natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
That breakdown does not correspond to variable and fixed costs respectively, since according to the 57th recital fixed costs include buildings and vehicles.
Ta razdelitev ni v skladu z razdelitvijo na fiksne in variabilne stro�ke, saj v skladu z uvodno izjavo 57 fiksni stro�ki vključujejo nepremičnine in vozila.
However, that recital makes it clear that variable costs were covered from the first year.
Kljub temu iz uvodne izjave jasno izhaja, da so bili variabilni stro�ki pokriti od prvega poslovnega leta.
By stating that only ‘some fixed costs’ were covered in the first two years (1986 to 1987) and that from 1988 ‘all the costs incurred by [La Poste]’ were covered, it is plain that all fixed costs were covered from that year.
Iz navedbe, da so bili v prvih dveh letih (leta 1986 in 1987) pokriti „nekateri fiksni stro�ki“ in da so bili od leta 1988 pokriti „vsi stro�ki družbe La Poste“, jasno izhaja, da so bili od tega leta naprej pokriti vsi stro�ki.
Moreover, it seems clear from the 42ndrecital that the allocation of fixed costs was proportional.
Poleg tega je glede na uvodno izjavo 42 odločbe jasno, da je bila razporeditev fiksnih stro�kov sorazmerna.
In essence, it rejects the approach taken by SFEI for valuing the different components of alleged State aid.
V bistvu je zavrnila način, na katerega je združenje SFEI ocenilo različne sestavne dele domnevne državne pomoči.
In particular, it is clear from the contested decision 60that the detailed economic studies provided by the complainant to demonstrate the existence of State aid were based on a concept of ‘normal market price’ which the Commission stated to be fundamentally flawed.
Iz izpodbijane odločbe 60je �e posebej jasno razvidno, da natančne gospodarske �tudije, ki jih je predložil pritožnik, da bi dokazal obstoj državne pomoči, temeljijo na konceptu „običajnih tržnih cen“, kar je Komisija ocenila kot bistveno napačno.
61 Against that background, a detailed response to the assumptions and calculations behind the overall amounts of State aid alleged in those studies would be irrelevant.
61 Glede na take okoli�čine bi bil natančen odgovor na vse domneve in izračune, na katerih temeljijo te �tudije v zvezi s celotnimi zneski domnevne državne pomoči, povsem nepomemben.
Paragraph 40 of Chronopost I makes it clear that the ‘adequate return on investment’ should derive from the price charged for commercial and logistical assistance.
Iz točke 40 sodbe Chronopost I jasno izhaja, da bi moralo „plačilo za investicijo“ izhajati iz cene, ki jo je treba plačati za logistično in komercialno podporo.
60 — 34th recital.61 — 53rd recital.
60 – Uvodna izjava 34.61 – Uvodna izjava 53.
59 — See points 69 and 73 above, and footnote 34.
59 – Glej točki 69 in 73 zgoraj in opombo 34.
Rather, the precise extent of the obligation to state reasons continues to be determined by the context and all the legal rules governing the matter in question.
Natančen obseg te obveznosti je �e naprej odvisen od okoli�čin zadeve in vseh pravnih pravil na zadevnem področju.
I conclude that, by finding the statement of reasons in the contested decision to be defective, the Court of First Instance erred in law.
Menim, da je Sodi�če prve stopnje, s tem da je presodilo, da je obrazložitev izpodbijane odločbe pomanjkljiva, napačno uporabilo pravo.
Accordingly, I suggest that the Court should allow the third ground of appeal.
Sodi�ču zato predlagam, naj tretjemu pritožbenemu razlogu ugodi.
I therefore do not consider the third reason advanced to justify a more detailed statement to be valid.
Zato menim, da tretji razlog, s katerim se zahteva natančnej�a obrazložitev, ni utemeljen.
62The Court of First Instance itself accepted that the Commission’s reasons for rejecting the SFEI’s method for calculating costs were set out clearly in the contested decision.
62Tudi Sodi�če prve stopnje je priznalo, da so razlogi, iz katerih je Komisija zavrnila metodo pritožnikov za izračun stro�kov, v izpodbijani odločbi povsem jasno obrazloženi.
