natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since the Länder have the power to regulate who is required to bear the costs for their particular area, certain undertakings were not favoured within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU if quality tests were funded within a given Land entirely or partly by the milk levy.
Budući da su savezne pokrajine nadležne za uređivanje obveze preuzimanja troškova u svojem području, određeni poduzetnici ne stavljaju se u povoljniji položaj u skladu s člankom 107. stavkom 1. UFEU-a ako se unutar savezne pokrajine ispitivanje kakvoće u potpunosti ili djelomično financira iz pristojbe za mlijeko.
Federal law was not the correct reference framework for determining the matter of who should bear the costs.
Savezno pravo nije relevantni pravni okvir za obvezu preuzimanja troškova.
It was therefore irrelevant that in Länder other than Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria such (partial) funding from the levy did not take place.
Stoga nije mjerodavna činjenica da se u drugim saveznim pokrajinama, za razliku od Baden-Württemberga i Bavarske, ne provodi takvo (djelomično) financiranje iz pristojbe.
Within Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg all undertakings had to bear the costs equally.
U Bavarskoj i Baden-Württembergu svi poduzetnici moraju snositi troškove u istoj mjeri.
There was therefore no (selective) favouring of some undertakings over others.
Stoga ne nastaje (selektivna) prednost.
A further aspect also demonstrated that there was no favouring of dairies that was relevant from a State aid point of view, i.e. the fact that dairies were not spared costs that they would normally have to bear because they were required in return to pay a higher contribution to the milk levy.
Iz još jednog aspekta vidljivo da ne postoji povoljniji položaj za mljekare u skladu s pravilima o potporama: Mljekare se ne oslobađaju troškova koje bi inače morale snositi jer bi s druge strane morale plaćati veći doprinos pristojbi za mlijeko.
The levy was only partially used to fund milk testing.
Pristojba se upotrebljava za djelomično financiranje provjera mlijeka.
When the level of funding for milk testing from the levy was ended in the light of the Commission's proceedings, the levy rate was also reduced.
Obustavom financiranja provjera mlijeka iz pristojbe na temelju postupka Komisije snižena je i stopa pristojbe.
The remuneration received by dairies in respect of quality tests thus increased in order to offset the lower level of funding from the levy.
Naknade mljekara za provjere kakvoće s druge su se strane povećale kako bi se nadoknadilo smanjeno financiranje iz pristojbe.
The Court of Justice had held in this respect that no advantage existed where a contribution corresponds to the actual economic cost of the benefits provided in return [11].
Sud je u tom pogledu odlučio da nema povoljnijeg položaja ako davanje odgovara stvarnom ekonomskom trošku protuusluge [11].
Such a link between the benefit and the consideration paid for it did exist in the case of (parafiscal) charges if the charges were collected in relation to a specific purpose.
Takva poveznica između usluge i protuusluge postoji kod (parafiskalnih) davanja ako su davanja naplaćena u konkretnu svrhu.
As the Commission had itself established [12], such ‘hypothecation’ did exist in this case.
Komisija je utvrdila [12] da u predmetnom slučaju postoji takva „povezana upotreba”.
Since the benefit (contribution to the levy) exceeded the consideration (lower costs of milk tests) in this case, any advantage relevant from a State aid point of view could be ruled out.
Budući da u ovom slučaju usluga (doprinos pristojbi) premašuje protuuslugu (manji troškovi provjera mlijeka) potrebno je isključiti stavljanje u povoljniji položaj u skladu s pravilima o državnim potporama.
In the alternative, Germany claimed that the sub-measures in question constituted existing aid.
Njemačka je umjesto toga navela da su predmetne podmjere zatečene potpore.
The basis for funding the tests from the revenues generated by the levy was Section 22(2), point 1, of the MFG.
Temelj je za financiranje provjera iz pristojbe članak 22. stavak 2. točka 1. MFG-a.
