Restructuring costs mintaszakaszok

Restructuring costs. The Norwegian authorities have argued that the grant of an amount of up to NOK 395 million for purposes of maintaining membership in the State Pension Fund (“SPK”) was necessary because continued membership of the SPK scheme is a burden imposed upon the company by the State. In order to protect the State's investment the costs should be covered by the State. (1) Letter dated 1 November 2004 from the Norwegian authorities to the Authority. Another similar statement appears in a letter dated 6 October 2006 from the authorities to the Authority: “The transitional contracts and all future contracts were reflected in the opening balance through the present value per 1 January 2003 of their estimated contribution to the esti- mated future cash flow in Mesta.”. (2) The Real Estate Registry contains information from “Tinglysningsregis- teret” or “Grunnboken” and “GAB-registeret (Grunneiendommer, Adresser og Bygninger)”. (3) Section 7(1) of Law No 59 of 1975 on document duty and Law No 86 of 1982 on court fees. (4) Section 2-6 of the Regulation on Document Duty, Ministry of Finance, 16 September 1975 as amended. (5) Section 3(2) of the Mesta Act (cf. footnote 33) concerns the transfer of ownership to real estate from the Public Road Administration to Mesta AS. (6) Section 3.3 of St. prp. nr. 1 Tillegg nr. 1 (2002-2003). It appears that the total market for construction and building in Norway accounts for approximately NOK 130 billion per year. The construction market and those parts of the building market which are relevant for the newly established company accounts for approximately NOK 42 billion (of which operating and maintenance work accounts for NOK 12 billion while investment work accounts for NOK 30 billion). (7) According to Section 2.1 of St. prp. nr. 1 Tillegg nr. 1 (2002-2003) the total turnover of the Production Department was NOK 6,55 billion for the year of 2001. With respect to the costs related to moving, commuting and renovation of machines, the Norwegian authorities have argued that the State, as an owner, should logically cover such costs in accordance with the private market investor principle. The authorities have further argued that when an owner spins off a part of its business and transfers it into a separate entity, it is normal that the owner covers the costs related to measures such as the transfer of archives to the new entity. It would be a burden on Mesta AS to cover such costs itself and it is therefore not an advantage for Mesta AS ...