natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
With respect to the compensation for salary the State has financed the relevant costs by means of a capital contribution to Mesta AS in the form of equity.
Glede nadomestila plače je država ustrezne stroške financirala s kapitalskim vložkom v družbo Mesta AS v obliki trajnega kapitala.
As a preliminary point, the Authority observes that the manner in which costs may be funded are irrelevant from the point of view of the application of the State aid rules.
Nadzorni organ najprej ugotavlja, da z vidika uporabe pravil o državni pomoči ni pomembno, kako so stroški financirani.
Hence, the fact that the Norwegian authorities have chosen to finance the costs for compensation of salary in the form of equity does not influence the assessment as to whether the State’s financing of the relevant costs may constitute State aid.
Zato dejstvo, da so se norveški organi odločili financirati stroške za nadomestilo plač v obliki trajnega kapitala, ne vpliva na oceno, ali državno financiranje ustreznih stroškov lahko pomeni državno pomoč.
As may be recalled, the reason that the Norwegian authorities chose to fund it via equity (rather than by grants) was simply to induce the company to spend the funds for alternative instruments for reducing the work force than the compensation for salary arrangement.
Kot se lahko spomnimo, so se norveški organi odločili, da nadomestilo plač financirajo prek trajnega kapitala (in ne s subvencijami) preprosto zato, da bi družbo spodbudili, naj sredstev ne porabi v obliki nadomestila plač, temveč za alternativne instrumente za zmanjševanje števila delavcev.
With respect to the fact that the funds intended for compensation for salary were spent on alternative measures to reduce the work force, namely the termination and pension packages as well as packages for leave of absence, the Authority considers that such measures merely represent acknowledged alternatives to compensation for salary.
Glede na dejstvo, da so bila sredstva, namenjena za nadomestilo plač, porabljena za alternativne ukrepe za zmanjševanje števila delavcev, namreč za prenehanje pogodb, pokojninske pakete in pakete odobrene odsotnosti z dela, Nadzorni organ meni, da taki ukrepi pomenijo le priznane alternative nadomestilu plače.
Indeed, if the State funding earmarked for compensation for salary is used to cover costs of alternative work force reducing measures, intending to achieve the same aim as compensation for salary, it does not alter the assessment of whether the company has received an economic advantage via funding for compensation for salary.
Če se državna sredstva, namenjena nadomestilu plače, porabijo za pokritje stroškov alternativnih ukrepov za zmanjševanje števila delavcev, ki imajo enak cilj kot nadomestilo plače, to dejansko ne spremeni ocene, ali je bila družba deležna gospodarske prednosti s sredstvi za nadomestilo plače.
In this regard it is recalled that the State’s intention of funding compensation for salary by means of equity was simply to bring down overall costs by inducing the company to use cheaper alternative work force reducing instruments.
Glede tega je treba spomniti, da je želela država s financiranjem nadomestila plače prek trajnega kapitala preprosto znižati celotne stroške, tako da je družbo spodbujala k uporabi cenejših alternativnih instrumentov za zmanjšanje števila delavcev.
As to whether State financing of costs incurred for purposes of offering compensation for salary constitutes an economic advantage, the Authority recalls that, as stated above, costs on undertakings arising from labour legislation are costs that form part of the budget of undertakings.
Glede vprašanja, ali državno financiranje stroškov, nastalih zaradi ponujanja nadomestila plače, pomeni gospodarsko prednost, želi Nadzorni organ spomniti, kot je navedeno zgoraj, da so stroški podjetij, ki izhajajo iz delovne zakonodaje, tisti stroški, ki so del proračuna podjetij.
Since the financial obligations arising out of compensation for salary have been legally imposed on Mesta AS by the Mesta Act [166], the costs constitute the ‘normal costs’ of the company.
Ker so bile finančne obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz nadomestila plače, družbi Mesta AS zakonito naložene z zakonom Mesta [166], so ti stroški „običajni stroški“ družbe.
Mesta AS has therefore received an economic advantage in the form of funds to cover the costs related to compensation for salary.
Družba Mesta AS je bila torej deležna gospodarske prednosti v obliki sredstev za pokritje stroškov, ki se nanašajo na nadomestilo plač.
Surplus funding
Presežna finančna sredstva
The Norwegian authorities have required Mesta AS to repay any funding in excess of the amounts spent for purposes of the restructuring costs.
Norveški organi so od družbe Mesta AS zahtevali, naj vrne vsa sredstva, ki so presegla znesek, porabljen za namene stroškov prestrukturiranja.
Hence, any issues raised in the Opening Decision as regards the spending of excess funding is no longer of relevance.