63 It seems to me that the Commission did respond to the ‘essential arguments of the applicants, as substantiated in [the] economic studies’.
63 Menim, da je Komisija odgovorila na „bistvene trditve pritožnikov, ki so bili podprti s priloženimi gospodarskimi �tudijami“.
The Commission’s view was essentially that SFEI’s overall approach and methodology were incorrect.
Komisija je bistvu presodila, da sta bila celotni pristop in metodologija, ki ju je uporabilo združenje SFEI, nepravilna.
After that, what purpose would be served by requiring there to be a ‘thorough statement of reasons’ examining particular points in greater detail?
Kak�en smisel bi imelo tako zahtevati skrbno obrazložitev, v kateri bi bila določena vpra�anja natančneje obravnavana?
I add that the Court of First Instance did not elaborate on which elements of SFEI’s complaints it considered were inadequately dealt with in the contested decision.
K temu je treba dodati, da Sodi�če prve stopnje ni natančno pojasnilo, kateri deli pritožbe združenja SFEI so bili v izpodbijani odločbi nezadostno obrazloženi.
That is in striking contrast with the approach it took in Sytraval and Brink’s France. 64
To pa je očitno v nasprotju s pristopom Sodi�ča v sodbi Sytraval in Brink’s France. 64
Fourth ground of appeal: Error of law in the assessment of the concept of State aid in respect of the transfer of Postadex 67
Četrti pritožbeni razlog: pravna napaka pri presoji pojma državne pomoči v zvezi s prenosom storitev Postadex 67
I am not convinced that the Court of First Instance’s second reason 65 for requiring
Prav tako nisem prepričana, da drugi razlog 65, zaradi katerega Sodi�če prve
The Court of First Instance’s assessment 68 more detailed reasoning in the Commission’s decision stands up to closer scrutiny.
Presoja Sodišča prve stopnje 68 stopnje zahteva natančnej�o obrazložitev odločbe Komisije, zahteva natančnej�o presojo.
It is fair enough to require a decision-maker to pay due attention to the pertinent decisions of a court that affect the way in which the decision he is presently drafting is formulated.
Seveda je mogoče od institucije, ki sprejema odločitve, zahtevati, da spremlja upo�tevne sodne odločbe sodi�ča in glede na to prilagodi vsebino odločbe, ki jo oblikuje.
The Commission did indeed concentrate its analysis on the SFEI judgment.
Komisija je analizo vsekakor oprla na sodbo SFEI. 66Vendar menim, da le dejstvo, da je
First, the Court of First Instance pointed out that the concept of State aid had a very
Prvič, Sodi�če prve stopnje je poudarilo, da je področje uporabe pojma državne
67 — La Poste’s express delivery service.
67 – Storitve hitre dostave družbe La Post.
See footnote 6.68 — Paragraphs 158 to 171 of the judgment under appeal.
Glej opombo 6.68 – Točke od 158 do 171 izpodbijane sodbe.
CHRONOPOST AND LA POSTE v UFEX AND OTHERS taking the view that the transfer of the Postadex client base did not constitute State aid on the ground that it did not entail any cash advantage.
CHRONOPOST IN LA POSTE PROTI UFEXU IN DRUGIM je presodila, da prenos strank, ki uporabljajo storitve Postadex, ne pomeni državne pomoči, saj družbi SFMI-Chronopost ni prinesel denarne prednosti.
Accordingly, the contested decision had to be annulled in so far as the Commission considered that the transfer of Postadex by La Poste to SFMI-Chronopost did not constitute State aid.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je izpodbijano odločbo zato razglasilo za nično v delu, v katerem je Komisija presodila, da prenos storitev Postadexa družbe La Poste družbi SFMI-Chronopost ni pomenil državne pomoči.
wide scope for the purposes of Article 92 of the Treaty (now Article 87 EC), whose aim was to prevent trade between Member States from being affected by advantages granted by public authorities which, in various forms, distorted or threatened to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or products.
pomoči v smislu člena 92 Pogodbe ES (zdaj člen 87 ES) zelo �iroko. Cilj te določbe naj bi bil namreč preprečiti, da bi bila menjava med državami članicami ovirana zaradi ugodnosti, ki jih dajo javni organi, ki s privilegiranjem nekaterih podjetij ali proizvodov izkrivljajo konkurenco na trgu ali grozijo z njenim izkrivljanjem.
