natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It appears from the State aid Guidelines on the rules on public service compensation, state ownership of enterprises and aid to public enterprises (the ‘Public Service Compensation guidelines’) that in order for compensation for public services to be declared compatible with the EEA Agreement the public service obligation must be (i) genuine and clearly defined; (ii) entrusted in an instrument specifying the public service obligation; and (iii) the amount of compensation may not exceed what is necessary to cover costs incurred in discharging the public service obligation (that is, it must be proportional), taking into account the relevant receipts and reasonable profit for discharging those obligations [199].As also reiterated in the Public Service Compensation Guidelines, the Authority recalls that the EFTA States have a wide margin of discretion regarding the nature of services that could be classified as being services of general economic interest [200].
Iz smernic o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve, državnega lastništva podjetij in pomoči za javna podjetja („Smernice o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve“) izhaja, da mora biti obveznost javne službe, če naj bi bilo nadomestilo za javne storitve razglašeno za združljivo s Sporazumom EGP, (i) resnična in jasno opredeljena ter (ii) zaupana v instrumentu, ki podrobno opredeljuje obveznost javne službe, in da (iii) znesek nadomestila ne sme presegati tistega, kar je potrebno za pokritje stroškov, nastalih pri izvajanju obveznosti javne službe (tj. biti mora sorazmerno), z upoštevanjem ustreznih prejemkov ter primernega dobička zaradi izvajanja teh obveznosti [199].Kot je večkrat navedeno tudi v Smernicah o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve, želi Nadzorni organ spomniti, da imajo države Efte široko diskrecijo glede narave storitev, opredeljenih kot storitve splošnega gospodarskega interesa [200].
The Authority considers that Mesta AS has been subject to genuine and clearly defined public service obligations which have been entrusted in an instrument specifying the relevant obligations.
Nadzorni organ meni, da je družba Mesta AS izvajala resnične in jasno opredeljene obveznosti javne službe, ki so ji bile zaupane v instrumentu, ki zadevne obveznosti podrobno opredeljuje.
The Authority observes that the transitional operation and maintenance contracts have been imposed on Mesta AS for a limited period in order to ensure that upon opening the operation and maintenance market (on the national road network) for competition, the activities would be carried out in a manner which permits the Public Road Administration to maintain sufficient control of road and traffic safety.
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da so bile prehodne pogodbe o upravljanju in vzdrževanju družbi Mesta AS za omejeno obdobje naložene zaradi zagotovitve, da bi se ob odprtju trga storitev upravljanja in vzdrževanja (na državnem cestnem omrežju) za konkurenco dejavnosti izvajale na način, ki Upravi za javne ceste omogoča, da ohrani zadovoljiv nadzor nad varnostjo na cestah in v cestnem prometu.
The duties imposed on Mesta AS are clearly identified and described in the Standardisation Report issued by the Public Road Administration via concrete requirements for the level of standard and/or actions with respect to the public service task.
Naloge, naložene družbi Mesta AS, so jasno opredeljene in opisane v Standardizacijskem poročilu, ki ga je objavila Uprava za javne ceste, s konkretnimi zahtevami glede ravni standarda in/ali ukrepov glede naloge javne službe.
The operation and maintenance of the national road network is a legitimate public service task of the State and in line with the Commission’s decision practice on road tunnel maintenance as public service obligations [201].
Upravljanje in vzdrževanje državnega cestnega omrežja sta zakonita naloga javne službe države in skladna s prakso odločanja Komisije glede vzdrževanja cestnih predorov kot obveznosti javne službe [201].
Moreover, in the present case the public service obligations are imposed only for a transitional period (until 2006) in order to ensure that the Public Road Administration maintains the necessary level of road and traffic security control thereby confirming the link between the public service task and the control responsibility of the Public Road Administration.
Poleg tega so v obravnavanem primeru obveznosti javne službe naložene le za prehodno obdobje (do leta 2006) zaradi zagotovitve, da Uprava za javne ceste ohrani potrebno raven nadzora nad varnostjo na cestah in v cestnem prometu, kar potrjuje povezavo med nalogo javne službe in odgovornostjo Uprave za javne ceste za nadzor.
Finally, in terms of entrustment the obligation to carry out the operation and maintenance work according to the standards has been entrusted to Mesta AS via a provision in each contract between Mesta AS and the State (in the capacity of the Public Road Administration) [202].
