natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It follows from these contractual provisions that it was the intention of the parties to maintain their cooperation and limit a possible annulment of the cooperation to situations where no agreement could be reached or the parties failed to fulfil their obligations in such a way that re-negotiations would no longer be possible.
Iz tih ugovornih odredaba proizlazi da su stranke namjeravale nastaviti svoju suradnju i ograničiti mogući prekid suradnje na situacije u kojima se ne bi mogao postići dogovor ili u kojima stranke nisu ispunile svoje obveze u mjeri u kojoj ponovni pregovori više ne bi bili mogući.
In this light it should also be taken into account that the project was complex, consisted of several sub-projects that were linked to each other and that the wider real estate project involved several parties that were connected to the 2004 Cooperation agreement.
S obzirom na to potrebno je uzeti u obzir i da je projekt bio složen, da se sastojao od nekoliko potprojekata koji su bili međusobno povezani i da je širi nekretninski projekt uključivao nekoliko stranaka koje su bile povezane sa Sporazumom o suradnji iz 2004.
Furthermore, although the Municipality was only involved in the ground exploitation phase of the real estate project, while the construction phase of the project was at the risk and expense of the private developers concerned, including SJB, it is established that in 2008, when SJB communicated to the Municipality that it was not willing to start with the construction works, the project was still at the ground exploitation phase.
Nadalje, iako je općina bila uključena samo u fazi razvoja građevinskog zemljišta u okviru nekretninskog projekta, dok su rizik i troškove faze izgradnje projekta snosila predmetna privatna društva, uključujući SJB, utvrđeno je da je 2008., kad je SJB obavijestio općinu da ne želi započeti građevinske radove, projekt još uvijek bio u fazi razvoja građevinskog zemljišta.
In this phase the municipality was financially involved in the project, since it bore 50 % of the costs and risks.
U toj je fazi općina bila financijski uključena u projekt jer je snosila 50 % troškova i rizika.
The costs of the ground exploitation phase of the project included the costs of making the land ready for construction, the costs for the public section of the underground parking garage and 50 % of the construction costs of the school.
Troškovi faze razvoja građevinskog zemljišta projekta uključivali su troškove pripreme zemljišta za izgradnju, troškove javnog dijela podzemne garaže i 50 % troškova za izgradnju škole.
The Commission also notes in this regard that, at the time of the re-negotiations, the financial crisis had started and affected the Dutch real-estate market in particular.
Komisija u tom pogledu napominje i da je u vrijeme ponovnih pregovora financijska kriza već započela i da je posebno utjecala na nizozemsko tržište nekretnina.
The renegotiations between the parties resulted in the Autumn of 2008 in a proposal by SJB to the PPP to pay EUR 4 million for the land, whereby SJB would start the construction works in April 2009 regardless of whether the housing units had been pre-sold.
Ponovni pregovori između stranaka doveli su u jesen 2008. do prijedloga SJB-a JPP-u u pogledu plaćanja 4 milijuna EUR za zemljište, pri čemu bi SJB građevinske radove započeo u travnju 2009., bez obzira na to jesu li stambene jedinice prethodno prodane.
An independent expert, Fakton, commissioned by the Municipality concluded in its report of 11 February 2009 that the EUR 4 million (value on 1 January 2010) agreed as the new price for the land could be considered as a market-compliant price for the land concerned, taking into account also the further commitments by SJB.
Neovisni stručnjak, društvo Fakton, koje je angažirala općina, u svojem je izvješću od 11. veljače 2009. zaključilo da bi se 4 milijuna EUR (vrijednost od 1. siječnja 2010.) dogovorena kao nova cijena zemljišta mogla smatrati tržišnom cijenom predmetnog zemljišta, uzimajući u obzir i daljnje obveze SJB-a.
Under these circumstances, the Commission has no reason to believe that the behaviour of the Municipality, in agreeing to a price of EUR 4 million in the particular circumstances, is not in line with normal market conditions.
U tim okolnostima Komisija nema razloga smatrati da ponašanje općine, u smislu dogovaranja cijene od 4 milijuna EUR u konkretnim okolnostima, nije u skladu s uobičajenim tržišnim uvjetima.
In the light of the above, the Commission considers that the decrease of the sales price of land and the waiver of the ground exploitation fee and quality fee agreed in the Supplementary Agreement between the Municipality, the PPP and SJB does not contain State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU,
S obzirom na prethodno navedeno Komisija smatra da sniženje prodajne cijene zemljišta te otpis naknade za razvoj građevinskog zemljišta i naknade za kvalitetu koje su u Dopunskom sporazumu dogovorili općina, JPP i SJB ne čine državnu potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a,
The decrease of the sales price of land and a waiver of the ground exploitation fee and quality fee agreed on 1 March 2010 by the Municipality of Leidschendam-Voorburg in favour of Schouten-de Jong Bouwfonds, a partnership consisting of Schouten & De Jong Projectontwikkeling BV and Bouwfonds Ontwikkeling BV, does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Sniženje prodajne cijene zemljišta te otpis naknade za razvoj građevinskog zemljišta i naknade za kvalitetu koje su 1. ožujka 2010. dogovorili općina Leidschendam-Voorburg u korist subjekta Schouten-de Jong Bouwfonds, partnerstva koje čine Schouten & De Jong Projectontwikkeling BV i Bouwfonds Ontwikkeling BV, ne čine državnu potporu u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije.