69It included interventions which, in various forms, mitigated the charges usually included in the budget of an undertaking.
69Pojem vključuje tudi ukrepe, ki na različne načine zmanj�ujejo bremena, ki se običajno krijejo iz proračuna podjetja.
According to settled caselaw, the Treaty defines measures of State intervention by reference to their effect.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso Pogodba ES opredeljuje državne intervencije glede na njihove učinke.
The Court of First Instance rejected the Commission’s argument that the transfer of the Postadex client base, as a logical corollary of a subsidiary being created, did not amount to State aid.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je zavrnilo trditev Komisije, da prenos strank, ki uporabljajo storitve Postadex, kot logična posledica ustanovitve hčerinske družbe, ni pomenil državne pomoči.
70 The client base amounted to an intangible asset which had an economic value, even if that value was difficult to quantify.
70Stranke pomenijo nematerialno premoženje, ki ima svojo gospodarsko vrednost, čeprav jo je težko ovrednotiti.
La Poste was able to create the Postadex service using the resources of a legal monopoly.
Družba La Poste je lahko storitve Postadex vzpostavila s sredstvi iz pravno dopustnega monopola.
SFMI-Chronopost 71paid no consideration to La Poste.
Družba SFMI-Chronopost 71ni plačala nobene protidajatve.
The transfer of such an asset nevertheless constituted an advantage for the beneficiary.
Prenos takega premoženja za prejemnika vendarle pomeni korist. Pripisati ga je mogoče državi.
Consequently, the transfer constituted State aid.
Prenos zato pomeni državno pomoč.
The appellants claim that the Court of First Instance was wrong to find that the contested decision erred in taking the view that the transfer of Postadex to SFMI-Chro-nopost did not constitute State aid.
Pritožnici zatrjujeta, da Sodi�če prve stopnje ni pravilno ugotovilo, da je izpodbijana odločba napačna glede stali�ča, da prenos storitev Postadex na družbo SFMI-Chronopost ne pomeni državne pomoči.
They say that the situation cannot be compared to the behaviour of a parent company in the private sector with an existing subsidiary.
Navajata, da obravnavanega položaja ni mogoče primerjati z ravnanjem matične družbe v zasebnem sektorju do hčerinske družbe.
Rather, La Poste created a subsidiary, transferring an economic activity into a distinct entity specifically created for the purpose.
Družba La Poste je ustanovila hčerinsko družbo in prenesla gospodarsko dejavnost na določen subjekt, ustanovljen posebej s tem namenom.
At the point of creation of a subsidiary there is no beneficiary.
V fazi ustanovitve hčerinske družbe ni prejemnika ugodnosti.
The Commission encourages such spin-offs in order to enhance the competitive functioning of the market.
Komisija podpira ustanavljanje takih družb, saj spodbujajo konkurenčnost na trgu.
The Court of First Instance concluded that the Commission had erred in law in
Sodi�če prve stopnje je ugotovilo, da je Komisija napačno uporabila pravo, ko
70 — 48 recital of the contested decision.
70 – Uvodna izjava 48 izpodbijane odločbe.
See point 72 above.
Glej točko 72 zgoraj.
71 — I recall that the subsidiary created was called SFMI.
71 – Naj opozorim, da se je hčerinska družba imenovala družba SFMI. Glej opombo 7.
According to UFEX, the free transfer of Postadex’s captive client base undoubtedly benefited SFMI-Chronopost as a new market entrant.
Združenje UFEX meni, da je brezplačen prenos strank, ki uporabljajo storitve Postadex, nedvomno prinesel korist družbi SFMI-Chronopost kot novemu podjetju na trgu.
Assets are always transferred for consideration.
Za prenos premoženja je vedno treba plačati protidajatev. Korist, ki je bila prido-
subsidiary, the economic value of the activities therein accrued to its shareholders.
Presoja družbe povečala tudi gospodarska vrednost dejavnosti, ki pa je pripadla delničarjem te družbe.