Končno, v smislu poveritve je bila obveznost izvajanja upravljavskih in vzdrževalnih del v skladu s standardi zaupana družbi Mesta AS z določbo v vsaki pogodbi, sklenjeni med družbo Mesta AS in državo (ki jo je zastopala Uprava za javne ceste) [202].
As regards the amount of compensation the overall rule in the Public Service Compensation guidelines is that the amount of compensation may not exceed what is necessary to cover the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations, taking into account a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations.
Glede zneska nadomestila velja splošno pravilo iz Smernic o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve, da znesek nadomestila ne sme presegati tistega, kar je potrebno za pokritje stroškov, nastalih pri izvajanju obveznosti javne službe, z upoštevanjem ustreznih prejemkov in primernega dobička zaradi izvajanja teh obveznosti.
In this regard the Public Service Compensation guidelines require, that only the costs associated with public service obligation is taken into consideration, and that a cost separation be made between services of general economic interest and any other activities.
Smernice o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve v zvezi s tem zahtevajo, da se upoštevajo le stroški, povezani z obveznostjo javne službe, in da je treba stroške storitev splošnega gospodarskega interesa ločevati od stroškov drugih dejavnosti.
Moreover, costs linked to investments may be taken into account when necessary for providing the public service obligation.
Poleg tega je mogoče upoštevati stroške, povezane z naložbami, če so potrebni za uresničevanje obveznosti javne službe.
Based on the information submitted, the Authority considers that since Mesta AS had separate accounts for the transitional operation and maintenance contracts the costs submitted for providing the public services have been correctly allocated.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi predloženih informacij ugotavlja, da je imela družba Mesta AS ločene račune za prehodne pogodbe o upravljanju in vzdrževanju, tako da so bili navedeni stroški za zagotavljanje javnih storitev pravilno razporejeni.
Furthermore, the fact that Mesta AS allocated capital investments in proportion to revenue obtained from such contracts is also in line with the rules set forth in the Public Service Compensation guidelines.
Poleg tega je tudi dejstvo, da je družba Mesta AS dodelila kapitalske naložbe v sorazmerju s prihodki iz takih pogodb, skladno s pravili, določenimi v Smernicah o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve.
On this basis the Authority considers that 100 % funding for cost coverage of the provision by Mesta AS of public services under the transitional operation and maintenance contracts is in line with the Public Service Compensation guidelines.
Na podlagi tega Nadzorni organ meni, da je financiranje stroškov, ki jih je imela družba Mesta AS zaradi izvajanja javnih storitev v skladu s prehodnimi pogodbami o upravljanju in vzdrževanju, 100-odstotno skladno s Smernicami o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve.
With respect to determining a reasonable profit the Public Service Compensation guidelines provide that the rate of return actually obtained by the public service provider must not exceed the average rate of return for the sector concerned in the recent years.
Glede določitve razumnega dobička Smernice o državni pomoči v obliki nadomestila za javne storitve določajo, da donosnost, ki jo je dejansko dosegel ponudnik javnih storitev, ne sme presegati povprečne donosnosti v zadevnem sektorju v zadnjih letih.
In other words, the level of the rate of return actually obtained by Mesta AS must be compared to a benchmark or common denominator in the sector.
Povedano drugače, stopnjo donosnosti, ki jo je dejansko dosegla družba Mesta AS, je treba primerjati s primerjalno vrednostjo ali skupnim imenovalcem v sektorju.
The Authority has examined the ‘reference rate of return’ of 8,42 % submitted by the Norwegian authorities (table below) to be used as a yardstick for the rate of return in the operation and maintenance sector.
Nadzorni organ je proučil 8,42-odstotno „referenčno donosnost“, ki so jo predložili norveški organi (spodnja tabela) kot merilo za donosnost v sektorju upravljanja in vzdrževanja cest.
The Authority has taken the view that the components of the reference rate of return is based on market oriented elements.
Nadzorni organ meni, da sestavine referenčne donosnosti temeljijo na tržno usmerjenih elementih.
First, the Authority has taken into account that the beta value of 1 is the average beta value of 15 other companies in the operation and maintenance sector.
