natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Under Section 22(3) of the MFG, the funds raised had to be managed separately.
U skladu s člankom 22. stavkom 3. MFG-a dobivenim sredstvima potrebno je odvojeno upravljati.
They were not allowed to be used to cover the administrative costs of the highest Land authorities and their subordinate departments.
Ne smije ih se upotrebljavati za podmirivanje troškova upravljanja najviših pokrajinskih tijela i njihovih pripadajućih službi.
They had to be shown in the Baden-Württemberg Land budget under a separate sub-heading, and the budget expressly referred to the fact that they were earmarked for a specific purpose.
U proračunu pokrajine Baden-Württemberg potrebno ih je iskazati pod vlastitim podnaslovom. U proračunu se upućuje na njihovu svrhu.
The revenues from the milk levy were therefore never used for purposes not falling within the scope of the MFG.
Stoga sredstva od pristojbe za mlijeko nikad nisu upotrijebljena u druge svrhe osim onih navedenih u MFG-u.
Above all, however, in the context of the tasks assigned to it, the MPBW received payments from levy resources which did not exceed the resources funded from the levy.
Međutim, MPBW je u okviru zadataka koji su mu preneseni primio plaćanja iz sredstava od pristojbe, ali ona nisu premašivala sredstva financirana iz pristojbe.
This meant that no State funds — from taxes or other state revenues, for example — were paid to the MPBW but only the revenues accruing from the levy paid by dairies.
Prema tome, MPBW-u nisu isplaćena državna sredstva, poput poreza ili drugih državnih prihoda, nego samo sredstva iz mljekarske pristojbe koju su plaćale mljekare.
Instead, Baden-Württemberg had merely taken on the task of organising and distributing the milk levy.
Umjesto toga savezna pokrajina Baden-Württemberg preuzela je samo organizaciju i raspodjelu pristojbe za mlijeko.
The system of quality tests on delivered milk in Baden-Württemberg did not therefore lead to any financial loss to the public purse.
Sustav ispitivanja kakvoće dostavljenog mlijeka u Baden-Württembergu stoga nije doveo do smanjenja javnih sredstava.
Since Baden-Württemberg had not granted any subsidies in addition to the milk levy and there was not any corresponding financial net cost to the Land budget, it could not have granted any aid ‘in the form of subsidised services’.
Budući da savezna pokrajina Baden-Württemberg nije dodijelila bespovratna sredstva za pristojbu za mlijeko i ne postoji odgovarajuće financijsko neto opterećenje proračuna pokrajine, Baden-Württemberg nije mogao dodijeliti „potporu u obliku subvencioniranih usluga”.
Even if the milk levy in Baden-Württemberg were attributable to the State contrary to the criteria set out by the Court of Justice in PreussenElektra, there was not any advantage to dairies.
Čak i da se mljekarska pristojba u Baden-Württembergu može pripisati državi, suprotno kriterijima Europskog suda utvrđenima u predmetu PreussenElektra, mljekare se ne stavljaju u povoljniji položaj.
The aspect of ‘favouring’ as the central element of Article 107(1) TFEU has been widely interpreted by reference to established case law and the Commission's practice [21].
Značajka stavljanja u povoljniji položaj kao središnjeg uvjeta iz članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a široko se tumači u skladu s ustaljenom sudskom praksom Europskog suda i praksom Komisije [21].
Parafiscal charges often formed the basis for systems involving the provision of services that are in the specific interest of those liable to pay them (aspect of group benefit).
Parafiskalna davanja često su činila temelj za sustave pružanja usluga koji su bili u posebnom interesu obveznika plaćanja (značajka skupne korisnosti).
In such systems, those paying the levy were prima facie identical to those who benefited from the service funded by the parafiscal levy.
U tim su sustavima stoga obveznici plaćanja prima facie istovjetni s korisnicima usluge financirane iz parafiskalnih davanja.
