Je was op zoek naar: drumet (Engels - Estisch)

drumet (poland)
drumet (poola)

drumet sa, wloclawek
drumet sa, wloclawek

drumet sa (poland),
drumet sa (poola),

wire and rope factory drumet sa, wloclawek, poland,
wire and rope factory drumet s.a., włocławek, poola

drumet submitted comments and requested to be heard orally.
drumet esitas oma märkused ja soovis suulist ärakuulamist.

wire and rope factory drumet sa (drumet), wloclawek, poland,
wire and rope factory drumet s.a. (edaspidi „drumet”), włocławek, poola;

drumet continued to be exempted from the definitive duties by virtue of and subject to its undertaking.
drumetile temaga sõlmitud hinnakohustuse tõttu ja selle alusel lõplikku tollimaksu endiselt ei kohaldatud.

drumet further submitted a contract on the transfer of shares which was acknowledged by a notarial act.
drumet esitas lisaks aktsiate üleminekut käsitleva lepingu, mille õigsust oli notariaalselt kinnitatud.

drumet argued that in view of these aspects, the two companies ceased to be related as from july 1999.
drumet väitis, et arvestades nimetatud fakte, lakkasid kõnealused kaks ettevõtet 1999. aasta juunist alates olemast sidusettevõtted.

drumet was requested, on two occasions, to inform the commission about any related importers in the community.
drumetit paluti kaks korda teavitada komisjoni ühenduses tegutsevatest sidusimportijatest.

it was further alleged that drumet's main shareholder had never acted or signed on behalf of the importer.
selles väideti samuti, et drumeti põhiaktsionär ei olnud kunagi tegutsenud importija nimel ega tema nimel millelegi alla kirjutanud.

as drumet had issued undertaking invoices accompanying swr apparently in conformity with the undertaking, these sales to the importer had been exempted from the duty.
kuna drumet oli ilmselt hinnakohustuse kohaselt esitanud koos terastrosside ja -kaablitega ka kinnitusarved, vabastati importijale suunatud müük tollimaksust.

finally, the argument that drumet's main shareholder had never acted on behalf of the importer or signed any documents was considered irrelevant.
lisaks ei loetud oluliseks väidet, et drumeti põhiaktsionär ei ole kunagi tegutsenud importija nimel ega allkirjastanud tema nimel dokumente.

as the undertaking only applies to sales to unrelated customers in the community and drumet had issued undertaking invoices for sales to the importer, a breach of the undertaking appeared to have occurred.
kuna hinnakohustust kohaldatakse ainult sõltumatutele klientidele suunatud müügile ühenduses ja drumet oli esitanud hinnakohustusega seotud kinnitusarved importijale, oli hinnakohustust ilmselt rikutud.

however, drumet submitted a copy of a trusteeship agreement following which drumet's main shareholder had allegedly sold his shares to the managing director of the importer in july 1999.
drumet esitas siiski koopia usaldusettevõtteks olemise lepingust, mille kohaselt drumeti põhiaktsionär oli 1999. aasta juunis oma aktsiad väidetavalt müünud importija tegevdirektorile.

contrary to what had been stated before (cf. recital 9), drumet actually admitted that both companies had indeed been related for a certain period.
vastupidiselt oma varasematele väidetele (vt põhjendus 9), tunnistas drumet, et kõnealused ettevõtted olid teineteise suhtes teatud aja jooksul tõepoolest sidusettevõtted.

imports of swr produced and directly exported to the community by drumet were exempted from the anti-dumping duty by article 1(3) of the same regulation.
drumetis toodetud ja otse ühendusse eksporditud terastrosside ja -kaablite import vabastati kõnealuse määruse artikli 1 lõike 3 kohaselt dumpinguvastasest tollimaksust.

first, the trusteeship agreement stipulates that drumet's main shareholder continues to hold himself out as a shareholder of the importer vis-à-vis all third parties.
esiteks on drumeti põhiaktsionär usaldusettevõtteks olemise lepingu kohaselt endiselt kolmandate isikute suhtes importija aktsionäriks.

during a hearing it was however not denied by drumet's representatives that the transfer of shares had not been officially transferred before october 2002 which implied that drumet's main shareholder continued to be the formal owner of the importer until that date.
Ärakuulamise ajal ei eitanud drumeti esindajad siiski seda, et aktsiaid ei kantud ametlikult üle enne kui 2002. aasta oktoobris, mis tähendab, et drumeti põhiaktsionär oli selle ajani endiselt importija formaalseks omanikuks.

according to this information, it was established that drumet's main shareholder also held 50 % of the shares of the importer in question from june 1999 until july 1999 and 95 % of the shares of the importer from july 1999.
nende andmete alusel selgitati välja, et drumeti peamine aktsionär omas ajavahemikus juunist 1999 kuni juulini 1999 kõnealuse importija aktsiatest 50 % ja alates juulist 199995 %.