natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The increase is a combination of an increase in the percentage of letting to 95 % (defined as fully let), an increase to the market rate in 2005 for time-limited contracts, an increase in mean average level rents in 2006, and market rents in 2011 for non time-limited contracts.
Rast je kombinacija povečanja odstotka oddaje v najem na 95 % (opredeljeno kot v celoti oddano), povišanja najemnin na tržno raven v letu 2005 za pogodbe za določen čas, povišanja povprečnih najemnin v letu 2006 in povišanje tržnih najemnin v letu 2011 za pogodbe za nedoločen čas.
Allowance has been made for some non-lets in connection with refurbishment of the dwellings.
Za nekatera neoddana stanovanja je bil obračunan odbitek v zvezi z obnovo stanovanj.
Deductions for liens and contractual limitations are related to paragraph 8 — the ‘as-is’ clause — in the contract between the Municipality of Oslo and Fredensborg.
Odbitki za pravice do zadržanja in pogodbene omejitve se navezujejo na odstavek 8 – klavzulo „videno, kupljeno“ – pogodbe med občino Oslo in Fredensborgom.
Holm considered that this represented a risk to the buyer.
Po Holmovi oceni je to pomenilo tveganje za kupca.
This applies, in particular, in connection with information that is found in the municipal system concerning the properties, but has not come to the knowledge of the buyer, such as rent contracts, rent revenues and area specifications, and not least the technical condition of the buildings.
To se predvsem nanaša na informacije, ki jih najdemo v občinskem sistemu v zvezi z nepremičninami, vendar kupec z njimi ni seznanjen, kot so na primer najemne pogodbe, prihodki od najemnin ter specifikacije površin in ne nazadnje tehnično stanje objektov.
Holm found it reasonable to assume that the ‘as-is’ clause has a certain financial influence.
Po Holmovem mnenju je bilo smotrno predpostavljati, da ima klavzula „videno, kupljeno“ določen finančni vpliv.
Seen in relationship to the size of the portfolio, Holm stipulated the worth deduction in this connection at NOK 30 Million, i.e. in the region of 4 % of the estimated value of the portfolio.
Glede na velikost portfelja je Holm v zvezi s tem določil odbitek vrednosti za 30 milijonov NOK, tj. na območju 4 % ocenjene vrednosti portfelja.
Deductions for initial refurbishment costs during the period 2001-2005 were costs for work necessary to undertake to be able to let out the dwellings at market rents.
Odbitki za začetne stroške obnove v obdobju 2001–2005 so bili stroški za delo, ki ga je bilo treba opraviti, da je bilo stanovanja mogoče oddajati po tržnih najemninah.
The costs arose in the years 2001-2005 and were discounted to 2001 values.
Stroški so nastali v obdobju 2001–2005 in so bili diskontirani na vrednosti iz leta 2001.
Holm has also conducted a ‘sensitivity analysis’ to see how different assumptions would influence the price.
Holm je opravil tudi „občutljivostno analizo“, da oceni, kako bi lahko različne predpostavke vplivale na ceno.
The analysis i.a. shows that if the estimated price per m2 of flats to be sold in ten years time after acquisition was NOK 24000 and not NOK 26000 as assumed for the purpose of calculating the value, this ‘adjustment’ alone would result in a portfolio worth 720 million instead of 753 million.
Analiza med drugim kaže, da če je predvidena cena za kvadratni meter stanovanj, ki se bodo prodala v obdobju desetih let po nakupu, znašala 24000 NOK in ne 26000 NOK, kot je bilo predpostavljeno pri izračunavanju vrednosti, bi samo zaradi te „prilagoditve“ vrednost portfelja znašala 720 milijonov namesto 753 milijonov.
A further downrating of for example 2 % of the rent revenues, would result in a worth under that of the achieved sales price.
Nadaljnje znižanje za recimo 2 % prihodkov od najemnin bi privedlo do vrednosti, ki bi bila nižja od vrednosti dosežene prodajne cene.
