, razen če je od nakupa minilo daljše obdobje.
The municipality noted that the Authority emphasised the uncertainty inherent in the type of land in question, a former military camp in a remote location.
Občina je navedla, da je Nadzorni organ izpostavil negotovost v zvezi z vrsto zadevnega zemljišča, tj. nekdanjim vojaškim oporiščem na oddaljeni lokaciji.
According to the municipality it must be correct to consider the total purchase price of NOK 46 million, based on the bridge value – including rebate – assessment, as the market value for the military camp and that the bridge value of the Inner Camp at NOK 12,4 million was the market value for the 44 buildings located there.
Po navedbah občine je pravilno, da se skupna nakupna cena v višini 46 milijonov NOK, ki temelji na oceni premostitvene vrednosti, vključno z znižanjem, upošteva kot tržna vrednost za vojaško oporišče in da je bila premostitvena vrednost ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča v višini 12,4 milijona NOK tržna vrednost za 44 zgradb, ki se tam nahajajo.
In order to establish the primary cost for the municipality for the 29 buildings in question, the municipality considers that it was correct to deduct the value of the other properties within the Inner Camp which were not subject to the sales agreement.
Občina meni, da je bilo za določitev njenih osnovnih stroškov v zvezi z zadevnimi 29 zgradbami pravilno, da se je odštela vrednost drugih nepremičnin v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, ki ni bila predmet prodajne pogodbe.
Thus, starting with the NOK 12,4 million that the municipality paid for the 44 buildings a year before, and by deducting the value of the properties which are not subject to the sales agreement, it is in the view of the municipality possible to conclude that NOK 4 million was the market price for the 29 buildings in question.
Zato je glede na 12,4 milijona NOK, ki jih je občina predhodno leto plačala za 44 zgradb, in odbitek vrednosti nepremičnin, ki niso predmet prodajne pogodbe, po mnenju občine mogoče skleniti, da so bili 4 milijoni NOK tržna cena za zadevnih 29 zgradb.
In order to support this conclusion the municipality has referred to the calculations of 2 May 2006 by Mr Bakke, described above.
V podporo temu sklepu se je občina sklicevala na zgoraj opisane izračune cenilca Bakka z dne 2. maja 2006.
The municipality has in the correspondence with the Authority noted that the bridge value of the Inner Camp should be set at NOK 12,4 million and that “the value of the properties not covered by the contract represents a value above the value of the entire Inner Camp.” The Authority assumes that the municipality by this statement meant to note that the sales values of all the different buildings in the Inner Camp, as calculated by Mr. Bakke, exceeded the municipality’s alleged primary cost of NOK 12,4 million.
V korespondenci z Nadzornim organom je občina navedla, da bi bilo treba premostitveno vrednost ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča določiti na 12,4 milijona NOK in da „vrednost nepremičnin, ki niso vključene v pogodbo, predstavlja vrednost, ki je večja od vrednosti celotnega ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča.“. Nadzorni organ predvideva, da je hotela občina s to izjavo povedati, da prodajne vrednosti vseh različnih zgradb v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, kot jih je izračunal cenilec Bakke, presegajo domnevne osnovne stroške občine v višini 12,4 milijona NOK.
As regards the value of the other buildings in the Inner Camp that were not sold to Haslemoen AS, the municipality has also submitted a valuation report of 15 March 2006, made by Mr. Erik Alhaug, that concerned mostly the same buildings as Norsk Trafikksenter made a bid for (No 28, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 46, 47, 50 and 94).
Kar zadeva vrednost drugih zgradb v ograjenem notranjem delu oporišča, ki niso bile prodane podjetju Haslemoen AS, je občina predložila tudi poročilo o oceni z dne 15. marca 2006, ki ga je pripravil cenilec Erik Alhaug in ki se je nanašalo večinoma na iste zgradbe, za katere je podjetje Norsk Trafikksenter predložilo ponudbo (št. 28, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 46, 47, 50 in 94).
The report assessed the total value of these 10 buildings at NOK 5,5 million if sold as one unit – and NOK 6,65 million if sold separately.
V poročilu je bila skupna vrednost teh 10 zgradb ocenjena na 5,5 milijona NOK, če bi se prodale kot ena enota, in 6,65 milijona NOK, če bi se prodale ločeno.
Thus, on the basis of these calculations and assessments the municipality has submitted that that the price of NOK 4 million for 29 buildings sold to Haslemoen AS corresponded to the market value.
Občina je tako na podlagi teh izračunov in ocen navedla, da je cena v višini 4 milijone NOK za 29 zgradb, prodanih podjetju Haslemoen AS, ustrezala tržni vrednosti.