Zato nobeno od vprašanj iz odločbe o sprožitvi postopka glede porabe presežnih finančnih sredstev ni več ključno.
Contribution of assets
Vložek sredstev
Mesta AS qualifies as a public undertaking within the meaning of the Transparency Directive [167].
Družbo Mesta AS je mogoče opredeliti kot javno družbo v smislu Direktive o preglednosti [167].
In determining whether a financial transaction by the owner of a public undertaking involves an economic advantage the Authority applies the ‘market economy investor principle’ which has been confirmed several times by the Court of Justice [168].
Pri ugotavljanju, ali finančna transakcija lastnika javnega podjetja pomeni gospodarsko prednost, Nadzorni organ uporablja „načelo zasebnega vlagatelja v tržno gospodarstvo“, ki ga je Sodišče večkrat potrdilo [168].
According to this principle, if public authorities contribute capital or contribution in kind (e.g. assets) to one of their undertakings on conditions which would be acceptable to a private market investor no economic advantage is involved [169].
V skladu s tem načelom ne gre za gospodarsko prednost, če javni organi v eno od svojih podjetij vložijo kapital ali prispevek v naravi (npr. sredstva) pod pogoji, ki bi bili sprejemljivi za zasebnega vlagatelja v tržno gospodarstvo [169].
Conversely, if money or other assets are contributed to public undertakings on conditions which are unacceptable to a private market investor an economic advantage is involved [170].
Nasprotno pa gre za gospodarsko prednost, če so denar ali druga sredstva vloženi v javno podjetje pod pogoji, ki za zasebnega vlagatelja v tržno gospodarstvo ne bi bili sprejemljivi [170].
This is normally considered to be the case where the structure and future prospects of the company is such that a normal return (by way of dividend payments or capital appreciation) by reference to a comparable private enterprise cannot be expected within a reasonable time [171].
To običajno velja v primeru, ko so struktura in obeti družbe za prihodnost taki, da s sklicevanjem na primerljivo zasebno podjetje ni mogoče pričakovati običajnega donosa (z izplačili dividend ali povečevanjem vrednosti kapitala) v razumnem času [171].
For example, if the rate of return is fixed on the basis of the value of assets, which have been assessed at below market value, the return may not be equivalent to what a private investor would consider acceptable in similar circumstances.
Na primer, če je donosnost določena na podlagi vrednosti sredstev, ki so bila ocenjena pod tržno vrednostjo, donos ne bo enak tistemu, ki bi bil v podobnih okoliščinah sprejemljiv za zasebnega vlagatelja.
It is in the light of these considerations that the Authority has examined the value assessment of assets in the context of establishing Mesta AS.
Ob upoštevanju teh pomislekov je Nadzorni organ proučil vrednost sredstev v okviru ustanovitve družbe Mesta AS.
As a preliminary point, it can be inferred from case law that the Authority’s duty to establish the facts of the case extends to, where relevant, an obligation to examine expert evaluations in order to establish its evidentiary value [172].
Najprej, iz sodne prakse je mogoče sklepati, da naloga Nadzornega organa, ki je ugotoviti dejstva primera, po potrebi obsega obveznost, da prouči strokovne ocene zaradi ugotovitve dokazne vrednosti [172].
It is also clear from such case law that in case of uncertainties the Authority is entitled, but not bound, to engage outside consultants for purposes of establishing the facts of the case [173].
Iz take sodne prakse še jasno izhaja, da je Nadzorni organ v primeru negotovosti upravičen, ne pa tudi zavezan, da za namene ugotavljanja dejstev primera uporabi zunanje svetovalce [173].
Finally, the Court has stated that it is the exclusive competence of the Authority to ensure that Article 61 is observed and not that of the experts [174].
Končno, Sodišče je navedlo, da je zagotovitev spoštovanja člena 61 v izključni pristojnosti Nadzornega organa, ne pa strokovnjakov [174].
In the present case the value of the assets contributed to the establishment of Mesta AS has been the subject of assessments carried out by Ernst & Young and Deloitte & Touche.
V obravnavanem primeru sta vrednost sredstev, vloženih v ustanovitev družbe Mesta AS, ocenili družbi Ernst & Young in Deloitte & Touche.
Based on the auditor reports the Authority found in its Opening Decision that there were uncertainties as regards the assessment of assets and the application of the evaluation methods.
Na podlagi revizijskih poročil je Nadzorni organ v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka ugotovil, da obstajajo negotovosti glede ocene sredstev in uporabe metod vrednotenja.
Following the Opening Decision, the Norwegian authorities have submitted explanations from the auditor, Ernst & Young.