Prvič, Nadzorni organ je upošteval, da je beta vrednost 1 povprečje beta vrednosti petnajstih drugih družb, dejavnih v sektorju upravljanja in vzdrževanja.
Secondly, the market rate risk premium of 5 % is within the range used by other operators in this market (of between 3–6 %) and within the range of the risk premium used by PWC in a report of 2008 on Mesta AS.
Drugič, 5-odstotna tržna premija za tveganje je v razponu, ki ga uporabljajo drugi ponudniki storitev na tem trgu (3–6 %) in v razponu premije za tveganje, ki jo je v poročilu o družbi Mesta AS za leto 2008 uporabila družba PWC.
Thirdly, the rate of return is based on the same methodology as the rate of return of 6,7 % which the State requires on its overall investments in Mesta AS (including both construction and operation and maintenance activities).
Tretjič, dobičkonosnost temelji na enaki metodologiji kot 6,7-odstotna dobičkonosnost, ki jo zahteva država za vse svoje naložbe v družbo Mesta AS (vključno z dejavnostmi gradnje ter upravljanja in vzdrževanja).
Fourthly, the beta value is an average calculated over 2002–2007 which is the period during which the public services have been provided by Mesta AS.
Četrtič, beta vrednost je povprečje, izračunano za obdobje 2002–2007, v katerem je družba Mesta AS izvajala javne storitve.
Weighted average cost of capital (WAAC)
Tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala (WAAC)
Risk free interest [203] before tax
Netvegane obresti [203] pred obdavčitvijo
Market rate risk premium [204]
Premija za tveganje tržne cene [204]
Observations of the beta value over a 40 month period (2002–2007) of 15 comparable companies (such as Veidekke ASA, Skanska AB-B SHS, PEAB AB) [205];
ugotovitve beta vrednosti v 40-mesečnem obdobju (2002–2007) v petnajstih primerljivih družbah (kot so Veidekke ASA, Skanska AB-B SHS, PEAB AB) [205];
the rate of return is correlated on the basis of Morgan Stanleys ‘All Country World Index’ [206];
korelacijo donosnosti na podlagi svetovnega indeksa vseh držav pri Morgan Stanley („All Country World Index“) [206];
the equity share has been considered to be in line with the sector average (based on 15 comparable companies) [207].
skladnost deleža trajnega kapitala s povprečjem v panogi (na podlagi petnajstih primerljivih družb) [207].
A comparison between the actual rate of return obtained by Mesta AS and the reference rate of return (of 8,42 %) during the years 2003–2006 (see table below) shows that Mesta AS obtained NOK 66,4 million in excess compensation.
Primerjava med dejansko donosnostjo družbe Mesta AS in referenčno donosnostjo (8,42 %) v letih 2003–2006 (glej spodnjo tabelo) kaže, da je družba Mesta AS prejela za 66,4 milijona NOK čezmernega nadomestila.
The Authority has therefore taken the view that this amount is to be considered as over-compensation within the meaning of the Public Service Compensation guidelines.
Zato je Nadzorni organ menil, da je treba ta znesek obravnavati kot čezmerno nadomestilo v smislu smernic o nadomestilu za javne storitve.
The Authority observes that the calculation of this amount in over-compensation has already taken account of the possibility for Mesta AS (in line with the Public Service Compensation guidelines) to carry forward over-compensation [208] obtained in one year to the next year.
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da je bila pri izračunu tega zneska v čezmernem nadomestilu že upoštevana možnost družbe Mesta AS (v skladu s smernicami o nadomestilu za javne storitve), da prenese prejeto čezmerno nadomestilo [208] iz enega leta v naslednje.
Mesta AS: rate of return
Mesta AS: donosnost
On the basis of the above the Authority considers that the conditions of Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement are fulfilled as regards the existence of a public service obligation and the entrustment thereof in relation to the transitional operation and maintenance contracts.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi navedenega meni, da so izpolnjeni pogoji člena 59(2) Sporazuma EGP glede obstoja obveznosti javne storitve in pooblastila zanjo v zvezi s prehodnimi pogodbami o upravljanju in vzdrževanju.
However, since Mesta AS has been over-compensated with NOK 66,4 million the Authority has concluded that the compensation for Mesta AS of the public service obligations is not proportional and that this amount of over-compensation is therefore not compatible with Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement.