In the case of parafiscal levies, case law therefore dictated that it must be examined whether the service received corresponds in value to the contribution (levy) paid, i.e. that there is equivalence in terms of the payment and the benefit received.
U skladu s ustaljenom praksom stoga je kod parafiskalnih davanja potrebno ispitati odgovara li protuusluga na temelju davanja vrijednosti plaćenog doprinosa, odnosno postoji li jednakovrijednost usluga.
Such equivalence should not be examined individually but in relation to the overall system.
Jednakovrijednost usluga pritom se ne ispituje pojedinačno, nego u odnosu na ukupni sustav. Parafiskalni sustavi financiranja obično sadržavaju određeni element preraspodjele, tj. svaki obveznik davanja ne dobiva jednaku korist iz svake usluge koja je dio raspoložive palete.
While it is true that parafiscal systems of funding services typically involve a certain element of redistribution, i.e. not all of those liable to pay draw the same benefit from each of the individual services on offer, the aspects of balance and equivalence in such systems were nevertheless not undermined if such redistribution occurred on the basis of solidarity [22].
Međutim, takav je sustav uravnotežen i nije ugrožena jednakovrijednost usluga, dok god se ta preraspodjela provodi solidarno [22].
The level of the levy in Baden-Württemberg was determined according to the specific quantity of delivered milk.
Iznos davanja u Baden-Württembergu određuje se na temelju konkretne količine dostavljenog mlijeka.
Dairy A that delivered twice as much milk for quality testing by MPBW would have to pay exactly twice the levy.
Mljekara A koja je u tijelo za ispitivanje mlijeka BW dostavila dvostruku količinu mlijeka na provjeru kakvoće za to bi morala platiti i točno dvostruka davanja.
This meant that the notion of equivalence in terms of the payment and the benefit received was not undermined.
Stoga jednakovrijednost usluga nije narušena.
The competent authorities in Baden-Württemberg had no discretion whatsoever in calculating the milk levy.
Nadležna tijela u Baden-Württembergu pri izračunu pristojbe za mlijeko nemaju diskrecijski prostor.
This system also ensured that there could not be any structural net beneficiaries because all dairies were liable to the levy solely on the basis of the quantity of milk delivered and would receive services from MPBW solely on that basis.
Tim se sustavom osigurava i da nema strukturnih neto dobitnika jer su sve mljekare plaćale davanja isključivo na temelju dostavljenog mlijeka i samo su na temelju toga primile usluge MPBW-a.
The MPBW therefore assumed that no aid was being granted, or at least no advantage.
MPBW stoga pretpostavlja da u toj mjeri ne postoji potpora, a u svakom slučaju da ne postoji stavljanje u povoljniji položaj.
It was therefore incomprehensible that it was no longer permissible to test milk quality from 2007 onwards.
Stoga je nerazumljivo zašto ispitivanje kvalitete mlijeka više ne bi trebalo biti dopušteno od 2007.
This had served in both the past and the present to guarantee consumers high quality milk that was free from inhibitor residues [23].
Ono je u prošlosti i u sadašnjosti služilo tomu da se potrošačima osigura visoka razina kakvoće mlijeka, bez ostataka inhibitora [23].
In its comments of 7 February 2014, the DHB — Netzwerk Haushalt considered the services provided by muva Kempten in the area of the tests carried out to detect nutritionally relevant constituents to make a vital contribution to the protection of and information available to consumers.
Udruženje DHB – Netzwerk Haushalt u svojim primjedbama od 7. veljače 2014. smatra usluge laboratorija muva Kempten u području ispitivanja nutritivno relevantnih sastojaka bitnim doprinosom zaštiti i informiranju potrošača.
The fact that the results of analyses were neutral and not influenced by dairies or the trade, the rapid detection of any harmful contaminants in milk and dairy products and, consequently, the ability to react quickly in a crisis situation were all elements that the DHB — Netzwerk Haushalt appreciated.