La Poste thus retained a proportion of the value corresponding to a 66% shareholding.
Družba La Poste je pridobila del te vrednosti, ki ustreza njenemu 66-odsto-tnemu lastni�kemu deležu.
TAT obtained the balance of the value in return for a capital injection.
Družba TAT je pridobila vrednost, ki se je izenačila z njenim kapitalskim vložkom.
In other words, the value of the activities was reflected in the value of the shares first issued to, and subsequently held by, the shareholders.
Povedano drugače, vrednost teh dejavnosti se je odražala v vrednosti delnic prve izdaje, te pa so pripadle delničarjem.
In the contested decision, the Commission recognises that the Postadex customer base represents an intangible asset.
Komisija je v izpodbijani odločbi ugotovila, da prenos strank, ki uporabljajo storitve Postadex, pomeni nematerialno premoženje.
72 As the Court of First Instance observes, the fact that an element may be difficult to quantify does not mean that it has no value.
72 Kot je ugotovilo Sodi�če prve stopnje, dejstvo, da je nekaj težko ovrednotiti, �e ne pomeni, da je brez vrednosti.
73 For my part, I accept that the customer base had a positive economic value at the time of the transfer to SFMI-Chronopost in 1985.
73 Sama menim, da je imela baza strank v času prenosa na družbo SFMI-Chronopost leta 1985 pozitivno gospodarsko vrednost.
Thus the situation is different from a privatisation.
Položaj je tako drugačen kot pri privatizaciji.
When a State divests an asset to an outside investor it receives consideration.
Če država prenese del svojega premoženja na zunanjega investitorja, za ta prenos vedno prejme protidajatev.
State aid arises if, under the private investor principle, the money raised is lower than the value of the assets sold.
O državni pomoči govorimo, ko je v skladu z načelom zasebnega investitorja prejeta protidajatev nižja od vrednosti prodanega premoženja.
74 With the creation of SFMI-Chronopost, the only outside investor to be involved was TAT, which took a 34% shareholding.
74 Edini zunanji investitor pri ustanovitvi družbe SFMI-Chronopost je bila družba TAT, ki je prevzela 34 odstotkov delnic.
If SFMI-Chronopost had paid any money to La Poste, that would simply have reduced the value of the subsidiary and, correspondingly, that of La Poste’s shareholding.
Če bi družba La Poste od družbe SFMI-Chronopost prejela kakr�no koli plačilo, bi to le znižalo vrednost hčerinske družbe in s tem tudi delnic, katerih imetnica je družba La Poste.
What precisely occurred when La Poste created SFMI-Chronopost?
Kaj natanko se je zgodilo, ko je družba La Poste ustanovila družbo SFMI-Chronopost?
It seems to me that, in particular, a distinction must be drawn between, on one hand, the activities relating to the express delivery service and, on the other hand, the value of those activities.
Menim, da je treba ločiti zlasti dejavnosti, ki se nana�ajo na storitev hitre dostave, in vrednost teh dejavnosti.
It seems to me that the private investor principle is also applicable to the conversion by a State entity of an activity into a subsidiary.
Menim, da je mogoče načelo zasebnega investitorja uporabiti tudi takrat, kadar državni subjekt prenese dejavnosti na hčerinsko družbo.
75The question is whether a private investor would have acted in the same way rather than, for example, selling off the
75Postavlja se vpra�anje, ali bi tako ravnal tudi zasebni investitor ali pa bi ta dejavnost raje prodal tretji osebi.
It is clear that the new entity took over the activities.
Povsem očitno je, da je novo ustvarjeni subjekt prevzel dejavnosti.
They included the management and utilisation of the client base.
Te zajemajo upravljanje in uporabo baze strank.
However, through the very creation of the
Vendar se je že s samo ustanovitvijo hčerinske
74 — See, to that effect, Case C-334/99 Germany v Commission [2003] ECR I-1139, paragraphs 133 to 134, relating to the sale for a negative price of an enterprise in former East Germany.
74 – Glej v tem smislu sodbo z dne 28. januarja 2003 v zadevi Nemčija proti Komisiji (C-334/99, str. I-1139, točki 133 in 134), ki se nana�a na vpra�anje prodaje podjetja pod ustrezno ceno v nekdanji Vzhodni Nemčiji.