Holm's conclusion is therefore that the achieved sales price of NOK 715 Million is so close to his evaluation of worth that in the light of the margins of uncertainty it can be said to represent the ‘correct price’i.e. the market price.
Holm torej ugotavlja, da je dosežena prodajna cena 715 milijonov NOK tako blizu njegovi oceni vrednosti, da bi se glede na določeno stopnjo nejasnosti lahko reklo, da predstavlja „pravilno ceno“, tj. tržno ceno.
Holm has also studied the sales process and how the way it was conducted influenced the sales price.
Holm je prav tako preučil prodajni proces in kako je način njegove izvedbe vplival na prodajno ceno.
Holm i.a. considered that the Authority's guidelines had not been strictly adhered to, and it is in particular the short implementation period and the limited initial market exposure that is in question.
Holm je med drugim ocenil, da smernice Nadzornega organa niso bile strogo upoštevane ter da sta sporna predvsem kratek čas izvajanja in omejena začetna ponudba na trgu.
However, Holm concluded i.a. that: ‘All things considered, we are of the opinion that the seller has had a sufficient number of interested parties on the playing field to achieve genuine bidding and a “correct and fair” price.
Vendar je Holm med drugim ugotovil, da „smo konec koncev mnenja, da ima prodajalec zadostno število zainteresiranih strank, da doseže pravo ponudbo ter ‚pravilno in pošteno‘ ceno.
There are however no absolute truths in this matter.
Vendar v tej zadevi ni absolutnih resnic.
A sale executed two months prior to or after the fact could have produced a totally different result.
Prodaja, izvedena dva meseca prej ali pozneje bi lahko pripeljala do popolnoma drugačnega rezultata.
The individual buyer's interest in and will to acquire the object is the final decider where price is concerned, but motivation can, as is well known, vary.
Interes in volja posameznega kupca do nakupa objekta je končni odločilni dejavnik, ki je povezan s ceno, toda motivacija se lahko, kot je dobro znano, spreminja.
It must be said that a higher price could in all likelihood been achieved by selling the properties as individual units.
Treba je povedati, da bi se lahko višja cena najverjetneje dosegla, če bi prodajali nepremičnine kot posamezne enote.
In this scenario, the seller would have been forced to pace the release of the properties in accordance with what the market could absorb of residential blocks, and would thus have had a totally different horizon regarding revenues.
V tem primeru bi bil prodajalec prisiljen sprostiti nepremičnine v skladu s tem, kar bi trg lahko absorbiral v zvezi s stanovanjskimi objekti, zaradi česar bi se popolnoma spremenil obseg njegovih prihodkov.
We consider this to be purely theoretical, and have thus not delved deeper into the option.
Po našem mnenju gre pri tem samo za teoretično možnost, zato je nismo podrobneje preučevali.
In conclusion we would say that the seller has in all probability achieved the sales price in a real bidding competition in the Norwegian market, i.e. close to what one can call a correct and fair price.
Naj nazadnje navedemo, da je prodajalec tržno ceno najverjetneje dosegel v pravi ponudbeni konkurenci na norveškem trgu, tj. približek temu, čemur lahko rečemo pravilna in poštena cena.
There is per definition no definable market price for a portfolio of this type in that there is no previous history of sales to refer to.
Tržne cene za portfelj te vrste že po opredelitvi ni mogoče določiti, saj do zdaj še ni bilo prodaj, na katere bi se lahko sklicevali.
The price achieved must therefore to all intents and purposes be deemed to be the market price.’
Doseženo ceno je zato treba za vse namene imeti za tržno ceno.“
Final correspondence with the Norwegian authorities
Končna korespondenca z norveškimi organi
By letter dated 22 December 2004 (Event No: 303758), the Authority requested additional information from the Norwegian authorities concerning the conciliation process between the State and the Municipality of Oslo, the views of the Norwegian authorities regarding whether the sale contained state aid and more detailed information concerning the sales process.