Po odločbi o sprožitvi postopka so norveški organi predložili pojasnila revizorja, družbe Ernst & Young.
In the view of the Authority such explanations have clarified the following uncertainties first identified in the Opening Decision:
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa so bile z njimi pojasnjene naslednje negotovosti, ki so bile najprej ugotovljene v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka.
First, Ernst & Young have clarified that as of October 2002 the principle applied for determining the value of the assets is ‘real value’ and hence the initial evaluations based on book value or simulated book value were no longer relevant.
Prvič, družba Ernst & Young je pojasnila, da je bilo od oktobra 2002 za določitev vrednosti sredstev uporabljeno načelo „realne vrednosti“ in zato začetne ocene na podlagi knjigovodske vrednosti ali simulirane knjigovodske vrednosti niso bile več ustrezne.
Secondly, the identification of the real value of assets was based on a combination of the results of (i) evaluating the total value of the business (i.e., the discounted cash flow method); and (ii) assessing individual assets (or groups thereof) separately.
Drugič, ugotavljanje realne vrednosti sredstev je temeljilo na kombinaciji rezultatov (i) vrednotenja skupne vrednosti podjetja (tj. po metodi diskontiranega denarnega toka) in (ii) ločene ocene posameznih sredstev (ali skupine sredstev).
Thirdly, based on the fact that the total value of the business (resulting from the discounted cash flow) was less than the total value of assets (resulting from evaluating assets individually) and that Norwegian company law stipulates that equity may not exceed the total value of the business, it was necessary to reduce the value of certain assets.
Tretjič, na podlagi dejstva, da je bila skupna vrednost podjetja (ki je izhajala iz diskontiranega denarnega toka) nižja od skupne vrednosti sredstev (ki je izhajala iz individualne ocene sredstev) in da norveška zakonodaja o gospodarskih družbah določa, da trajni kapital ne sme presegati skupne vrednosti podjetja, je bilo treba znižati vrednost nekaterih sredstev.
On this basis the real value of assets was reduced with NOK 79 million divided between (i) real estate (reduced with NOK 54 million from NOK 335 million to NOK 281 million); and (ii) machinery (reduced with NOK 25 million from NOK 572 million to NOK 547 million) [175].
Na podlagi tega je bila realna vrednost sredstev zmanjšana za 79 milijonov NOK, kar je bilo razdeljeno med (i) nepremičnine (zmanjšanje za 54 milijonov NOK, s 335 milijonov NOK na 281 milijonov NOK) in (ii) stroje (zmanjšanje za 25 milijonov NOK, s 572 milijonov NOK na 547 milijonov NOK) [175].
This also means that machinery was not adjusted downwards with NOK 200 million (from NOK 747 million to NOK 547 million) as has been alleged by the complainants.
To tudi pomeni, da vrednost strojev ni bila prilagojena navzdol za 200 milijonov NOK (s 747 milijonov NOK na 547 milijonov NOK), kot so trdili pritožniki.
The NOK 747 million value did not constitute the basis for the downward assessment as it was a value based on the ‘simulated continuity’ principle, no longer applied [176].
Vrednost 747 milijonov NOK ni bila podlaga za oceno zmanjšane vrednosti, saj je temeljila na načelu „simulirane kontinuitete“, ki se ni več uporabljalo [176].
Ernst & Young have confirmed that early calculations made for purposes of explaining any connection between the value based on simulated continuity (of NOK 747 million) and the real value (of NOK 572 million) of machinery are misleading and have not formed part of the process for assessing the real value of assets.
Družba Ernst & Young je potrdila, da so zgodnji izračuni, opravljeni zaradi razlage kakršne koli povezave med vrednostjo, ki temelji na simulirani kontinuiteti (747 milijonov NOK), in realno vrednostjo (572 milijonov NOK) strojev, zavajajoči in niso bili del postopka ocenjevanja realne vrednosti sredstev.
Fourthly, as regards allocating value to the transitional contracts, it has been clarified that while the transitional contracts formed part of the discounted cash flow (and were therefore taken into account when assessing the total value of the business) the value of the contract portfolio was too low to be allocated any value and the contracts were therefore not included in the opening balance [177].
Četrtič, glede dodelitve vrednosti prehodnih pogodb je bilo pojasnjeno, da so prehodne pogodbe sicer bile del diskontiranega denarnega toka (in zato upoštevane pri oceni skupne vrednosti podjetja), vendar je bila vrednost pogodbenega portfelja prenizka, da bi ji dodelili kakršno koli vrednost, in zato pogodbe niso bile vključene v začetno bilanco [177].