The support granted pursuant to that provision was (at most) existing aid and was therefore subject to grandfathering.
Potpora dodijeljena na temelju članka 22. stavka 2. točke 1. MFG-a zatečena je potpora (u svakom slučaju) i kao takva se nastavlja priznavati.
The support's status as existing aid was undermined neither by any changes nor by any appropriate measures.
Značaj potpore kao zatečene potpore ne narušava se ni mogućim izmjenama ni relevantnim mjerama.
Article 1(b)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 provided that ‘existing aid’ encompasses aid which ‘existed prior to the entry into force of the Treaty in the respective Member States, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the Treaty’.
U skladu s člankom 1. točkom (b) podtočkom i. Uredbe (EZ) br. 659/1999 pojam „zatečena potpora” znači, među ostalim, potpora „koja je postojala prije stupanja na snagu Ugovora u odgovarajućim državama članicama, odnosno programi potpore i pojedinačna potpora čija je primjena započela prije, te se nastavila i nakon stupanja Ugovora na snagu”.
The MFG was drafted in 1952 and had remained in force largely unamended ever since.
MFG je ažuriran 1952. i otad je na snazi u većinom neizmijenjenom obliku.
The aid scheme had therefore been introduced well before the relevant qualifying date (1 January 1958).
Program potpore tako je uveden znatno prije relevantnog datuma (1. siječnja 1958.).
Under the first sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU, existing aid lost its protection under grandfathering and was liable to be notified if the aid was altered.
Zatečena potpora u skladu s člankom 108. stavkom 3. rečenicom 1. UFEU-a prestaje vrijediti i podliježe obvezi prijave ako je potpora izmijenjena.
According to settled case law and decisional practice, aid could only be deemed to have been altered within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU if it had been significantly amended.
Izmjena u smislu članka 108. stavka 3. rečenice 1. UFEU-a u skladu s ustaljenom sudskom praksom i praksom odlučivanja prihvaća se samo ako je potpora bitno izmijenjena.
An amendment was only relevant if it affected the essential nature of the aid, if the aid was granted on a different legal basis or if it amended the scope of the scheme.
Izmjena je relevantna samo ako se odnosi na „bitno obilježje” potpore, ako se potpora dodjeljuje na drugoj pravnoj osnovi ili ako se izmijeni „opseg programa”.
Only point 5 of Section 22(2), which is irrelevant to this case, had been amended.
Izmjena se odnosi samo na točku 5. članka 22. stavka 2. koja ovdje nije relevantna.
Amendments to the provisions of the individual Länder did not affect the scope or nature of the measures in question.
Izmjene propisa pojedinih saveznih pokrajina ne odnose se na opseg ili značaj pojedine mjere. Štoviše, člankom 22. stavkom 2.
Indeed, the purposes for which revenues from the levy could be used were stipulated by Sections 22(1) of the MFG.
MFG-a predviđa se u koje se svrhe mogu upotrebljavati sredstva iz pristojbe u skladu s člankom 22. stavkom 1. MFG-a.
To the extent that individual procedural rules had been amended, this would have altered the existing aid within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU only if its compatibility with the internal market had been affected.
U slučaju izmjene pojedinih postupovnih propisa zatečena potpora time bi se izmijenila samo u smislu članka 108. stavka 3. rečenice 1. UFEU-a, kad bi se to odnosilo na spojivost s unutarnjim tržištem.
In the case of Bavaria, the relevant Regulation on a levy for milk (BayMilchUmlV) only regulated details, e.g. concerning the collection of the levy, and the same also applied to Baden-Württemberg.
U slučaju Bavarske mjerodavnom Uredbom o pristojbi za mlijeko (BayMilchUmlV) uređuju se samo pojedinosti, npr. o naplati pristojbe, a jednako vrijedi i za Baden-Württemberg.
The aspects relevant to the aid's compatibility with the internal market, i.e. the provenance of the funds (the levy pursuant to Section 22(1)) and the purpose for which they were used (Section 22(2)) were, however, already sufficiently set out in the MFG.