S pismom z dne 22. decembra 2004 (Dogodek št.: 303758) je Nadzorni organ od norveških organov zahteval dodatne informacije o poravnalnem postopku med državo in občino Oslo, stališče norveških organov glede tega, ali je prodaja vsebovala državno pomoč, ter podrobnejše informacije o prodajnem postopku.
The Authority also informed the Norwegian authorities that it had engaged an independent expert, Eirik Holm AS, to assess i.a. the previous value assessments.
Nadzorni organ je norveške organe obvestil tudi o tem, da je zaposlil neodvisnega strokovnjaka Eirika Holma AS, da med drugim presodi predhodne ocene vrednosti.
The Authority also asked the Norwegian authorities to agree to an extension of the deadline for taking a final decision until the end of February 2005.
Nadzorni organ je norveške organe prav tako zaprosil, da pristanejo na podaljšanje skrajnega roka za sprejetje končne odločitve do konca februarja 2005.
By letter from the Mission of Norway to the EU dated 13 January 2005, forwarding two letters dated 10 January 2005 from the Ministry of Modernisation and the Ministry of Health and Care Services, respectively, received and registered by the Authority on 14 January 2005 (Event No: 305352), the Norwegian authorities submitted additional information.
S pismom misije Norveške pri EU z dne 13. januarja 2005, ki je posredovalo pismi Ministrstva za modernizacijo in Ministrstva za zdravje in skrbstvene storitve z dne 10. januarja 2005, ki ga je prejel in evidentiral Nadzorni organ 14. januarja 2005 (Dogodek št.: 305352), so norveški organi predložili dodatne podatke.
The Norwegian authorities agreed to an extension of the deadline for taking a final decision until the end of February 2005.
Norveški organi so pristali na podaljšanje skrajnega roka za sprejetje končne odločitve do konca februarja 2005.
The letters from the Ministry of Modernisation and the Ministry of Health and Care Services were also sent by telefax dated 10 January 2005 (Event No: 304852).
Pismi Ministrstva za modernizacijo in Ministrstva za zdravje in skrbstvene storitve sta bili poslani tudi po telefaksu 10. januarja 2005 (Dogodek št.: 304852).
By letter dated 25 February 2005 to the Norwegian authorities (Event No: 311394), the Authority asked for an extension of the deadline for taking a final decision until 11 March 2005.
S pismom norveškim organom z dne 25. februarja 2005 (Dogodek št.: 311394) je Nadzorni organ zaprosil za podaljšanje skrajnega roka za sprejetje končne odločitve do 11. marca 2005.
By telefax dated 7 March 2005 from the Ministry of Modernisation (Event No: 312289), the Norwegian authorities agreed to an extension of the deadline for taking a final decision until 11 March 2005.
Po telefaksu Ministrstva za modernizacijo z dne 7. marca 2005 (Dogodek št.: 312289) so norveški organi pristali na podaljšanje skrajnega roka za sprejetje končne odločitve do 11. marca 2005.
APPRECIATION
PRESOJA
As mentioned above, the Norwegian authorities notified to the Authority the sale of 1744 rental apartments from the Municipality of Oslo to Fredensborg at a price of NOK 715 Million (approximately EUR 89 Million).
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, so norveški organi Nadzornemu organu priglasili prodajo 1744 najemnih stanovanj občine Oslo Fredensborgu po ceni 715 milijonov NOK (približno 89 milijonov EUR).
The Authority decided to open the formal investigation procedure with regard to the sale and called on interested parties to submit their comments.
Nadzorni organ je sklenil, da bo uvedel uradni preiskovalni postopek v zvezi s prodajo in pozval zainteresirane stranke, da predložijo pripombe.
By reference to Chapter 18B of the State Aid Guidelines, the Authority doubted that the sale had taken place in such a way that the existence of state aid automatically could be excluded.
S sklicevanjem na poglavje 18B smernic o državni pomoči je Nadzorni organ izrazil dvom o tem, da je prodaja potekala tako, da bi bil lahko obstoj državne pomoči samodejno izključen.