Procjenjuju se neutralni rezultati istraživanja na koje ne utječu mljekare ili trgovina, brzo prepoznavanje štetnih opterećenja za mlijeko i mliječne proizvode te time i mogućnost za brzo reagiranje u kriznim situacijama.
These measures helped ensure that high-quality food was available to the trade and thus to consumers.
Navedenim se mjerama pridonosi tome da kvalitetne namirnice stignu u trgovine, a time i do potrošača.
The importance of these tests to all consumers could not be overestimated.
Značenje tih ispitivanja za sve potrošače ne može se dovoljno visoko vrednovati.
By deciding on how the resources from the levy were to be used, in particular as regards milk quality tests, it could exert significant influence to be exerted on how these tests were carried out.
Pokrajinsko udruženje odlučivanjem o upotrebi sredstava iz pristojbe posebno pri ispitivanju kvalitete mlijeka može imati velik utjecaj na način na koji se provode ta ispitivanja.
According to the opinion of the Genossenschaftsverband Bayern e.V., as set out in its comments of 5 February 2014, neither individual farms nor individual milk-processing undertakings could derive any kind of competitive advantage from the charging of the levy.
Udruženje Genossenschaftsverband Bayern e.V. u primjedbama od 5. veljače 2014. smatra da ni pojedina poljoprivredna gospodarstva ni pojedini poduzetnici koji se bave preradom mlijeka naplatom pristojbe ne mogu ostvariti prednosti u tržišnom natjecanju.
When routine milk quality checks had been partially funded from levy resources in the past, milk-processing undertakings had paid contributions towards the levy and therefore bore the full cost of this co-funding.
Ako su se rutinske provjere kakvoće mlijeka u prošlosti djelomično financirale sredstvima od pristojbe, poduzetnici koji se bave preradom mlijeka plaćali su doprinose pristojbi i time su taj financijski doprinos sami snosili u potpunosti.
In other German Länder in which no levy was charged, dairies did not pay any levies, but testing bodies neither received any levy resources.
U drugim saveznim pokrajinama, u kojima se ne naplaćuje pristojba, mljekari nisu plaćali sredstva iz pristojbe, ali zato ni ispitne stanice nisu primile sredstva od pristojbe.
On the individual issues, the LVN put forward its views that the measures funded by milk levy resources did not involve any loss to the Land budget, that the State did not have any power of disposal or control over the milk levy resources, and that the State did not exercise any control over either the amount of the levy or the content of the measures.
Točnije, LVN je tvrdio da se mjerama financiranima sredstvima od pristojbe za mlijeko ne opterećuje državni proračun, da se državi ne daje dozvola za raspolaganje sredstvima od pristojbe za mlijeko ni za kontrolu nad njima te da država nema kontrolu nad iznosom pristojbe ni nad sadržajem mjera.
Consequently, the payments in question could not be attributed to the State.
Stoga se predmetna dodijeljena sredstva ne mogu pripisati državi.
Moreover, the State neither controlled the level of payments nor was it involved organisationally in the LVN.
Nadalje, država nema kontrolu nad iznosom dodijeljenih sredstava niti ima veze s organizacijom LVN-a.
It also stated that the LVN was not overseen by state bodies but rather by the Hannover Chamber of Agriculture, a public self-regulating body which therefore did not come directly under the public administration.
Isto je tako navedeno da LVN ne nadziru državna tijela, nego Poljoprivredna komora u Hannoveru (njem. Landwirtschaftskammer Hannover), samoupravni subjekt javnog prava koji nije tijelo neposredne državne uprave.
In supplementary comments submitted on 8 July 2014, the LVN referred, inter alia, to the Commission Decision2014/416/EU [24] in the case Val'Hor.
U dodatnim primjedbama od 8. srpnja 2014. LVN je, među ostalim, uputio na Odluku Komisije 2014/416/EU [24] u predmetu Val'Hor.