Međutim, značajke bitne za spojivost potpore s unutarnjim tržištem – podrijetlo sredstava (pristojba u skladu s člankom 22. stavkom 1.) i svrha upotrebe (članak 22. stavak 2.) – već su u dovoljnoj mjeri određene u MFG-u.
The fact that some of the funds had possibly been granted on the basis of the MFG in individual cases and only temporarily [13] (see recital 147 of the Decision) was not an obstacle to their being regarded as existing aid.
Mogućnost da su djelomično pojedinačno i samo privremeno dodjeljivana sredstva na temelju MFG-a [13] nije u suprotnosti sa značajem zatečene potpore.
This support was granted on the basis of the MFG, which was an aid scheme and thus, by its nature, described individual aid purely in abstract terms.
Ta je potpora dodijeljena na temelju MFG-a koji predstavlja program potpore i stoga je njegova narav takva da se u njemu pojedine potpore opisuju samo na apstraktan način.
Moreover, it was not required that an aid scheme be used on a continuous basis.
Usto se program potpore ne mora upotrijebiti u potpunosti.
The appropriate measures contained in the Community Guidelines for State Aid in the Agricultural Sector 2000-2006 [14] (hereinafter: ‘the 2000-2006 Guidelines’) and in the Community Guidelines for State Aid in the Agricultural and Forestry Sector 2007-2013 [15] (hereinafter: ‘the 2007-2013 Guidelines’) were not applicable to the measures relevant in this case, meaning that they continued to constitute existing aid.
Relevantne mjere sadržane u Smjernicama Zajednice za državne potpore u poljoprivrednom sektoru 2000. – 2006. [14] (dalje u tekstu: „Smjernice Zajednice 2000. – 2006.”) i u Smjernicama Zajednice za državne potpore u sektoru poljoprivrede i šumarstva 2007. – 2013.
The appropriate measures would have to relate specifically to the aid in question and determine that it was not compatible with the internal market.
(dalje u tekstu: „Smjernice 2007. – 2013.”) nisu primjenjive na mjere koje su ovdje relevantne tako da one ostaju zatečene potpore. Relevantne mjere morale bi se odnositi upravo na predmetnu potporu i njima bi se moralo utvrditi da ona nije spojiva s unutarnjim tržištem.
The 2007-2013 Guidelines did not address the matter of the compatibility of support for milk quality checks, at least not with the necessary detail.
U Smjernicama 2007. – 2013. ne upućuje se na spojivost potpore za provjere kakvoće mlijeka ili se barem na nju ne upućuje na dovoljno konkretan način.
In this context, Germany referred to paragraphs 108 and 109 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines.
U tom pogledu Njemačka upućuje na točke 108. i 109. Smjernica 2007. – 2013.
The classification of aid in the 2007-2013 Guidelines and in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 [16] distinguished between ‘aid in the livestock sector’ and ‘aid for the production and marketing of agricultural products’.
U sistematici Smjernica 2007. – 2013. i Uredbe Komisije (EZ) br. 1857/2006 [16] pravi se razlika između „potpora za stočarstvo” i „potpora za proizvodnju i prodaju poljoprivrednih proizvoda”.
Paragraph 108 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines was clearly concerned solely with support for livestock holdings since it related to the ‘genetic quality of Community livestock’.
Točka 108.
Paragraph 109 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines could only be understood as meaning that it should take account of this knowledge concerning the maintenance of the genetic quality of livestock (paragraph 108) as this was the only thing it dealt with.
Program iz točke 109. Smjernica 2007. – 2013. može se razumjeti samo na način da se uzimaju u obzir saznanja o genetičkoj kakvoći životinjske populacije (točka 108.) jer je riječ samo o tome.
Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006, to which paragraph 109 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines referred, was concerned with ‘support for the livestock sector’ and not with milk quality checks in the sense that was relevant in this case.