Furthermore, assessed values of the properties diverged to a substantial degree and gave reasons to doubt that the agreed sales price reflected the market price.
Poleg tega so se ocenjene vrednosti nepremičnin med seboj občutno razlikovale, zaradi česar se je porajal dvom, da je dogovorjena prodajna cena izražala tržno ceno.
Chapter 18B, ‘State aid elements on sales of land and buildings by public Authorities’, of the State Aid Guidelines, describes two sales procedures that allow EFTA States to handle sales of land and buildings in a way that automatically precludes the existence of state aid.
Poglavje 18B smernic o državni pomoči, Elementi državne pomoči pri prodaji zemljišč in objektov s strani javnih oblasti, opisuje dva prodajna postopka, ki državam Efte omogočata izvedbo prodaje zemljišč in objektov na način, ki samodejno izključuje obstoj državne pomoči.
The two procedures are described, respectively, in Chapter 18B.2.1 (unconditional bidding procedure) and Chapter 18B.2.2 (independent expert evaluation).
Postopka sta opisana v poglavju 18B.2.1 (brezpogojni ponudbeni postopek) oziroma poglavju 18B.2.2 (neodvisna strokovna ocena).
Unconditional bidding procedure
Brezpogojni ponudbeni postopek
In Chapter 18B.2.1(1) of the Guidelines, it is stated that ‘A sale of land and buildings following a sufficiently well-publicized, open and unconditional bidding procedure, comparable to an auction, accepting the best or only bid, is by definition at market value and consequently does not contain State aid.
Poglavje 18B.2.1(1) smernic navaja: „Prodaja zemljišč in objektov po zadostno oglaševanem, odprtem in brezpogojnem ponudbenem postopku, primerljivem z dražbo, v katerem se sprejme brezpogojna ali edina možna ponudba, je po opredelitvi prodaja po tržni vrednosti in zato ne vsebuje državne pomoči.
The fact that a different valuation of the land and buildings existed prior to the bidding procedure, e.g. for accounting purposes or to provide a proposed initial minimum bid, is irrelevant’.
Dejstvo, da je pred ponudbenim postopkom obstajala drugačna ocena vrednosti zemljišč in objektov, npr. za računovodske namene ali za določitev izklicne cene, je zanemarljivo.“
‘An offer is “sufficiently well-publicized” when it is repeatedly advertised over a reasonably long period (two months or more) in the national press, estate gazettes or other appropriate publications and through real-estate agents addressing a broad range of potential buyers, so that it can come to the notice of all potential buyers.
„Ponudba je ‚zadostno oglaševana‘, kadar je večkrat oglaševana v primerno dolgem obdobju (dva meseca ali več) v nacionalnem časopisju, v nepremičninskih revijah ali drugih ustreznih publikacijah in prek nepremičninskih agentov ter naslavlja širok krog morebitnih kupcev, tako da jo lahko opazijo vsi potencialni kupci.
The intended sale of land and buildings, which in view of their high value or other features may attract investors operating on a Europe-wide or international scale, should be announced in publications which have a regular international circulation.
Nameravano prodajo zemljišč in objektov, ki zaradi svoje visoke vrednosti ali drugih značilnosti lahko pritegnejo vlagatelje, ki poslujejo na evropski ali mednarodni ravni, je treba objaviti v publikacijah z redno mednarodno naklado.
Such offers should also be made known through agents addressing clients on a Europe-wide or international scale.’
S takimi ponudbami morajo biti seznanjeni tudi agenti, ki imajo stranke na evropski ali mednarodni ravni.“
The sales process of the apartments did not comply with the above cited provisions on the unconditional bidding procedure.
Postopek prodaje stanovanj ni potekal v skladu z zgoraj navedenimi določbami o brezpogojnem ponudbenem postopku.
The offer was not ‘repeatedly advertised for a reasonably long period (two months or more)’.
Ponudba ni bila „večkrat oglaševana v primerno dolgem obdobju (dva meseca ali več)“.
Furthermore, it can not be excluded that a sale of the size as in the case at hand could attract investors operating on a European-wide or international scale.