In that Decision the Commission had acknowledged that neither the State's power to recognise an interbranch organisation nor its regulatory support in the collection of sector-related ‘contributions’ (through the possibility, in the case in question, of extending agreements) led to the conclusion that the measures implemented by the interbranch organisation were attributable to the State.
U njoj je Komisija priznala da se ni na temelju ovlasti države da prizna sektorsku organizaciju ni na temelju regulatorne potpore pri naplati sektorskih „doprinosa” (na temelju mogućnosti proglašavanja univerzalne primjenjivosti) ne može zaključiti da se mjere koje je provela sektorska organizacija mogu pripisati državi.
Whether State involvement in parafiscal systems of funding led to advantages being attributable to the State as ‘State aid’ depended on the circumstances in the individual case and on an overall assessment to be made on that basis.
O okolnostima pojedinog slučaja i ukupnoj ocjeni koju je potrebno provesti na toj osnovi ovisi dovodi li sudjelovanje države u parafiskalnim sustavima financiranja do toga da se prednosti mogu pripisati državi kao „državna potpora”.
The aspects that were relevant to an examination as to whether State aid existed, as developed by case law, were as follows:
Posebno su sljedeći aspekti razvijeni na temelju sudske prakse mjerodavni za ispitivanje postojanja državne potpore:
Who decided about the collection and use of the funds?
Tko odlučuje o naplati i upotrebi sredstava?
If this was a private organisation, how did the State influence this decision?
Ako odlučuje privatna organizacija, kako je uređen utjecaj države?
From what resources were the payments funded?
Iz čega se financiraju dodijeljena sredstva?
What type of measures were funded?
Koja se vrsta mjera financira?
From whom were the resources collected?
Od koga se naplaćuju sredstva?
Who was responsible for initiating the measure?
Tko preuzima inicijativu za mjeru?
Via its legal representatives, the LVN had examined the legal situation in other German Länder and had come to the conclusion that the indicators for the existence of State aid developed by case law were not met, which meant that the MFG could not overall be regarded as comprising an aid element.
LVN je preko svojeg pravnog zastupnika istražio pravnu situaciju u drugim saveznim pokrajinama i došao do rezultata da pokazatelji za postojanje državne potpore razvijeni na temelju sudske prakse nisu ispunjeni, tako da MFG ukupno ne može imati značajke potpore.
According to the LVN, it was the Land associations that decided to collect the levy from dairies.
Prema mišljenju LVN-a pokrajinska udruženja donose mjerodavne odluke o naplati pristojbe od mljekara.
Under the first sentence of Section 22(1) of the MFG, the levy could only be collected in consultation with the Land associations.
U skladu s člankom 22. stavkom 1. podstavkom 1. MFG-a pristojba se može naplatiti samo uz savjetovanje s pokrajinskim udruženjima.
Under the second sentence of Section 22(1) of the MFG, any increase in the levy had to be requested by the Land association.
U skladu s člankom 22. stavkom 1. podstavkom 2. MFG-a povećanje pristojbe podliježe zahtjevu pokrajinskog udruženja.
The detailed arrangements and amount of the levy were regulated in Lower Saxony and Thuringia by a Levy Collection Regulation [Umlageerhebungsverordnung (UmlErhVO)] which had been issued ‘in consultation’ with the relevant Land association.
Načini naplate i iznos pristojbe u Donjoj Saskoj i Tiringiji uređeni su Uredbom o naplati pristojbe (njem. Umlageerhebungsverordnung – UmlErhVO) koja je donesena „uz savjetovanje” s predmetnim pokrajinskim udruženjem.
The Land association in question also determined how the revenues from the levy, which had to be administered separately (see the first sentence of Section 22(3) of the MFG), were to be used. For this reason, they were in some cases even paid into an account belonging to the Land association (see, for example, Section 3(1) of the Thuringia Levy Collection Regulation).