Članak 16. Uredbe (EZ) br. 1857/2006, na koji se upućuje u točki 109. Smjernica 2007. – 2013., jednako se tako odnosi na „potpore sektoru stočarstva”, a ne na provjere kakvoće mlijeka u smislu koji je relevantan za ovaj predmet.
Article 16(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 dealt with milk quality checks linked to the breeding of animals.
Članak 16. stavak 1. točka (b) Uredbe (EZ) br. 1857/2006 odnosi se na provjere kakvoće mlijeka povezane sa stočarstvom.
This was apparent from the context of the provision, which stipulated that the exemption extended to aid (up to a rate of 70 %) to determine the genetic quality or yield of livestock.
To proizlazi i iz konteksta propisa: prema njemu su izuzete potpore (do najviše stope od 70 %) za utvrđivanje genetičke kakvoće ili prinosa stoke.
If routine milk quality checks were excluded from this, then this could also only relate to checks that are generally suited to determining the yield of animals.
Ako su rutinske provjere kakvoće mlijeka izuzete iz toga, onda se i to može odnositi samo na provjere koje su u načelu primjerene za utvrđivanje prinosa stoke.
The exception related solely to routine milk quality checks carried out directly on the dairy cow because only such checks could determine the characteristics of the animal in question.
Iznimka se odnosi samo na rutinske provjere kakvoće mlijeka koje se provode izravno na mliječnoj kravi jer se značajke pojedine životinje mogu utvrditi samo tim provjerama.
By contrast, the milk quality testing carried out by the MPBY and the MPBW that is relevant to this case related to determining the characteristics of the milk itself (and not the genetic characteristics of the cow).
Međutim, ispitivanja kakvoće mlijeka relevantna za ovaj predmet koja provode MPBY i MPBW odnose se na utvrđivanje svojstava samog mlijeka (a ne genetičkih svojstava krave).
The characteristics of the milk in question (e.g. fat and protein content) were relevant to the sale and placing on the market of milk.
Te značajke mlijeka (među ostalim udjel masti i bjelančevina) relevantne su za prodaju mlijeka i stavljanje mlijeka na tržište.
They did not allow inferences to be made concerning individual animals because they were carried out differently.
Naknadni zaključci u pogledu pojedine životinje nisu mogući jer su ispitivanja uređena na drukčiji način.
Samples were not separated so as to be able to identify which cow they came from, but were instead taken from milk tankers.
Uzorci se ne razdvajaju s obzirom na to od koje su krave dobiveni. Uzimaju se tek iz kolica za prikupljanje mlijeka.
This meant that it was no longer possible to separate the milk according to the cow it had come from because milk from a variety of cows had already been mixed together when the sample was taken.
Ondje nije moguće razdvajanje s obzirom na pojedine životinje jer je u kolicima za prikupljanje mlijeka pri dobivanju pomiješano mlijeko nekoliko krava.
Consequently, neither paragraph 109 nor any other provision of the 2007-2013 Guidelines excluded the possibility that aid for milk quality checks was compatible with the internal market.
U Smjernicama 2007. – 2013. stoga ni u točki 109. ni na nekom drugom mjestu nije isključeno da su potpore za provjere kakvoće mlijeka spojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
The onus was on the Commission to prove that individual measures were incompatible with the internal market.
Komisija je obvezna dokazati da su pojedine mjere nespojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
Any ambiguity in the formulation of appropriate measures could not be to the detriment of the Member States [17].
Moguće nejasnoće u formuliranju relevantnih mjera ne mogu ići na teret države članice [17].
The acceptance by the Member State required under Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 could therefore only be effective if the Member State was aware which measures it was specifically accepting.
Prihvaćanje države članice potrebno u skladu s člankom 19. stavkom 1. Uredbe (EZ) br. 659/1999 može imati učinka samo ako država članica može razumjeti koje mjere konkretno prihvaća.
