natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
By telefax from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 9 December 2002, received and registered by the Authority the same day (Doc. No: 02-8912 A), the Norwegian Government requested that the Authority provide its conclusion in the case regarding the establishment of Entra.
S telefaksom Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo z dne 9. decembra 2002, ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral istega dne (Dok. št.: 02-8912 A), je norveška vlada od Organa zahtevala zagotovitev sklepa v primeru glede ustanovitve podjetja Entra.
By letter dated 17 December 2002 (Doc. No: 02-9062 D) to the Mission of Norway to the European Union, the Authority informed the Norwegian authorities that the Authority might be in a position to close the part of the case as regards deduction in the assessed value on the basis of special termination conditions depending upon the submission of additional specified and detailed documentation concerning this issue.
Z dopisom Misiji Norveške pri Evropski uniji z dne 17. decembra 2002 (Dok. št.: 02-9062 D) je Organ obvestil norveške organe oblasti, da Organ lahko zaključi tisti del primera, ki se nanaša na odbitek od ocenjene vrednosti na podlagi posebnih pogojev odpovedi, če predložijo dodatno natančno in podrobno dokumentacijo v zvezi s tem vprašanjem.
Such detailed documentation was submitted by a telefax from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 23 January 2003, received and registered by the Authority on 23 January 2003 (Doc. No: 03-424 A).
Takšna podrobna dokumentacija je bila predložena s telefaksom Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo z dne 23. januarja 2003, ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral istega dne (Dok. št.: 03-424 A).
By letter to the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 31 January 2003 (Doc. No: 03-588 D), the Authority informed the Norwegian authorities that — since no aid seemed to be involved — it ‘will not raise objections to the value assessment made in the opening balance of the properties transferred from the Norwegian State to Entra Eiendom AS’. However, the Authority stressed that this statement was without prejudice to the issue on document duties and registration fees.
Z dopisom Misiji Norveške pri Evropski uniji z dne 31. januarja 2003 (Dok. št.: 03-588 D) je Organ obvestil norveške organe oblasti, da – ker očitno ni bila vključena nobena pomoč – „ne bo ugovarjal oceni vrednosti iz otvoritvene bilance premoženja, prenesenega z norveške države na podjetje Entra Eiendom AS.“ Vendar je Organ poudaril, da ta izjava ne vpliva na vprašanje taks za listine in pristojbin za registracijo.
By letter dated 2 April 2003 (Doc. No: 03-1827 D), the Authority once more addressed the issue of exemption from registration fees and excise duties and requested the Norwegian authorities to provide additional and clarifying information.
Organ je z dopisom z dne 2. aprila 2003 (Dok. št.: 03-1827 D) še enkrat izpostavil vprašanje izvzetja iz plačila pristojbin za registracijo in trošarin ter od norveške vlade zahteval predložitev dodatnih informacij in pojasnil.
By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Mission dated 5 June 2003, forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 4 June 2003, both received and registered by the Authority on 10 June 2003 (Doc. No: 03-3631 A), additional information was submitted.
Norveški organi oblasti so dodatne informacije predložili z dopisom Misije Norveške pri Evropski uniji z dne 5. junija 2003, ki je posredoval dopis Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo z dne 4. junija 2003; oba dopisa je Organ prejel in evidentiral 10. junija 2003 (Dok. št.: 03-3631 A).
On 16 June 2004, the Authority decided to open the formal investigation procedure (Dec. No: 132/04/COL).
Organ je 16. junija 2004 sprejel odločitev o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave (Dok. št.: 132/04/COL).
The decision to open the formal investigation procedure was published on 23 December 2004.
Odločba o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave je bila objavljena 23. decembra 2004.
By telefax dated 13 August 2004 (Event No: 290206) and letter from the Norwegian Mission to the European Union dated 17 August 2004, received and registered by the Authority on 18 August 2004 (Event No: 290456), the Norwegian authorities requested a one month extension of the deadline for submitting comments.