The total value of the Inner Camp was therefore: NOK 3,67 million (the value of the buildings the municipality intended to keep) plus NOK 5 million (the offer from Norsk Trafikksenter or alternatively NOK 5,5 million as estimated by the later value assessment) plus NOK 4 million (the price for the 29 buildings to Haslemoen AS) = NOK 12,67 million which exceeds the municipality’s primary cost of NOK 12,4 million.
Skupna vrednost ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča je torej znašala: 3,67 milijona NOK (vrednost zgradb, ki jih je občina nameravala obdržati) plus 5 milijonov NOK (ponudba podjetja Norsk Trafikksenter ali pa 5,5 milijona NOK, kot je bilo ocenjeno v poznejši oceni vrednosti) plus 4 milijone NOK (cena za 29 zgradb, prodanih podjetju Haslemoen AS), kar znaša 12,67 milijona NOK in presega osnovne stroške občine v višini 12,4 milijona NOK.
The municipality also recalls that the sales contract between Våler Municipality and Haslemoen AS contains elements that have a price reducing effect.
Občina tudi opozarja, da prodajna pogodba med občino Våler in podjetjem Haslemoen AS vsebuje elemente, ki znižujejo ceno.
The municipality refers to the obligation imposed on the buyer to rent out the purchased school building for a period of one year for free and that none of the valuations takes into account possible pollution in the ground.
Občina se sklicuje na obveznost, naloženo kupcu, da kupljeno šolsko zgradbo eno leto brezplačno oddaja, in na dejstvo, da nobena ocena ne upošteva morebitne onesnaženosti tal.
Finally, the municipality submits that it was correct to transfer to Haslemoen AS both rebates the municipality was granted when it acquired the military camp from the State.
Nenazadnje občina navaja, da je bilo pravilno na podjetje Haslemoen AS prenesti obe znižanji, ki sta bili občini odobreni, ko je vojaško oporišče kupila od države.
While the municipality in this regard understands the doubt the Authority expressed in its opening decision, it has explained that although only a part of the 44 buildings of the Inner Camp was sold, the sales contract between Våler Municipality and Haslemoen AS is based on the assumption that the buyer would develop and operate the entire Inner Camp as well as the areas outside as one unit together with Våler Municipality.
Medtem ko občina v zvezi s tem razume dvom, ki ga je Nadzorni organ izrazil v sklepu o začetku postopka, je pojasnila, da čeprav je bil prodan le del 44 zgradb ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča, prodajna pogodba med občino Våler in podjetjem Haslemoen AS temelji na predpostavki, da bo kupec skupaj z občino Våler razvijal in upravljal celoten ograjeni notranji del oporišča ter tudi območja zunaj njega kot eno enoto.
The sales price of NOK 4 million to Haslemoen AS reflects this assumption.
Ta predpostavka je izražena v prodajni ceni za podjetje Haslemoen AS, ki znaša 4 milijone NOK.
This is also the reason why the 30 % rebate for the Inner Camp sold as one unit plus an additional 20 % rebate for the entire Haslemoen Leir should be applied when reaching the final price.
To je tudi razlog, zakaj bi bilo treba pri določanju končne cene uporabiti 30-odstotno znižanje za ograjeni notranji del oporišča, ki se proda kot ena enota, ter dodatno 20-odstotno znižanje za celotno oporišče Haslemoen Leir.
The latter rebate cannot be understood as an en bloc rebate that would not be applicable if the buyer did not buy the whole camp.
Slednjega znižanja ni mogoče razumeti kot količinskega znižanja, ki se ne uporabi, če kupec ne kupi celotnega oporišča.
The municipality has stressed that it endeavoured to handle the sale in a manner that would not raise problems with regard to the EEA state aid rules.
Občina poudarja, da si je prizadevala izvesti prodajo na način, ki ne bi povzročil težav v zvezi s pravili o državni pomoči EGP.
In order to constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement the sale must confer an economic advantage on the beneficiary.
Da bi prodaja pomenila državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, mora kupcu zagotoviti ekonomsko prednost.
If the transaction was carried out in accordance with the market economy investor principle, i.e. if the municipality sold the land at its market value and the conditions of the transaction would have been acceptable for a private seller, the transaction would not involve state aid.
Če bi se transakcija izvedla v skladu z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji, tj. če bi občina prodala zemljišče po njegovi tržni vrednosti in bi bili pogoji transakcije sprejemljivi za zasebnega prodajalca, transakcija ne bi vključevala državne pomoči.
The Authority’s guidelines – primary cost
Smernice Nadzornega organa – osnovni stroški
The Authority’s State Aid Guidelines on state aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities, explain how the Authority applies the state aid rules when assessing the sale of public land and buildings.
