Betekenis van:
common factor

common factor
Zelfstandig naamwoord
    • an integer that divides two (or more) other integers evenly

    Synoniemen

    Hyperoniemen

    Hyponiemen


    Voorbeeldzinnen

    1. This is a basic factor that can even be said to be the common lot of man, it certainly doesn't apply only to Germans.
    2. The fifth factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market was the appropriateness of the method of calculating the aid.
    3. Furthermore, this high coefficient may be attributable to a common factor such as the price of inputs or to a common (downward) price trend rather than to competitive constraints.
    4. The fourth factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market was the choice of years used for determining the production for a normal year for the purpose of calculating the loss incurred.
    5. The seventh factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market concerned the existence of a presumption of an infringement of the rules governing the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables established by Regulation (EC) No 2200/96.
    6. The sixth factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market concerned compliance with point 11.3.8 of the guidelines, according to which, where aid is paid to a producer organisation, the amount must not exceed the actual loss incurred by the farmer.
    7. credit institutions shall have a process in place to detect excessive correlation between the creditworthiness of a protection provider and the obligor of the underlying exposure due to their performance being dependent on common factors beyond the systematic risk factor; and
    8. Since the period under consideration in the present proceedings is subsequent to that alteration, the evolution of the common market cannot play a role in the assessment. An evolution factor coming into play after the introduction of the new financing mechanism would be equally irrelevant, because the measure would already have constituted State aid at the time the evolution took place.
    9. The sixth factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market concerned compliance with point 11.3.8 of the guidelines, according to which, where aid is paid to a producer organisation, the amount must not exceed the actual loss incurred by the farmer. The concept of actual loss was called into question in view of the doubts referred to above (loss of turnover and not of production; method of calculating losses not entirely reliable).
    10. ‘A factor of legal uncertainty would be introduced if Member States were to be required to notify to the Commission and submit for its preventive review not only new aid or alterations of aid properly so-called granted to an undertaking in receipt of existing aid but also all measures which affect the activity of the undertaking and which may have an impact on the functioning of the common market or on competition.’
    11. The second factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market was the fact that the Italian authorities, after referring to a loss in relation to average historical production, acknowledged that the loss had been calculated in relation to the turnover of the undertakings, while point 11.3 of the Community guidelines for State aid to the agricultural sector (hereafter called the guidelines) [4], which serve as a basis for the assessment of aid to compensate farmers for losses caused by adverse weather conditions, describes a method of calculating losses which concerns production losses (the ‘price’ factor is taken into consideration only when the loss at production level has been determined).
    12. The first factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market was the fact that, according to the information provided by the Italian authorities during the exchange of correspondence with the Commission, it became increasingly clear that the difficult situation was not due to weather conditions but to the unfavourable development of trade, in other words a factor falling within the normal risks associated with farming (for example, in their letter of 7 August 2003 the Italian authorities said that the difficult situation was due more to market conditions than to a fall in production; in addition, the loss has been calculated in terms of turnover and not of production — see recital 13 below).
    13. The third factor which led the Commission to doubt the compatibility of the aid with the common market was the fact that, according to the estimates provided by the Italian authorities, the average production of peaches and nectarines in 2002 was going to be above that for the three previous years, while according to point 11.3.1 of the guidelines aid is permitted only if the damage reaches 20 % of normal production in the less-favoured areas and 30 % in other areas (as indicated in recital 9, the average regional production for the three years preceding the event relied on had totalled 144692 tonnes, 86059 tonnes for peaches and 58633 tonnes for nectarines; for 2002 it had been estimated at 147300 tonnes, 86300 tonnes for peaches and 61000 tonnes for nectarines).