As is evident from the process, the Authority has thoroughly examined the material presented in the auditor reports by inquiring and requesting further material and on that basis clarified initial doubts and uncertainties.
Kot je razvidno iz postopka, je Nadzorni organ podrobno proučil gradivo, predloženo v revizijskih poročilih, tako da je poizvedoval in zahteval nadaljnje gradivo ter tako pojasnil začetne dvome in negotovosti.
Since, as appears from above, such doubts and uncertainties have been resolved, and considering that the evaluations have been carried out on the basis of generally accepted valuation methods, the Authority has not found reason to doubt the evidentiary value of the auditor reports in relation to the value assessment of fixed assets set out in the final opening balance of Mesta AS.
Ker so bili taki dvomi in negotovosti pojasnjeni, kot je razvidno iz navedenega, in ob upoštevanju, da so bile ocene opravljene na podlagi splošno sprejetih metod vrednotenja, Nadzorni organ ni našel nobenega razloga, da bi podvomil o dokazni vrednosti revizijskih poročil v zvezi z oceno vrednosti fiksnih sredstev, določeno v končni začetni bilanci družbe Mesta AS.
It has therefore not been deemed necessary to obtain another expert opinion.
Tako naj pridobitev drugega strokovnega mnenja ne bi bila potrebna.
Based on the above the Authority considers that there is no reason to question the value assessment of assets in the final opening balance of Mesta AS.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi navedenega meni, da ni nobenega razloga, da bi dvomili o vrednosti sredstev v končni začetni bilanci družbe Mesta AS.
Transfer of transitional contracts
Prenos prehodnih pogodb
One example of the application of the private market investor principle is that if the State sells land and buildings at market price, State aid is presumed not to be involved since the State has behaved like a private market investor [178].
Eden od primerov uporabe načela zasebnega vlagatelja v tržno gospodarstvo je, da v primeru, če država proda zemljišče in stavbe po tržni ceni, predvidoma ne gre za državno pomoč, saj je država ravnala kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržno gospodarstvo [178].
However, the private market investor principle applies equally when the State is purchasing goods and services [179].
Vendar načelo zasebnega vlagatelja v tržno gospodarstvo enako velja, kadar država kupuje blago in storitve [179].
Thus, if the State enters into a contract for purposes of having services provided by a market operator, no State aid will be involved if the State behaves as a private market investor by paying the market price.
Če tako država sklene pogodbo, po kateri storitve izvaja ponudnik na trgu, ne bo šlo za državno pomoč, če država ravna kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržno gospodarstvo, tako da plača tržno ceno.
Conversely, if the price is higher than the market price the contract may involve an economic advantage for the service provider, corresponding to the difference between the market price for providing similar services and the price at which such services are provided under the contract [180].
Nasprotno, če cena presega tržno ceno, lahko pogodba pomeni gospodarsko prednost za ponudnika storitev, ki ustreza razliki med tržno ceno za izvedbo podobnih storitev in ceno, po kateri se storitve izvajajo v skladu s pogodbo [180].
One way for the State to obtain an indication of the market price is to launch a non-discriminatory public tender.
Eden od načinov, kako lahko država pridobi informacijo o tržni ceni, je izvedba nediskriminatornega javnega razpisa.
Another way is to obtain an expert evaluation.
Drugi način je pridobitev strokovne ocene.
In any event all circumstances of the transaction must be taken into account for purposes of determining whether a market price has been applied.In the present case a number of the service contracts, entered into between the Public Road Administration and the Production Department for purposes of the provision of services by the latter to the former, were transferred from the Production Department to Mesta AS in the sense that Mesta AS replaced the Production Department in its capacity as a service provider.
V vsakem primeru je treba za ugotovitev, ali je bila uporabljena tržna cena, upoštevati vse okoliščine transakcije.V obravnavanem primeru so bile številne pogodbe o storitvah, sklenjene med Upravo za javne ceste in Oddelkom za gradnjo zaradi izvajanja storitev zadnjega za prvo, prenesene z Oddelka za gradnjo na družbo Mesta AS v smislu, da je družba Mesta AS nadomestila Oddelek za gradnjo kot ponudnik storitev.
The Authority must therefore examine whether the prices at which the contracts have been ‘entered into’ between the Public Road Administration and Mesta AS reflect market prices.
Tako mora Nadzorni organ proučiti, ali cene, po katerih so bile „sklenjene“ pogodbe med Upravo za javne ceste in družbo Mesta AS, odsevajo tržne cene.