Ker pa je družba Mesta AS prejela za 66,4 milijona NOK previsoko nadomestilo, je Nadzorni organ sklenil, da nadomestilo za obveznosti družbe Mesta AS za izvajanje javnih storitev ni sorazmerno in ta znesek čezmernega nadomestila tako ni skladen s členom 59(2) Sporazuma EGP.
DOCUMENT DUTY AND REGISTRATION FEE
TAKSA ZA DOKUMENTE IN VPIS V ZEMLJIŠKO KNJIGO
As to State aid involved as a result of an exemption from the payment of document duty and registration fee in favour of Mesta AS, the Norwegian authorities have not argued that such aid is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Norveški organi glede zadevne državne pomoči, ki je posledica oprostitve plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo v korist družbe Mesta AS, niso trdili, da je taka pomoč združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
Nonetheless, the Authority has considered the possibilities for considering the aid compatible.
Kljub temu je Nadzorni organ obravnaval možnosti, da bi pomoč veljala kot združljiva.
The Authority observes first that none of the exceptions in Article 61(2) EEA apply as the aid at issue is not aimed at the objectives listed in those provisions: The exemption from document duty and registration fee is not an aid of a social character granted to individual consumers nor is it aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences.
Nadzorni organ najprej ugotavlja, da ne velja nobena od izjem iz člena 61(2) Sporazuma EGP, saj zadevna pomoč ni namenjena za dosego ciljev, navedenih v njegovih določbah. Oprostitev plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo ni pomoč socialnega značaja, dodeljena posameznim potrošnikom, in ni pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izjemni dogodki.
Secondly, an aid measure may be considered to be compatible under Article 61(3)(a) EEA when it is designed to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment.
Drugič, ukrep pomoči lahko velja za združljivega v skladu s členom 61(3)(a) Sporazuma EGP, kadar je namenjen pospeševanju gospodarskega razvoja območij, kjer je življenjski standard izjemno nizek ali kjer je podzaposlenost velika.
However, as there are no such areas defined by the Norwegian regional aid map this provision is not relevant.
Ker norveški zemljevid regionalne pomoči nima opredeljenih takih območij, ta določba ni pomembna.
Thirdly, the exception in Article 61(3)(b) EEA does not apply since the aid in question is not intended to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of Norway.
Tretjič, oprostitev v členu 61(3)(b) Sporazuma EGP ne velja, saj zadevna pomoč ni namenjena za pospeševanje izvedbe pomembnega projekta skupnega evropskega interesa ali za odpravljanje resne motnje v gospodarstvu Norveške.
Finally, the Authority has found no reason to consider that the exception laid down in Article 61(3)(c) EEA, which provides that State aid may be considered compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement where it facilitates the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas without affecting trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest, is applicable to the aid in question.
Končno, Nadzorni organ ni našel nobenega razloga za ugotovitev, da bi za zadevno pomoč veljala oprostitev iz člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, ki določa, da državna pomoč lahko velja za združljivo z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP, če pospešuje razvoj določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, kadar taka pomoč ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
Since none of the exemptions apply the Authority has considered that the aid granted via exemptions from document duty and registration fee is not compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Ker ne velja nobena od navedenih izjem, je Nadzorni organ ugotovil, da pomoč, dodeljena z oprostitvami plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo, ni združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
This conclusion of the Authority is in line with the position taken in the decision adopted on 14 December 2005 in which the Authority also considered that exemptions from document duty and registration fee were not compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement [209].
Ta ugotovitev Nadzornega organa je skladna z mnenjem iz odločbe, sprejete 14. decembra 2005, v kateri je Nadzorni organ še menil, da oprostitve plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo niso združljive z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP [209].
On the basis of the foregoing assessment, the Authority takes the view that the restructuring measures consisting of early pension, temporary maintenance of civil servant pension rights and special retirement age, as well as compensation for salary (or alternative measures) involve the grant of State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement which is compatible on the basis of Article 61(3)(c) EEA.
Na podlagi navedene ocene Nadzorni organ meni, da ukrepi za prestrukturiranje, ki vključujejo predčasno upokojevanje, začasno ohranitev pokojninskih pravic za državne uradnike in posebno upokojitveno starost ter nadomestilo plače (ali alternativne ukrepe), pomenijo odobritev državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, ki je združljiva na podlagi člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP.