Usto, predmetno pokrajinsko udruženje usmjerava upotrebu sredstava od pristojbe kojima se odvojeno upravlja (vidjeti članak 22. stavak 3. podstavak 1. MFG-a) te se ona ponekad prikupljaju na vlastitom računu predmetnog pokrajinskog udruženja (vidjeti članak 3. stavak 1. uredbe UmlErhVO koja je na snazi u Tiringiji).
The Land associations thus drew up proposals under their own responsibility in the area as to how the revenues should be used.
Tako su pokrajinska udruženja na vlastitu stručnu odgovornost izradila prijedloge za upotrebu sredstava.
In Thuringia, for example, this occurred on the basis of applications submitted to the local Land association, the Landesvereinigung Thüringer Milch (LVTM), by its members (see point 6.3 of the Thuringia Working Guidelines [Thüringer Arbeitsrichtlinie]).
U Tiringiji to se primjerice čini na temelju zahtjeva koje su pokrajinskom udruženju Landesvereinigung Thüringer Milch (LVTM) postavili njegovi članovi (vidjeti podtočku 6.3. radne smjernice pokrajine Tiringije (njem. Thüringer Arbeitsrichtlinie)).
Moreover, the revenues from the levy were indeed used in all Länder in accordance with the proposals put forward by the Land associations.
Činjenica je da su sredstva od pristojbe u svim saveznim pokrajinama upotrijebljena u skladu s prijedlozima za upotrebu pokrajinskih udruženja.
That in itself was evidence enough — irrespective of the specific legal arrangements that were applicable — that the revenues in question were not imputable to the State [26].
Već se time, neovisno o konkretnom pravnom uređenju, upućuje na to da se sredstva od pristojbe ne mogu pripisati državi [26].
According to the LVN, each of the Land associations had the status of a public body.
Prema mišljenju LVN-a pojedina pokrajinska udruženja imaju status isključivo privatnog subjekta.
Their statutes made it clear that they considered themselves to represent the interests of their members, who were recruited solely from the dairy industry (including consumer representatives).
S obzirom na njihove statute pokrajinska udruženja smatraju se zastupnicima interesa svojih članova koji dolaze isključivo iz mljekarstva (uključujući zastupnike potrošača).
In Section 14 of the MFG, Land associations were described as ‘voluntary’ organisations made up of businesses and consumers involved in the dairy industry whose purpose it was to ensure the joint representation of their member's economic interests.
U skladu s člankom 14. MFG-a pokrajinska su udruženja „dobrovoljna” udruženja gospodarskih subjekata i potrošača koji sudjeluju u mljekarstvu radi zajedničkog zastupanja njihovih gospodarskih interesa.
The Land associations differed from the Hoofdbedrijfschap Ambachte, the opticians' trade association entrusted with collecting and allocating a compulsory levy for advertising measures, which was at issue in the case Pearle.
Pokrajinska udruženja razlikuju se od udruženja optičara Hoofdbedrijfschap Ambachte iz predmeta Pearle, koje je bilo zaduženo za naplatu i upotrebu prisilnog davanja za mjere oglašavanja.
Although this trade association had the status of a public body, the Court of Justice found that State aid did not exist because the advertising measures were not funded by resources made available to State bodies but rather by levies collected from undertakings operating in the sector [27].
Iako je to udruženje optičara imalo javnopravni status, Sud je zanijekao postojanje državne potpore jer se mjere oglašavanja nisu financirale iz sredstava koja su dana na raspolaganje državnim tijelima, nego iz davanja koja su prikupili poduzetnici iz sektora [27].
The Land associations, as the bodies competent for collecting and allocating the milk levy, also differed from the agricultural committees in the case Plans de Campagne, which were not involved in defining the measures in question and did not have any discretion in their application [28].
Pokrajinska udruženja kao mjerodavna tijela za naplatu i upotrebu pristojbe za mlijeko razlikuju se i od poljoprivrednih odbora u predmetu Plans de Campagne, koji nisu sudjelovali u utvrđivanju mjera i nisu imali nikakav diskrecijski prostor u pogledu primjene mjera [28].