V smernicah Nadzornega organa o državni pomoči je v zvezi z elementi državne pomoči pri prodaji zemljišč in zgradb s strani javnih organov pojasnjeno, kako Nadzorni organ pri oceni prodaje javnih zemljišč in zgradb uporablja pravila o državni pomoči.
Section 2.1 describes a sale through an unconditional bidding procedure.
V oddelku 2.1 je opisana prodaja z brezpogojnim postopkom zbiranja ponudb.
Section 2.2 describes a sale on the basis of an independent expert evaluation.
V oddelku 2.2 pa je opisana prodaja na podlagi ocene neodvisnega strokovnjaka.
These two procedures allow EFTA States to handle sales of land and buildings in a way that normally precludes state aid.
Ta dva postopka državam Efte omogočata izvedbo prodaje zemljišč in zgradb na način, ki običajno izključuje državno pomoč.
As mentioned above, none of these two procedures were followed when Våler Municipality sold the 29 buildings to Haslemoen AS.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, občina Våler pri prodaji 29 zgradb podjetju Haslemoen AS ni upoštevala nobenega od teh dveh postopkov.
Section 2.2 d) of the Guidelines stipulates that the primary cost to the public authorities of acquiring land or buildings is an indicator for the market value unless a significant period of time has elapsed since the municipality’s purchase.
V oddelku 2.2 d) smernic je določeno, da so osnovni stroški javnih organov v zvezi z nakupom zemljišča ali zgradb kazalnik tržne vrednosti, razen če je od nakupa s strani občine minilo daljše obdobje.
The market value should not be set below the primary cost during the first three years after acquisition.
Tržna vrednost ne bi smela biti nižja od osnovnih stroškov v prvih treh letih od nakupa.
It goes without saying that the primary cost as an indicator for market value for the next three years is only applicable to the extent the land or buildings were acquired at market value in the first place.
Ni treba posebej poudarjati, da se osnovni stroški lahko uporabijo kot kazalnik tržne vrednosti za naslednja tri leta le, če so se zemljišče ali zgradbe prav tako kupili po tržni vrednosti.
Hence, although the 29 buildings in questions were sold to Haslemoen AS less than a year after the municipality acquired Haslemoen Leir from the State, two questions arise.
Tako se kljub temu, da je bilo zadevnih 29 zgradb prodanih podjetju Haslemoen AS manj kot leto za tem, ko je občina oporišče Haslemoen Leir kupila od države, zastavljata dve vprašanji.
First whether the preceding sale of Haslemoen Leir from the Norwegian State to Våler Municipality was carried out on market terms.
Prvo je, ali je bila predhodna prodaja oporišča Haslemoen Leir s strani Norveške države občini Våler izvedena pod tržnimi pogoji.
Second, provided that this was the case, whether Våler Municipality subsequently sold the relevant parts of the Inner Camp to Haslemoen AS for a price corresponding at least to its primary cost.
Če je odgovor na prvo vprašanje pozitiven, pa je drugo vprašanje, ali je občina Våler nato prodala zadevne dele ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča podjetju Haslemoen AS po ceni, ki ustreza vsaj osnovnim stroškom.
Whether the municipality acquired Haslemoen Leir on market terms
Ali je občina oporišče Haslemoen Leir kupila pod tržnimi pogoji
As described above, there was considerable uncertainty about the market value of Haslemoen Leir in the negotiations between the State and Våler Municipality, in particular with regard to the value of the Inner Camp.
Kot je opisano zgoraj, je bila v pogajanjih med državo in občino Våler prisotna precejšnja negotovost glede tržne vrednosti oporišča Haslemoen Leir, zlasti v zvezi z vrednostjo ograjenega notranjega dela oporišča.
The first Agdestein report estimated the investor value of the Inner Camp at NOK 39 million (or NOK 29 million if sold as one unit) and the user value at NOK 44 million, and the assessment by Alhaug/Bakke estimated the investor value of all the buildings there at NOK 0.
V prvem Agdesteinovem poročilu je bila vrednost vlagatelja za notranji del oporišča ocenjena na 39 milijonov NOK (oziroma 29 milijonov NOK, če bi se prodal kot ena enota), vrednost uporabnika pa na 44 milijonov NOK, medtem ko je bila Alhaug/Bakkova ocena vrednosti vlagatelja vseh tamkajšnjih zgradb 0 NOK.
In the view of the Authority, prior value assessments of this type of land, a former military camp with old, but relatively well preserved buildings, both residential housing and other buildings, located in a remote area, will always involve considerable uncertainty.
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa bo v predhodnih ocenah vrednosti te vrste zemljišča, tj. nekdanjega vojaškega oporišča s starimi, vendar razmeroma dobro ohranjenimi zgradbami, ki vključujejo stanovanjske objekte in druge zgradbe, na oddaljenem območju, vedno prisotna precejšnja negotovost.