For the reasons set out above, the Authority considers that State aid in favour of Mesta AS for the following measures is not compatible with the EEA Agreement:
Zaradi zgoraj navedenih razlogov Nadzorni organ meni, da državna pomoč v korist družbe Mesta AS za naslednje ukrepe ni združljiva s Sporazumom EGP:
moving and commuting costs;
stroški selitve in dnevnega prevoza iz kraja bivanja na delo in nazaj;
costs for moving offices/support and maintenance offices and transfer of archives incurred after 1 January 2003;
stroški selitve uradov / uradov za vzdrževanje in podporo ter prenosa arhivov, ki so nastali po 1. januarju 2003;
exemption of Mesta AS from document duty and registration fee; and
oprostitev plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo za družbo Mesta AS in
over-compensation in relation to the provision of public services by Mesta AS under the transitional operation and maintenance contracts of an amount of NOK 66,4 million.
čezmerno nadomestilo v znesku 66,4 milijona NOK v zvezi z zagotavljanjem javnih storitev družbe Mesta AS v skladu s prehodnimi pogodbami o upravljanju in vzdrževanju.
As these measures were not notified to the Authority, such aid constitutes unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Ker ti ukrepi niso bili priglašeni Nadzornemu organu, taka pomoč pomeni nezakonito pomoč v smislu člena 1(f) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
It follows from Article 14 of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement that the Authority shall decide that unlawful aid which is incompatible with the State aid rules under the EEA Agreement must be recovered from the beneficiaries.
Iz člena 14 dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču izhaja, da Nadzorni organ odloči, da morajo upravičenci vrniti nezakonito pomoč, ki je nezdružljiva s pravili o državni pomoči iz Sporazuma EGP –
The State aid in relation to early pension, temporary maintenance of civil servant pension rights and special retirement age, as well as compensation for salary (or alternative measures) in favour of Mesta AS is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Državna pomoč v zvezi s predčasnim upokojevanjem, začasno ohranitvijo pokojninskih pravic za državne uradnike in posebno upokojitveno starostjo ter nadomestilom plače (ali alternativnimi ukrepi) v korist družbe Mesta AS je združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
The State aid in favour of Mesta AS in relation to (i) costs for moving and commuting; (ii) costs for moving offices/support and maintenance offices and transfer of archives incurred after 1 January 2003; (iii) the exemption of Mesta AS from paying document duty and registration fee; and (iv) over-compensation with NOK 66,4 million in relation to the provision of public services by Mesta AS under the transitional operation and maintenance contracts, is not compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
Državna pomoč v korist družbe Mesta AS v zvezi s (i) stroški selitve in dnevnega prevoza iz kraja bivanja na delo in nazaj, (ii) stroški selitve uradov / uradov za vzdrževanje in podporo ter prenos arhivov, ki so nastali po 1. januarju 2003, (iii) oprostitvijo plačila takse za dokumente in vpis v zemljiško knjigo za družbo Mesta AS in (iv) čezmernim nadomestilom v znesku 66,4 milijona NOK v zvezi z zagotavljanjem javnih storitev družbe Mesta AS v skladu s prehodnimi pogodbami o upravljanju in vzdrževanju je nezdružljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
The Norwegian authorities shall take all necessary measures to recover from Mesta AS the aid referred to in Article 1(2) and unlawfully made available to Mesta AS.
Norveški organi sprejmejo vse potrebne ukrepe, da jim družba Mesta AS vrne pomoč, ki je navedena v členu 1(2) in je bila družbi Mesta AS nezakonito dodeljena.
Recovery shall be affected without delay and in accordance with the procedures of national law provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the decision.
Vračilo se izvede nemudoma in v skladu s postopki nacionalne zakonodaje, če ti omogočajo takojšnjo in učinkovito uveljavitev odločbe.
The aid to be recovered shall include interest and compound interest from the date on which it was at the disposal of Mesta AS until the date of its recovery.
Pomoč, ki jo je treba vrniti, vključuje obresti in obrestne obresti od datuma, ko je bila dana na voljo družbi Mesta AS, do datuma njenega vračila.
Interest shall be calculated on the basis of Article 9 in the EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 195/04/COL.
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi člena 9 Odločbe nadzornega organa Efte št. 195/04/COL.