The Länder in question could therefore assume that the disputed measures were compatible with the internal market.
Predmetne savezne pokrajine stoga mogu pretpostaviti da su mjere koje su predmet spora spojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
If the Commission had intended to find the Bavarian and Baden-Württemberg milk quality tests to be incompatible with the common market, it could have (expressly) addressed this in a form consistent with how it had done this in other decisions.
Da je Komisija namjeravala utvrditi nespojivost provjera kakvoće mlijeka u Bavarskoj i Baden-Württembergu s unutarnjim tržištem EU-a to je mogla navesti u (izričitom) obliku u kojem je to učinila u drugim odlukama [18].
The Commission had not, however, broached the question of the compatibility with the internal market of funding the milk quality tests in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg by means of a levy.
Komisija u odnosu na Njemačku nije razmatrala spojivost financiranja provjera kakvoće mlijeka sredstvima iz pristojbe u Bavarskoj i Baden-Württembergu s unutarnjim tržištem.
In view of the wording of the 2007-2013 Guidelines, which is at the very least unclear, it would have been necessary in accordance with the general principles of legal certainty and sincere cooperation (Article 4(3) TEU) to specifically deal with these measures, particularly given that the Länder in question had assumed that sub-measures BY 1 and BW 1 did not involve any aid.
Izričita bi obrada tih mjera, s obzirom na u najmanju ruku nejasnu formulaciju iz Smjernica 2007. – 2013., bila potrebna u skladu s općim načelima određenosti i lojalne suradnje (članak 4. stavak 3. UFEU-a) jer su predmetne savezne pokrajine pretpostavljale da mjere BY 1/BW 1 ne sadržavaju potporu.
The 2007-2013 Guidelines should therefore not be understood as meaning that measures implemented pursuant to Section 22(2)(1) of the MFG were incompatible with the internal market.
Smjernice 2007. – 2013. stoga nije potrebno tumačiti na način da su mjere koje se temelje na članku 22. stavku 2. točki 1. MFG-a nespojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
Consequently, the funding of milk quality tests in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg by means of a levy (BY 1/BW 1) did not fall under the definition of appropriate measures.
Financiranje provjera kakvoće mlijeka sredstvima iz pristojbe u Bavarskoj i Baden-Württembergu (BY 1 i BW 1) stoga nije obuhvaćeno relevantnim mjerama.
In the alternative, Germany also argued that the measures were compatible with the internal market even if they did constitute aid.
Njemačka je umjesto toga dalje navela da su mjere, čak i ako predstavljaju potporu, spojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
It did not result from Article 16(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 that it was incompatible with the internal market to grant aid for controls of milk quality.
Iz članka 16. stavka 1. točke (b) Uredbe (EZ) br. 1857/2006 ne proizlazi da je dodjela potpora za provjeru kakvoće mlijeka nespojiva s unutarnjim tržištem.
Under that provision, these were not ‘automatically’ compatible with the internal market and thus exempt from the notification requirement.
Međutim, u skladu s člankom 16. stavkom 1. točkom (b) Uredbe one nisu „automatski” spojive s unutarnjim tržištem i time izuzete iz obveze prijave.
However, the Commission could decide in an individual case that the aid was compatible with the internal market.
Ipak, Komisija bi mogla u pojedinačnom slučaju utvrditi da su potpore spojive s unutarnjim tržištem.
The alleged aid for Bavarian/Baden-Württemberg dairies was in any case compatible with the internal market in accordance with Article 107(3)(c) TFEU.
Navodne potpore za mljekare iz Bavarske i Baden-Württemberga u svakom su slučaju spojive s unutarnjim tržištem u skladu s člankom 107. stavkom 3. točkom (c) UFEU-a.
This view was also supported by the fact that this form of aid was compatible with the internal market under point 13.3 of the 2000-2006 Guidelines, as the Commission had itself acknowledged in its initiation Decision (paragraphs 164 et seq.).