Norveški organi oblasti so s telefaksom z dne 13. avgusta 2004 (Dogodek št.: 290206) in dopisom Misije Norveške pri Evropski uniji z dne 17. avgusta 2004, ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral 18. avgusta 2004 (Dogodek št.: 290456), zaprosili za enomesečno podaljšanje roka za predložitev pripomb.
By letter dated 17 August 2004 (Event No: 290305), the Authority agreed to extend the deadline by one month.
Organ je z dopisom z dne 17. avgusta 2004 (Dogodek št.: 290305) odobril enomesečno podaljšanje roka.
By telefax dated 16 September 2004 (Event No: 292867) and letter from the Norwegian Mission to the EU dated 20 September 2004, forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 16 September 2004, received and registered by the Authority on 21 September 2004 (Event No: 293392), the Norwegian authorities submitted comments to the opening decision.
Norveški organi oblasti so s telefaksom z dne 16. septembra 2004 (Dogodek št.: 292867) in dopisom Misije Norveške pri EU z dne 20. septembra 2004, ki je posredoval dopis Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo z dne 16. septembra 2004 in ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral 21. septembra 2004 (Dogodek št.: 293392), predložili svoje pripombe na uvodno odločbo.
The Norwegian authorities concluded that the exemption from document duties and registration fees provided for in the establishment of Entra does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Norveški organi oblasti so sklenili, da izvzetje iz plačila taks za listine in pristojbin za registracijo, predvideno v ustanovitvi Entre, ne predstavlja državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The Authority did not receive any comments to the opening decision from other interested parties within the deadline of one month after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Organ ni prejel nobenih pripomb na uvodno odločbo od drugih zainteresiranih strank v roku enega meseca po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
By letter dated 4 May 2005, received and registered by the Authority on 9 May 2005 (Event No: 318691), the law Firm Selmer, representing Entra, submitted comments to the Authority’s decision to open the formal investigation procedure (see point 3.4 below).
Odvetniška pisarna Selmer kot zastopnica podjetja Entra je z dopisom z dne 4. maja 2005, ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral dne 9. maja 2005 (Dogodek št.: 318691), posredovala pripombe na odločbo Organa o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave (glej točko 3.4 spodaj).
The case was discussed at a meeting in Oslo on 19 May 2005 with representatives from different Norwegian Ministries and representatives from the Authority present.
Razprava o primeru je potekala na srečanju v Oslu 19. maja 2005 ob prisotnosti predstavnikov različnih norveških ministrstev in predstavnikov Organa.
By telefax from the Ministry of Modernisation dated 26 July 2005 (Event No: 327938), and letter from the Mission of Norway to the EU dated 1 August 2005, received and registered on 3 August 2005 (Event No: 329110), forwarding a letter dated 30 June 2005 from the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Norwegian authorities submitted further information concerning whether the exemption constituted an economic advantage for Entra.
Norveški organi oblasti so s telefaksom Ministrstva za modernizacijo (Ministry of Modernisation) z dne 26. julija 2005 (Dogodek št.: 327938) in z dopisom Misije Norveške pri EU z dne 1. avgusta 2005, ki ga je Organ prejel in evidentiral 3. avgusta 2005 (Dogodek št.: 329110) in ki je posredoval dopis Ministrstva za trgovino in industrijo (Ministry of Trade and Industry) z dne 30. junija 2005, predložili nadaljnje informacije o tem, ali izvzetje iz plačila predstavlja gospodarsko prednost za podjetje Entra.
The conclusion of the Ministry of Trade and Industry was that the exemption was no advantage for Entra.
Ministrstvo za trgovino in industrijo je sklenilo, da izvzetje iz plačila ne predstavlja prednosti za podjetje Entra.
The establishment of Entra
Ustanovitev podjetja Entra
Proposal to establish a new limited liability company
Predlog za ustanovitev nove družbe z omejeno odgovornostjo
The Norwegian Government presented the reorganisation of the public body, the Directorate of Public Construction and Property (‘Statsbygg’), and the establishment of Entra, on 4 June 1999 [5].