75 — The test laid down in Chronopost I is, conversely, inapplicable since that test relates to cost coverage in commercial transactions between parent and subsidiary in the State sector.
75 – Testa iz sodbe Chronopost I ni mogoče uporabiti, ker se nana�a na pokritje stro�kov v trgovinskem poslovanju med matično družbo in njeno hčerinsko družbo v javnem sektorju.
72 — 48th recital.73 — Paragraph 169 of the judgment under appeal.
72 – Uvodna izjava 48.73 – Točka 169 izpodbijane sodbe.
CHRONOPOST AND LA POSTE v UFEX AND OTHERS on the ground that La Poste received no consideration from SFMI-Chronopost.
CHRONOPOST IN LA POSTE PROTI UFEXU IN DRUGIM družba La Poste za ta prenos ni prejela nikakr�ne protidajatve. 78
For the reasons set out above, I suggest that the Court should also allow the fourth ground of appeal.
Iz zgoraj navedenih razlogov Sodi�ču predlagam, naj ugodi tudi četrtemu pritožbenemu razlogu.
Under Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice the Court may, if it quashes the decision of the Court of First Instance, give final judgment in the matter where the state of the proceedings so permits or refer the case back to the Court of First Instance for judgment.
V skladu s členom 61 Statuta Sodi�ča lahko Sodi�če, ko razveljavi odločitev Sodi�ča prve stopnje, samo dokončno odloči o zadevi, če stanje postopka to dovoljuje, ali pa zadevo vrne Sodi�ču prve stopnje v novo odločanje.
In the judgment under appeal, the Court of First Instance quite rightly notes that what is now Article 87(1) EC distinguishes measures of State intervention in relation to their effects.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je v izpodbijani sodbi pravilno navedlo, da sedanji člen 87(1) ES razlikuje med državnimi intervencijami glede na njihove učinke.
77However, I find it difficult to see how the creation of SFMI-Chronopost can have had a distorting effect on the market.
77Vendar sama menim, da je težko trditi, da bi ustanovitev družbe SFMI-Chronopost lahko povzročila izkrivljanje konkurence na trgu.
It was a new competitor only to the extent that it was a newly created company with a new name.
Novi konkurent je bil le, ker je bila to novoustanovljena družba z novim imenom.
The activities and the client base were those of Postadex.
Dejavnosti in baza strank pa so bile povezane s storitvijo Postadex.
It seems far more likely that the effect of creating a separate subsidiary to carry out activities formerly subsumed under a State monolith will, providing business transactions with its parent are conducted on the basis of the Chronopost I formula, ultimately be to enhance competitiveness in the market.
Veliko verjetneje se zdi, da bi ustanovitev hčerinske družbe za opravljanje dejavnosti, ki jih je v okviru monopola prej opravljala država, imela pozitiven učinek na konkurenco na trgu, seveda pod pogojem, da so transakcije med matično in hčerinsko družbo v skladu z zahtevami iz sodbe Chronopost I.
Since the Court of First Instance considered that it could not examine some of the arguments in the first part of the fourth plea on the ground that the reasoning in the contested decision was insufficient, 79it seems to me that the state of proceedings does not allow the Court to give final judgment.
Ker je Sodi�če prve stopnje presodilo, da zaradi pomanjkljive obrazložitve izpodbijane odločbe 79 ne more presoditi o nekaterih trditvah, navedenih v prvem delu četrtega tožbenega razloga, menim, da Sodi�če ne more samo odločiti o zadevi.
I therefore propose that the case be referred back to the Court of First Instance
Sodi�ču zato predlagam, naj zadevo vrne Sodi�ču prve stopnje v novo odločanje, odločitev o stro-
For all these reasons, I do not consider that, at the time of the conversion of Postadex into a subsidiary, La Poste relinquished the value of Postadex to SFMI-Chronopost.
Iz vseh navedenih razlogov menim, da se pri preoblikovanju storitev Postadex v hčerinsko družbo družba La Poste ni odrekla vrednosti storitev Postadex v korist družbe SFMI-Chronopost.