Poleg tega ne more biti izključeno, da bi lahko prodaja take razsežnosti, kot jo ima v obravnavanem primeru, pritegnila investitorje, ki poslujejo na evropski ali mednarodni ravni.
No announcements were made in publications with a regular international circulation and no offer was made known through agents addressing clients on a European-wide or international scale.
Prodaja ni bila objavljena v publikacijah z redno mednarodno naklado in agenti, ki imajo stranke na evropski in mednarodni ravni, s ponudbo niso bili seznanjeni.
The Municipality of Oslo has itself stated (letter of 14 may 2003) that: ‘The Municipality will not argue that the procedure followed when the apartments were sold were in full compliance with the requirements set out in the Guidelines.
Občina Oslo je sama izjavila (pismo z dne 14. maja 2003), da „občina ne bo trdila, da je bil izvedeni postopek med prodajo stanovanj v skladu z zahtevami iz smernic.
The sale of the apartments was not made public in the way prescribed in clause 18B.2.1(a) of the Guidelines’, and in an earlier correspondence (see point I.1 and footnote 10 above; see also similar statements of the Municipality under point 2.1 above), that the time constraint under which the sales procedure was conducted might have resulted in a smaller number of bidders than desirable and that the bidders submitted lower bids than they might have done with more time at their disposal.
Prodaja stanovanj ni bila objavljena na način, predpisan v klavzuli 18B2.1(a) smernic,“ v zgodnji korespondenci pa (glej točko I.1 in opombo 10 zgoraj; glej tudi podobne izjave občine iz točke 2.1 zgoraj), da je bilo morda zaradi časovnih omejitev izvedbe prodajnega postopka število ponudnikov manjše, kot je bilo zaželeno, ter da so slednji predložili nižje ponudbe, kot bi jih morda, če bi imeli na voljo več časa.
On the basis of these various factors, the Authority concludes that the sales process was not conducted according to the principles laid down in Chapter 18B.2.1 of the State Aid Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi teh različnih dejavnikov ugotavlja, da prodajni postopek ni bil izveden v skladu z načeli iz poglavja 18B.2.1 Smernic o državni pomoči.
Sale without an unconditional bidding procedure (independent expert evaluation)
Prodaja brez brezpogojnega ponudbenega postopka (neodvisna strokovna ocena)
Concerning sale without an unconditional bidding procedure, Chapter 18B.2.2, of the State Aid Guidelines provides that ‘an independent evaluation should be carried out by one or more independent asset valuers prior to the sale negotiations in order to establish the market value on the basis of generally accepted market indicators and valuation standards.
V zvezi s prodajo brez brezpogojnega ponudbenega postopka poglavje 18B2.2 smernic o državni pomoči predpisuje, da „mora pred dogovori o prodaji en cenilec ali več opraviti neodvisno oceno, da se določi tržna vrednost na podlagi splošno sprejetih tržnih kazalnikov in cenilskih standardov.
The market price thus established is the minimum purchase price that can be agreed upon without granting state aid’,
Tako določena tržna cena je najnižja nakupna cena, ki se lahko določi brez dodelitve državne pomoči“.
and furthermore:
in poleg tega:
‘ “Market” value means the price at which land and buildings could be sold under private contract between a willing seller and an arm's length buyer on the date of valuation, it being assumed that the property is publicly exposed to the market, that market conditions permit orderly disposal and that a normal period, having regard to the nature of the property, is available for the negotiations of the sale.’
„ ‚Tržna vrednost‘ pomeni vrednost, po kateri bi lahko prodali zemljišča in objekte po zasebni pogodbi med voljnim prodajalcem in neodvisnim kupcem na dan vrednotenja, pri čemer se pojmuje, da je lastnina javno ponujena na trgu, da razmere na trgu dovoljujejo njeno pravilno prodajo in da je za prodajne dogovore na voljo običajen rok, ob upoštevanju narave lastnine“.