Norveška vlada je 4. junija 1999 predstavila preoblikovanje javne organizacije, Direktorata za javno gradnjo in lastnino („Statsbygg“), in ustanovitev podjetja Entra [5].
On the same date, the Government presented a special Act on the conversion of parts of the real estate activity of Statsbygg to a limited liability company to resolve some transitional questions concerning the transformation and establishment of Entra [6].
Istega dne je vlada predstavila poseben zakon o preusmeritvi dela nepremičninskih dejavnosti organizacije Statsbygg v družbo z omejeno odgovornostjo, da bi tako rešila nekatera prehodna vprašanja glede preoblikovanja in ustanovitve Entre [6].
Paragraph 3 of this Act (hereinafter‘the contested Act’) states that re-registration in the real estate registry and other public registries are to be done as a change of name.
Odstavek 3 tega zakona (v nadaljnjem besedilu „sporni zakon“) določa, da je ponovna registracija v zemljiški knjigi in drugih javnih registrih izvedena kot sprememba imena.
As a consequence of this, Entra was not obliged to pay document duties and registration fees, but still became the title holder in the Real Estate Register.
Zaradi tega podjetju Entra ni bilo treba plačati taks za listine in pristojbin za registracijo, pa je vseeno postalo lastnik v zemljiški knjigi.
Statsbygg is an administrative body (‘Forvaltningsbedrift’), responsible to the Ministry of Modernisation.
Statsbygg je upravni organ („Forvaltningsbedrift“), odgovoren Ministrstvu za modernizacijo (Ministry of Modernisation).
Statsbygg acts on behalf of the Norwegian Government as manager and advisor in construction and property affairs and offers premises to governmental organisations.
Statsbygg v imenu norveške vlade deluje kot upravljavec in svetovalec pri gradbenih in nepremičninskih poslih ter vladnim organizacijam ponuja poslovne prostore.
Statsbygg continued operations and management of the property stock that was not transferred to Entra.
Statsbygg je nadaljeval s poslovanjem in upravljanjem premoženja, ki ni bilo preneseno na podjetje Entra.
Statsbygg currently manages around 2,2 million m2 of floor space, in Norway and abroad.
Statsbygg trenutno upravlja približno 2,2 mio m2 talne površine na Norveškem in v tujini.
The property portfolio consists of office buildings, schools, accommodation and specialised buildings throughout the country, embassies and residences outside Norway.
Premoženjski portfelj sestavljajo poslovne stavbe, šole, bivališča in specializirane stavbe po vsej državi ter ambasade in rezidence zunaj Norveške.
In St.prp. nr. 84 (1998-1999) it is i.a. stated that the purpose of the reorganisation is to clarify the different roles of Statsbygg and to achieve a more efficient use of buildings owned by the State.
V St. prp. nr. 84 (1998–1999) je med drugim navedeno, da je namen preoblikovanja razjasniti različne vloge Statsbygga in doseči bolj učinkovito uporabo stavb v državni lasti.
To ensure better framework conditions for the part of Statsbygg being in competition with other private undertakings, buildings operated in a competitive market (‘konkuranseutsatte bygg’) were to be diverged from the special purpose buildings and become part of a new portfolio of real estate owned by Entra.
Da bi zagotovili boljše okvirne pogoje za tisti del Statsbygga, ki je v konkurenci z drugimi zasebnimi podjetji, naj bi stavbe v uporabi na konkurenčnem trgu („konkuranseutsatte bygg“) ločili od stavb za posebne namene. Tako bi postale del novega nepremičninskega portfelja v lasti podjetja Entra.
The Government indicated that at a later stage, an alternative could be to sell part of the company to private interests.
Vlada je kot kasnejšo možnost navedla prodajo dela podjetja zasebnim interesom.
Entra has the following object clause in its bylaws: ‘The main purpose of the company is to provide state agencies with premises.