Consequently, the Court of First Instance erred in holding that the transfer of Postadex to SFMI-Chronopost constitutes State aid and that costs be reserved.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je zato napačno ugotovilo, da prenos storitev Postadexa na družbo SFMI-Chronopost pomeni državno pomoč, ker
76 — 59 to 63 recitals of the contested decision.
�kih pa naj se pridrži.
78 — Paragraph 167 of the judgment under appeal.79 — Paragraph 102.
78 – Točka 167 izpodbijane sodbe.79 – Točka 102.
77 — Paragraph 160.
76 – Uvodni izjavi 59 in 63 izpodbijane odločbe.77 – Točka 160.
In the light of the arguments above, I suggest that the Court:
Glede na zgoraj navedeno Sodi�ču predlagam, naj:
— set aside the judgment delivered on 7 June 2006 by the Court of First Instance in Case T-613/97 UFEX and Others v Commission to the extent that it annulled Commission Decision 98/365/EC of 1 October 1997 concerning alleged State aid granted by France to SFMI-Chronopost ‘in so far as it finds that neither the logistical and commercial assistance provided by La Poste to its subsidiary, SFMI-Chronopost, nor the transfer of Postadex constitute State aid to SFMI-Chronopost’;
– razveljavi sodbo Sodi�ča prve stopnje z dne 7. junija 2006 v zadevi UFEX in drugi proti Komisiji, T-613/97 v delu, v katerem je bila razgla�ena ničnost Odločbe Komisije 98/365/ES z dne 1. oktobra 1997 v zvezi z domnevno državno pomočjo Francoske republike družbi SFMI-Chronopost, ker je s to odločbo ugotovljeno, da „niti logistična in komercialna podpora, ki jo je družba La Poste nudila svoji hčerinski družbi SFMI-Chronopost, niti prenos storitev Postadex na družbo SFMI-Chronopost ne pomenita državne pomoči“;
— refer the case back to the Court of First Instance;
– zadevo vrne v novo odločanje Sodi�ču prve stopnje;
— reserve the costs.
– odločitev o stro�kih pridrži.
In Joined Cases C-341/06 P and C-342/06 P,
V združenih zadevah C-341/06 P in C-342/06 P, zaradi dveh pritožb na podlagi člena 56 Statuta Sodi�ča, vloženih 4. avgusta 2006,
Chronopost SA, established in Issy-les-Moulineaux (France), represented by D. Berlin, avocat (C-341/06 P),
Berlin, odvetnik (C-341/06 P),
La Poste, established in Paris (France), represented by H. Lehman, avocat (C-342/06 P), appellants, the other parties to the proceedings being:
La Poste, s sedežem v Parizu (Francija), ki jo zastopa H. Lehman, odvetnik (C-342/06 P), tožeči stranki, druge stranke v postopku so
2008 — JOINED CASES C-341/06 P AND C-342/06 P
2008 – ZDRUŽENI ZADEVI C-341/06 P IN C-342/06 P
Commission of the European Communities, represented by C. Giolito, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg, defendant at first instance,
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti, ki jo zastopa C. Giolito, zastopnik, z naslovom za vročanje v Luxembourgu, tožena stranka v postopku na prvi stopnji,
Advocate General: E. Sharpston, Registrar: R. Grass, having regard to the written procedure, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 6 December 2007, gives the following
Grass, na podlagi pisnega postopka, po predstavitvi sklepnih predlogov generalne pravobranilke na obravnavi 6. decembra 2007 izreka naslednjo
By their appeals, Chronopost SA (‘Chronopost’) (C-341/06 P) and La Poste (C-342/06 P) ask the Court to set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 7 June 2006 in Case T-613/97 UFEX and Others v Commission [2006] ECR II-1531 (‘the judgment under appeal’).
Chronopost SA (v nadaljevanju: družba Chronopost) (C-341/06 P) in La Poste (C-342/06 P) s pritožbama predlagata razveljavitev sodbe Sodi�ča prve stopnje Evropskih skupnosti z dne 7. junija 2006 v zadevi UFEX in drugi proti Komisiji (T-613/97, ZOdl., str. II-1531, v nadaljevanju: izpodbijana sodba).