OJ C 86, 23.3.2012, p. 12.
SL C 86, 23.3.2012., str. 12.
Judgment of the Court of 30 June 2015 in Joined Cases T-186/13, T-190/13 and T-193/13, The Nederlands (T-186/13), Municipality Leidschendam-Voorburg (T-190/13) and Bouwfonds Ontwikkeling BV en Schouten & De Jong Projectontwikkeling BV (T-193/13) v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2015:447.
Presuda Općeg suda od 30. lipnja 2015. u spojenim predmetima T-186/13, T-190/13 i T-193/13, Nizozemska (T-186/13), općina Leidschendam-Voorburg (T-190/13) i Bouwfonds Ontwikkeling BV en Schouten & De Jong Projectontwikkeling BV (T-193/13) protiv Komisije, ECLI:EU:T:2015:447.
References to SJB throughout the remainder of this Decision should therefore also be considered as constituting references to both Schouten de Jong and Bouwfonds.
Upućivanja na SJB u ostatku ove Odluke stoga bi se trebala smatrati upućivanjima i na Schouten de Jong i na Bouwfonds.
Article 4.1. of the Ground exploitation/PPP agreement of 22 November 2004 provides the following: ‘Gemeente en SJB vormen met ingang van de datum van ondertekening van deze overeenkomst een VOF. Als zodanig dragen zij met ingang van die datum gezamenlijk op basis van separaat te sluiten project-gronduitgifteovereenkomsten, in goed overleg, zorg voor de uitvoering van de grondexploitatie. De daaraan verbonden kosten en risico's komen voor 50 % voor rekening van SJB en voor 50 % van de Gemeente. Schouten en Bouwfonds zijn ieder hoofdelijk aansprakelijk voor de nakoming door SJB van haar verplichtingen ingevolge deze Overeenkomst (de Sok en de projectovereenkomst).’
U članku 4. stavku 1. Sporazuma o razvoju građevinskog zemljišta/JPP-u od 22. studenoga 2004. navedeno je sljedeće: „Gemeente en SJB vormen met ingang van de datum van ondertekening van deze overeenkomst een VOF. Als zodanig dragen zij met ingang van die datum gezamenlijk op basis van separaat te sluiten project-gronduitgifteovereenkomsten, in goed overleg, zorg voor de uitvoering van de grondexploitatie. De daaraan verbonden kosten en risico's komen voor 50 % voor rekening van SJB en voor 50 % van de Gemeente. Schouten en Bouwfonds zijn ieder hoofdelijk aansprakelijk voor de nakoming door SJB van haar verplichtingen ingevolge deze Overeenkomst (de Sok en de projectovereenkomst).”
The project was initially called Dam centrum project but was renamed Leidschendam Centrum Project in 2005.
Projekt se na početku zvao Projekt Dam Centrum, ali je 2005. preimenovan u Projekt Leidschendam Centrum.
In this Decision ‘Leidschendam Centrum Project’ is used to describe the real estate project.
U ovoj se Odluci „Projekt Leidschendam Centrum” upotrebljava za opis nekretninskog projekta.
The final plans for the Damplein only foresaw the construction of 67 housing units by SJB.
U konačnim planovima za Damplein predviđeno je da će SJB izgraditi samo 67 stambenih jedinica.
No public procurement procedure was carried out in this regard.
U tom pogledu nije proveden nikakav postupak javne nabave.
This Decision is without prejudice to any analysis the Commission could make concerning public procurement aspects related to the project.
Ovom se Odlukom ne dovodi u pitanje nikakva analiza koju bi Komisija mogla provesti u pogledu aspekata javne nabave koji se odnose na taj projekt.
Point 5.1.2 of the Ground Exploitation Masterplan Damcentrum of 10 February 2004.
Točka 5.1.2. Glavnog plana razvoja građevinskog zemljišta Damcentrum od 10. veljače 2004.
According to the Ground Exploitation Masterplan Damcentrum of 10 February 2004, the Municipality would contribute EUR 7,3 million while SJB would contribute EUR 2,6 million.
U skladu s Glavnim planom razvoja građevinskog zemljišta Damcentrum od 10. veljače 2004. doprinos općine iznosio bi 7,3 milijuna EUR, dok bi doprinos SJB-a iznosio 2,6 milijuna EUR.
According to the ‘Exploitatieverordening Gemeente Leidschendam-Voorburg 2009’, the Municipality may ask private parties to contribute to the costs of infrastructure works.