Entra ima v svojem statutu naslednjo določbo o predmetu poslovanja: „Glavni namen podjetja je zagotavljanje poslovnih prostorov za državne ustanove.
The company may own, purchase, sell, operate and administer real estate and conduct other businesses in connection with this.
Podjetje lahko poseduje, kupuje, prodaja in upravlja nepremičnine, posluje z njimi ter opravlja druge s tem povezane posle.
The company may also own shares or interests in and participate in other companies that conduct activities such as those mentioned in the previous sentence’ (unofficial translation by the Authority).
Podjetje prav tako lahko poseduje delnice ali deleže in sodeluje v drugih podjetjih, ki opravljajo dejavnosti, podobne omenjenim v prejšnjem stavku“ (neuraden prevod Organa).
Entra’s opening balance
Otvoritvena bilanca podjetja Entra
In the proposal presented to Parliament, the Norwegian Government laid out the basic principles behind the transfer of assets to the new undertaking.
V predlogu, predstavljenem Parlamentu, je norveška vlada pripravila osnovna načela za prenos sredstev na novo podjetje.
No conclusions were drawn with regards to the actual value of the assets to be transferred.
Vlada ni sprejela nobenih sklepov glede dejanske vrednosti sredstev za prenos.
Rather, it is stated that this question was to be dealt with at a later stage, as it is written that: ‘the final opening balance for the company will be presented in the budget for year 2000’ [8].
Pravzaprav je navedla, da bo to vprašanje obravnavano pozneje: „zaključna otvoritvena bilanca podjetja bo predstavljena v proračunu za leto 2000“ [8].
Nor was there established any specific methodology for determining this value.
Prav tako ni določila nobene posebne metodologije za določanje te vrednosti.
In the period from 4 June 1999 and until the final valuation was settled by Royal Decree 22.6.2000, the value of the assets to be transferred was subject to extensive scrutiny.
V obdobju od 4. junija 1999 do končne ocene, določene s kraljevo uredbo z dne 22.6.2000, je bila vrednost sredstev za prenos podvržena obsežni preiskavi.
The aim was to determine the correct transaction value in accordance with the principles from Proposition No 84 (1998-99) for the transfer of the assets.
Cilj je bil določiti pravilno vrednost transakcije v skladu z načeli iz Predloga št. 84 (1998–99) za prenos sredstev.
Several methods and assumptions for arriving at this price were considered.
Obravnavali so več metod in predpostavk, ki so privedle do te cene.
Firstly, Statsbygg requested the independent consultant Catella Eiendom Consult AS (CEC) to perform a valuation of the properties to be transferred.
Statsbygg je najprej zahteval, da vrednost premoženja za prenos oceni neodvisni svetovalec iz podjetja Catella Eiendom Consult AS (CEC).
This valuation was done according to the Norwegian Valuers and Surveyors Association (NTF) framework for valuation, by evaluating each property and then adding up the individual properties to arrive at the total portfolio value.
Ta ocena je bila opravljena v skladu z okvirom za ocenjevanje Norveškega združenja ocenjevalcev in nadzornikov (Norwegian Valuers and Surveyors Association – NTF) tako, da so ovrednotili vsako nepremičnino posebej in nato sešteli posamezne nepremičnine do vrednosti celotnega portfelja.
The result arrived at was NOK 3852110000.
Končni rezultat je bil 3852110000 NOK.
This valuation was later audited by the Norwegian Valuers’ and Surveyors’Association (NTF), who concluded that the value arrived at was acceptable, but cautiously assessed.
Revizijo te ocene je kasneje opravilo Norveško združenje ocenjevalcev in nadzornikov, ki je zaključilo, da je končna vrednost sprejemljiva, ampak previdno ocenjena.
Statsbygg used the discounted cash flows for the total portfolio as a basis for their calculations, instead of considering each property as a separate calculation to be added to the total.
Namesto da bi obravnavali vsako nepremičnino kot ločen izračun, prištet vsoti, so za osnovo svojih izračunov uporabili metodo diskontiranih denarnih tokov za celotni portfelj.