Finally, Chapter 18B.2.2. provides that: ‘If, after a reasonable effort to sell the land and buildings at the market value, it is clear that the value set by the valuer cannot be obtained, a divergence of up to 5 % from that value can be deemed to be in line with market conditions’.
Končno poglavje 18B.2.2 predpisuje, da „če je po smiselnih prizadevanjih za prodajo zemljišč in objektov po tržni vrednosti jasno, da vrednosti, ki jo je določil cenilec, ni mogoče doseči, se lahko pojmuje, da je do 5-odstotno odstopanje od te vrednosti v skladu z razmerami na trgu“.
It seems that the Municipality of Oslo claims that the sale was conducted in compliance with the above cited provisions.
Zdi se, da občina Oslo trdi, da je bila prodaja izvedena v skladu z zgoraj navedenimi določbami. Nadzorni organ se s tem stališčem ne strinja zaradi naslednjih razlogov.
The Authority disagrees with this view, for the following reasons: First, none of the expert evaluations, which were carried out prior to the final sale (i.e. the Catella and the OPAK reports), were based on generally accepted market indicators and valuation standards or were made in sufficient time prior to the sales negotiations (on these points see below under point 3.1).
Prvič, nobena od strokovnih ocen, ki so bile opravljene pred končno prodajo (tj. poročila podjetij Catella in OPAK), ni bila pridobljena na podlagi splošno sprejetih tržnih kazalnikov in cenilskih standardov ali opravljena dovolj časa pred prodajnimi dogovori (v zvezi s temi vprašanji glej točko 3.1).
Second, none of the established market values in the Catella and OPAK reports were taken as the minimum purchase price for the final sale.
Drugič, nobena od določenih tržnih vrednosti v poročilih podjetij Catella in OPAK ni bila upoštevana kot najnižja nakupna cena za končno prodajo.
Third, the Norwegian authorities have not substantiated the claim that they had undertaken reasonable efforts to sell the apartments at the values established in these reports, which would have justified a reduction in the sales price of 5 %.
Tretjič, norveški organi niso utemeljili trditve, da so si smiselno prizadevali za prodajo stanovanj po vrednostih iz teh poročil, s čimer bi upravičili znižanje prodajne cene za 5 %.
Hence, the sale was not carried out in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18B.2.2. of the State Aid Guidelines.
Zato prodaja ni bila izvedena v skladu z določbami iz poglavja 18B.2.2 smernic o državni pomoči.
Procedure when aid cannot automatically be excluded
Postopek, kadar pomoč ne more biti samodejno izključena
The conclusion is thus that neither the unconditional bidding procedure nor the procedure based on an independent expert evaluation were complied with.
S tem je ugotovljeno, da nista bila upoštevana niti brezpogojni ponudbeni postopek niti postopek, ki temelji na neodvisni strokovni oceni.
Therefore, the existence of state aid cannot be excluded.
Zato obstoj državne pomoči ne more biti izključen.
However, one cannot draw the opposite conclusion that state aid is necessarily involved if the prescribed procedures were not followed.
Vendar pa ne moremo sklepati nasprotno, da je, kadar predpisani postopki niso spoštovani, državna pomoč nujno vključena.
It could still be that the sales price would be considered to reflect a true market value.
Še vedno namreč obstaja možnost, da se za prodajno ceno smatra, da izraža resnično tržno vrednost.
The Guidelines provide that when the prescribed procedures are not followed, the state concerned should notify the sale to the Authority to allow it to establish whether state aid exists.
Smernice predpisujejo, da mora zadevna država, kadar predpisani postopki niso upoštevani, prodajo priglasiti Nadzornemu organu, da ta lahko ugotovi, ali državna pomoč obstaja.
The Norwegian authorities have notified the sale.
Norveške oblasti so prodajo priglasile.
It is up to the Authority to conclude whether the sale of the 1744 hospital apartments in Oslo contained any state aid.
Nadzorni organ mora ugotoviti, ali je prodaja 1744 bolnišničnih stanovanj v Oslu vsebovala državno pomoč.