For the sake of completeness, it should be pointed out that the fact that the Authority has assessed elements relevant for determining whether the State has acted as a private market investor (by contributing the transitional contracts) to its fully owned company, does not exclude the Authority from assessing the presence of aid in other transactions between the State [181] and that company.
Zaradi celovitosti je treba poudariti, da dejstvo, da je Nadzorni organ ocenil elemente, ki so pomembni za ugotovitev, ali je država ravnala kot zasebni vlagatelj v tržno gospodarstvo (tako da je prehodne pogodbe pripisala družbi, ki je v celoti v njeni lasti), Nadzornemu organu ne izključuje možnosti, da presodi obstoj pomoči v drugih transakcijah med državo [181] in navedeno družbo.
On the contrary, such an assessment is even more pertinent where the State is a customer in one of its own companies.
Nasprotno, taka ocena je še primernejša, kadar je država stranka v eni od lastnih družb.
As explained above, when the State is a procurer of services from an undertaking (including one of its 100 % owned undertakings) it must act like a ‘private market investor’ and pay the market price.
Kot je razloženo zgoraj, kadar je država naročnik storitev podjetja (vključno z enim od podjetij, katerih 100-odstotni lastnik je), mora ravnati kot „zasebni vlagatelj v tržno gospodarstvo“ in plačati tržno ceno.
Construction contracts
Pogodbe o gradbenih delih
Following the Opening Decision the Norwegian authorities have clarified the circumstances in which the prices of the existing construction contracts were transferred to Mesta AS.
Po odločbi o sprožitvi postopka so norveški organi pojasnili okoliščine, v katerih so bile cene veljavnih pogodb o gradbenih delih prenesene na družbo Mesta AS.
The contracts were transferred to Mesta AS at the prices originally fixed for the individual contract.
Pogodbe so bile na družbo Mesta AS prenesene po cenah, ki so bile prvotno določene za posamezno pogodbo.
The Authority has taken account of all the information provided, in particular, the internal guidelines of the Public Road Administration on how to price internal contracts.
Nadzorni organ je upošteval vse predložene informacije, predvsem pa notranje smernice Uprave za javne ceste o določanju cen notranjih pogodb.
The guidelines show that the price of the contracts were fixed directly on the basis of market prices (namely the prices resulting from public tenders) or at premises which should ensure that prices ultimately reflect a market price (i.e., estimates adjusted to be in line with market price).
Smernice kažejo, da so bile cene pogodb določene neposredno na podlagi tržnih cen (tj. cen, ki izhajajo iz javnih razpisov) ali na predpostavkah, ki naj bi zagotovile, da cene na koncu odsevajo tržno ceno (tj. ocen, ki so bile prilagojene, da bi bile v skladu s tržno ceno).
Account has also been taken of the fact that it was an overall condition of the Road Administration for entering into agreements with the Production Department that the prices reflect market prices and that for this purpose the Production Department had obtained price experience from public tenders in the construction market – which was a well functioning and developed market.
Upoštevana sta bila tudi splošni pogoj Uprave za ceste pri sklepanju pogodb z Oddelkom za gradnjo, da morajo cene odsevati tržne cene, in to, da je Oddelek za gradnjo v ta namen pridobil izkušnje z javnimi razpisi na gradbenem trgu – ki je dobro deloval in bil dobro razvit.
The Norwegian authorities have further clarified that there were no ex-post adjustment mechanism, nor regulatory requirements which had an affect on the price at which the contracts were transferred.
Norveški organi so še pojasnili, da ni bilo nobenega mehanizma za naknadno prilagoditev niti ureditvenih zahtev, ki bi vplivale na ceno, po kateri so bile prenesene pogodbe.
Considering all circumstances together the Authority is of the opinion that the construction contracts were transferred at market price.
Ob upoštevanju vseh okoliščin skupaj Nadzorni organ meni, da so bile pogodbe o gradbenih delih prenesene po tržni ceni.
The Authority finds that the Road Administration had, through its internal guidelines, put in place a system for pricing contracts that together with its market knowledge to a sufficient degree ensured market prices.
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da je Uprava za ceste z notranjimi smernicami vzpostavila sistem za določanje cen pogodb, ki je skupaj z njenim poznavanjem trga zadovoljivo zagotovil raven tržnih cen.
However, to exclude that the prices fixed in the construction contracts in each and every contract deviated somewhat from market prices, would require an in-depth assessment of all the contracts.
Vendar bi bila za izločitev možnosti, da so se cene, določene v pogodbah o gradbenih delih, v vsaki posamezni pogodbi nekoliko razlikovale od tržnih cen, potrebna poglobljena ocena vseh pogodb.