The result arrived at was NOK 3137500000.
Končni rezultat je bil 3137500000 NOK.
Thirdly, the Ministry of Administration also performed a valuation, based on the same principles as Statsbygg, but with different assumptions.
Ministrstvo za javno upravo (Ministry of Administration) je nato prav tako opravilo oceno na osnovi enakih načel kot Statsbygg, vendar z drugačnimi predpostavkami.
The result arrived at was NOK 3337500000.
Končni rezultat je bil 3337500000 NOK.
The band between the highest and lowest valuations at this point was NOK 714610000, or a difference of 22 % relative to the lowest assumed price.
Razpon med najvišjimi in najnižjimi ocenami na tej točki je bil 714610000 NOK ali razlika 22 % glede na najnižjo predpostavljeno ceno.
Without going into further details, it should be mentioned that the methods used differ significantly.
Brez navajanja nadaljnjih podrobnosti je treba omeniti, da se uporabljene metode med seboj občutno razlikujejo.
This observation was also made in an independent audit carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), where the three above values were assessed.
To je ugotovila tudi neodvisna revizija, ki jo je izvedlo podjetje PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), pri kateri so ocenili tri zgoraj omenjene vrednosti.
In their assessment PWC concluded that given the large methodological differences, a detailed comparison between the three assessments would be both a complex task to assemble and, more importantly, of little relevance.
Podjetje PWC je v svoji oceni je zaključilo, da bi bilo bolj podrobno primerjavo med tremi ocenami glede na velike metodološke razlike zapleteno izvesti in, kar je še bolj pomembno, bila bi brez bistvenega pomena.
They concluded that ‘In our view, all the three values are all within a reasonable band’.
Zaključili so, da so „po našem mnenju vse tri vrednosti znotraj razumnega razpona“.
Further, PWC stressed the point that it was impossible to arrive at any specific number that should be regarded as the ‘correct’ value.
Poleg tega je podjetje PWC poudarilo, da je nemogoče priti do številke, ki bi jo lahko upoštevali kot „pravilno“ vrednost.
Rather, this price would be the subject of negotiations between the parties, and might thus fluctuate according to the assumptions made.
Namesto tega bi ta cena lahko postala predmet pogajanj med strankami in bi tako nihala glede na postavljene predpostavke.
Fourthly, the Ministry decided to reassess the value once again.
Ministrstvo se je odločilo za ponovno oceno vrednosti.
After an extensive discussion on whether or not the fact that the government agencies were able to terminate their leases on 12 month’s notice should affect the market value of the properties, the value of the properties was now set to NOK 2837550000.
Po obsežni razpravi o tem, ali naj dejstvo, da so vladne agencije lahko prekinile svoje najemnine z dvanajstmesečnim odpovednim rokom, vpliva na tržno vrednost premoženja ali ne, so vrednost premoženja določili na 2837550000 NOK.
By Royal Decree the value in the final opening balance was set at NOK 3222871000.
S kraljevo odločbo je bila vrednost v zaključni otvoritveni bilanci določena na 3222871000 NOK.
The process is summarised below.
Postopek je povzet spodaj.
As can be seen, the band of values that has been suggested ranges from NOK 3852110000 to NOK 2837550000.
Kot je videti, razpon predlaganih vrednosti sega od 3852110000 NOK do 2837550000 NOK.
This difference of NOK 1014560000, or 35,8 % relative to the lowest price, can be explained both by differences in the methodology applied, and the assumptions made in the different models.
To razliko 1014560000 NOK ali 35 % glede na najnižjo ceno lahko pojasnimo z razlikami v uporabljeni metodologiji, pa tudi s predpostavkami, izdelanimi v različnih modelih.