The Land associations were non-State and entirely private bodies that determined the amount and allocation of the milk levy as such on their own responsibility.
Pokrajinska su udruženja nevladina, isključivo privatna tijela koja kao takva na vlastitu odgovornost odlučuju o pristojbi za mlijeko i njezinoj upotrebi.
Moreover, the benefit enjoyed by the dairy industry was not a drain on the public exchequer because the milk levy was collected from operators belonging to the dairy industry, i.e. the selective ‘advantage’ was offset by a selective burden.
Nadalje, u okviru stavljanja mliječne industrije u povoljniji položaj ne podrazumijeva se opterećenje državnog proračuna jer se pristojba za mlijeko naplaćuje pripadnicima mliječne industrije i time se selektivna „prednost” ne nadoknađuje selektivnim opterećenjem.
This in itself was enough to rule out any preferential treatment or distortion of competition because the ‘advantages’ enjoyed by dairies and milk producers were offset by having to pay the levy.
To znači da nema učinka prednosti i narušavanja tržišnog natjecanja jer se „prednosti” mljekara i proizvođača mlijeka opterećenjem na temelju pristojbe nadoknađuju u potpunosti.
In the case Vent de Colère, the Court of Justice had found a system of charges to constitute State aid because — following a change to the law — the burden was no longer offset solely by charges paid by members of the economic sector in question (energy) but by charges paid by all end consumers of electricity resident in the national territory [29].
U predmetu Vent de Colère Sud je potvrdio postojanje značajki državne potpore sustava davanja među ostalim zato što se opterećenja nisu više, kao u skladu s ranijim pravom, nadoknađivala samo davanjima pripadnika predmetne industrijske grane (energetike), nego su se nakon promjene u zakonu nadoknađivala davanjima svih krajnjih korisnika električne energije u zemlji [29].
The LVN also considered State aid not to exist in the event that it related to ‘collective operations’ implemented in the interests of a specific sector and funded on the basis of contributions collected from members of that sector.
Nadalje, LVN smatra da nema državne potpore ako je riječ o „kolektivnim mjerama” koje se provode u interesu određenog sektora i financiraju doprinosima koje su platili pripadnici sektora.
The contested measures were intended solely to promote milk as a product and thus the collective interest of the dairy industry.
Sve su sporne mjere služile poticanju proizvoda „mlijeko”, a time i kolektivnog interesa sektora mlijeka.
The measures in question also partially protected consumer interests because the two purposes could not be separated from each other owing to the overlapping of interests that existed.
Dijelom se tim mjerama štite interesi potrošača jer se obje svrhe ne mogu međusobno razdvojiti na temelju postojećeg slaganja interesa.
The role of the State was limited to making a statutory compensation mechanism available to the dairy sector via the MFG that — by its nature — guaranteed that the members of the dairy industry that benefited from the measures implemented in favour of milk were the ones who contributed to the costs.
Uloga države ograničena je na stavljanje zakonskog mehanizma naknada na raspolaganje sektoru mlijeka na temelju MFG-a, čime će se osigurati da pripadnici mliječne industrije koji po prirodi stvari imaju koristi od mjera provedenih u korist proizvoda „mlijeko” ostvare odgovarajući doprinos rashodima.
As in the cases Pearle, Doux Elevages and VaľHor, the State thus functioned solely as a facilitator enabling the compensation mechanism that had been brought into being by the private sector to be made mandatory and thus ensuring a fair sharing of burdens [30].
Država tako, kao u sudskim predmetima Pearle i Doux Elevages te u predmetu VaľHor, služi samo kao sredstvo na temelju kojeg mehanizam naknada koji su pokrenuli privatni gospodarski subjekti postaje obvezujući i time se stvara pravedna podjela opterećenja [30].
The levy had been initiated by the Land associations and thus by the private sector.
Inicijativu u pogledu pristojbe pokrenula su pokrajinska udruženja, tj. privatni gospodarski subjekti.