U prilog tomu govori i činjenica da je taj oblik potpora spojiv s unutarnjim tržištem na temelju podtočke 13.3. Smjernica Zajednice 2000.
In particular, it relates to prescribed checks that are carried out by third parties.
2006., što je Komisija priznala u Odluci o pokretanju postupka (točka 164. i dalje).
Compatibility with the internal market is further confirmed by the fact that the dairies themselves met the costs of the quality checks via the milk levy.
Posebno je riječ o propisanim provjerama koje provode treće strane. Nadalje, u prilog spojivosti s unutarnjim tržištem govori i činjenica da mljekare same snose troškove za provjere kakvoće pristojbom za mlijeko.
This minimised any potential advantages that the dairies might enjoy [19].
Time se navodne prednosti mljekara svode na najmanju moguću mjeru [19].
Competition between dairies was not undermined by the different system, irrespective of whether costs were borne directly or a levy was charged.
Različitim sustavima ne utječe se na tržišno natjecanje među mljekarama, neovisno o tome snose li se troškovi izravno ili se naplaćuje pristojba.
The upshot was that dairies bore the costs in either case.
Kao rezultat toga, mljekare u oba slučaja snose troškove.
It was not clear how the compatibility with the internal market of aid that had explicitly been included in the 2000-2006 Guidelines should have changed from 2007.
Nije jasno zašto se spojivost odgovarajućih potpora s unutarnjim tržištem koja je izričito preuzeta u Smjernicama Zajednice 2000. – 2006. promijenila od 2007.
Comments from interested parties
Primjedbe zainteresiranih stranaka
Between 5 and 7 February 2014, the Commission received a total of seven letters from interested parties containing comments concerning the support granted in respect of the milk quality tests.
Od 5. do 7. veljače 2014. Komisija je primila ukupno sedam primjedaba zainteresiranih strana u pogledu potpora uloženih u ispitivanja kvalitete mlijeka.
In its letter of 5 February, the MPBY argued that dairies had not in recent years been afforded any advantage by dint of levy funding.
MPBY u svojem je dopisu od 5. veljače 2014. naveo da ne postoji prednost mljekara na temelju financiranja od pristojbe u proteklim godinama.
It was therefore completely incomprehensible how this long-standing and generally accepted system could distort competition or negatively affect trade between the Member States.
Stoga nikako nije razumljivo kako bi taj razvijeni i opće prihvaćeni sustav mogao dovesti do narušavanja tržišnog natjecanja ili do negativnog utjecaja na trgovinu među državama članicama.
In the context of the further procedure, therefore, the measures referred to [in the initiation Decision] under the heading BY 1 should, after re-examination, be regarded as settled.
U okviru daljnjeg postupka stoga je mjeru BY 1 iz Odluke o pokretanju postupka nakon ponovljenog ispitivanja potrebno smatrati provedenom.
The MPBW stated in its comments of 6 February that payments relating to sub-measure BW 1 did not meet the conditions for aid pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU.
MPBW je u svojim primjedbama od 6. veljače 2014. tvrdio je da se plaćanjima u pogledu podmjere BW 1 ne ispunjuju preduvjeti za potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1.
In particular, the system of carrying out quality tests on delivered milk in Baden-Württemberg was not associated with any cost to the public exchequer.
UFEU-a. Točnije, sa sustavom ispitivanja kakvoće dostavljenog mlijeka u Baden-Württembergu nije povezano nikakvo opterećenje proračuna pokrajine.
Advantages similar to subsidies that may be traced back to a state measure without there being any corresponding financial loss to the public purse did not, however, fall within the scope of Article 107(1) TFEU [20].
Međutim, pogodnosti istovjetne subvencijama koje proizlaze iz mjere države, a pritom ne dovode do odgovarajućeg smanjenja javnih sredstava, nisu obuhvaćene područjem primjene članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a [20].