Valuation by Catella Eiendoms Consult (CEC) [10]
Ocena podjetja Catella Eiendoms Consult (CEC) [10]
Statsbygg’s recommendation
Priporočilo organizacije Statsbygg
Ministry’s valuation
Ocena ministrstva
Ministry’s reassessed value due to termination conditions [11]
Ponovna ocena ministrstva zaradi pogojev odpovedi [11]
Final opening balance [12]
Zaključna otvoritvena bilanca [12]
The final opening balance was based on the discounted cash flow of the total portfolio, as used in Statsbygg’s original recommendation, but based on certain changes in assumptions.
Zaključna otvoritvena bilanca je bila osnovana na metodi diskontiranih denarnih tokov celotnega portfelja, kot jo je Statsbygg uporabil v svojem prvotnem priporočilu, vendar s spremembami v predpostavkah.
Entra was originally founded as a ‘minimum’ company based on cash contributions.
Podjetje Entra je bilo prvotno ustanovljeno kot „minimalno“ podjetje na osnovi denarnih prispevkov.
Subsequently, property, capital and personnel (assets and liabilities) were transferred from the State to Entra in exchange for the issue of shares, with effect from 1 July 2000.
Premoženje, kapital in osebje (sredstva in obveznosti) so bili naknadno preneseni z države na podjetje Entra v zameno za izdane delnice z veljavnostjo od 1. julija 2000.
Ownership and title of the properties in question were transferred from the Norwegian State to Entra and registered in Entra’s name.
Lastništvo in pravice za zadevno premoženje so bili preneseni z norveške države na podjetje Entra in registrirani v imenu Entre.
On the basis of the Act establishing Entra, no document duties and registration fees were paid.
Takse za listine in pristojbine za registracijo niso bile plačane na osnovi zakona o ustanovitvi podjetja Entra.
The company is a limited liability company 100 per cent owned by the Norwegian State.
Podjetje je družba z omejeno odgovornostjo v 100-odstotni lasti norveške države.
The company (group [13]) had an operating income of NOK 1072 million (some EUR 128 million [14]) in 2004, and a profit before tax of NOK 134 million (some EUR 16 million).
Prihodek poslovanja podjetja (skupine [13]) je v letu 2004 znašal 1072 milijona NOK (približno 128 milijonov EUR [14]), dobiček pred davkom pa 134 milijonov NOK (približno 16 milijonov EUR).
The group’s consolidated equity (book value) as of 31.12.2004 was NOK 1288 million (some EUR 154 million).
Uskupinjeni kapital skupine (knjigovodska vrednost) z dne 31.12.2004 je znašal 1288 milijonov NOK (približno 154 milijonov EUR).
At year-end, the group’s property portfolio (book value) was NOK 8768 million (some EUR 1047 million).
Ob koncu leta je premoženjski portfelj (knjigovodska vrednost) skupine znašal 8768 milijonov NOK (približno 1047 milijonov EUR).
As of 31.12.2004, Entra had 133 employees.
V podjetju Entra je bilo z dnem 31.12.2004 zaposlenih 133 ljudi.
The total property portfolio consists of some 110 properties, amounting to approximately 900000 m2 [15].
Skupno premoženje sestavlja okrog 110 nepremičnin, kar znaša približno 900000 m2 [15].
According to the Norwegian authorities, simulated accumulated document duty is estimated to NOK 80571775, and accrued registration fee is estimated to an amount of NOK 147300 (150 properties * NOK 982), in total NOK 80719075 (some EUR 9,87 million) [16].3.
Norveški organi oblasti ocenjujejo simulirano kumulativo taks za listine na 80571775 NOK, vnaprej izračunane pristojbine za registracijo pa na 147300 NOK (150 nepremičnin * 982 NOK), kar skupaj znaša 80719075 NOK (približno 9,87 milijonov EUR) [16].3.
The Norwegian Government’s assessment of whether the exemption of document duties and registration fees is in compliance with the state aid provisions of the EEA Agreement
Ocena norveške vlade o tem, ali je izvzetje iz plačila taks za listine in pristojbin za registracijo v skladu z določbami sporazuma EGP glede državne pomoči