U skladu s uredbom „Exploitatieverordening Gemeente Leidschendam-Voorburg 2009” općina može od privatnih osoba zatražiti da pridonesu podmirenju troškova infrastrukturnih radova.
To this end, the 2004 Cooperation Agreement stipulates that the private parties will pay a ground exploitation fee and, as the Municipality decided to use high quality products to develop the public area, a quality fee to the PPP, on top of the price for the land.
U tu je svrhu Sporazumom o suradnji iz 2004. propisano da će privatne osobe JPP-u, uz cijenu zemljišta, platiti i naknadu za razvoj građevinskog zemljišta i, s obzirom na to da je općina odlučila upotrijebiti visokokvalitetne proizvode za razvoj javnog prostora, naknadu za kvalitetu.
Article 6.6 of the 2004 Cooperation Agreement of 2004 provides that: ‘Indien de vereiste bouwvergunningen als gevolg van niet aan de aanvragende partij toe te rekenen planologische belemmeringen niet binnen de terzake in het ATS voorziene termijn verkregen worden, zullen Partijen dienaangaande — daaronder begrepen aangaande grondprijsberekening en grondprijsbetaaldata — nadere afspraken met elkaar maken die zo dicht mogelijk blijven bij de inhoud van deze SOK, respectievelijk de Bilaterale overeenkomsten.’
U članku 6. stavku 6. Sporazuma o suradnji iz 2004. navedeno je sljedeće: „Indien de vereiste bouwvergunningen als gevolg van niet aan de aanvragende partij toe te rekenen planologische belemmeringen niet binnen de terzake in het ATS voorziene termijn verkregen worden, zullen Partijen dienaangaande – daaronder begrepen aangaande grondprijsberekening en grondprijsbetaaldata – nadere afspraken met elkaar maken die zo dicht mogelijk blijven bij de inhoud van deze SOK, respectievelijk de Bilaterale overeenkomsten.”
Article 2.1.2 point 1 of the Supplementary Agreement provides as follows: ‘In afwijking van het bepaalde in een of meer van de in de considerans genoemde overeenkomsten (i) wordt de koopsom van het Verkochte, welke koper bij levering verschuldigd is aan Verkoper, onder de in deze overeenkomst opgenomen voorwaarden nader bepaald op € 4000000,- (zegge: vier miljoen euro) exclusief btw kosten Koper Vermeerderd met 5 % rente vanaf 1 januari 2010. (ii) zijn de oorspronkelijk overeengekomen grex en kwaliteitsbijdragen niet verschuldigd, (iii) wordt de grond bouwrijp geleverd. De koopsom is gebaseerd op prijspeil 1 januari 2010 en is niet verrekenbaar.’
U članku 2.1.2. točki 1. Dopunskog sporazuma navodi se sljedeće: „In afwijking van het bepaalde in een of meer van de in de considerans genoemde overeenkomsten i. wordt de koopsom van het Verkochte, welke koper bij levering verschuldigd is aan Verkoper, onder de in deze overeenkomst opgenomen voorwaarden nader bepaald op € 4000000,- (zegge: vier miljoen euro) exclusief btw kosten Koper Vermeerderd met 5 % rente vanaf 1 januari 2010. ii. zijn de oorspronkelijk overeengekomen grex en kwaliteitsbijdragen niet verschuldigd, iii. wordt de grond bouwrijp geleverd. De koopsom is gebaseerd op prijspeil 1 januari 2010 en is niet verrekenbaar.”
This new agreement refers to 208 parking spaces i.e. fewer than the 225 initially planned.
Taj se novi sporazum odnosi na 208 parkirnih mjesta, tj. manje od početno planiranih 225.
This corresponds to the earlier agreed EUR 4,6 million (value on 1 January 2003) indexed at 2,5 % up to 1 January 2010.
To odgovara prethodno dogovorenom iznosu od 4,6 milijuna EUR (vrijednost od 1. siječnja 2003.), uz indeks od 2,5 % do 1. siječnja 2010.
As confirmed by the General Court in its judgment of 30 June 2015, see footnote 3, paragraphs 62-72.
Kako je potvrdio Opći sud u svojoj presudi od 30. lipnja 2015., vidjeti bilješku 3., točke 62. – 72.
Case C-39/94 SFEI and Others EU:C:1996:285,paragraphs 60-61.
Predmet C-39/94 SFEI i drugi EU:C:1996:285, točke 60. – 61.
Case T-244/08 Konsum Nord v Commission EU:T:2011:732, paragraph 57 and the case-law cited.
Predmet T-244/08 Konsum Nord protiv Komisije EU:T:2011:732, točka 57. i navedena sudska praksa.
The Dutch authorities submitted their reply by letter of 7 December 2007.
Nizozemska nadležna tijela svoj su odgovor dostavila dopisom od 7. prosinca 2007.
The Commission sent further requests for information to the Dutch authorities by letters of 25 April 2008, 12 September 2008, 14 August 2009, 12 February 2010 and 2 August 2011.
Komisija je dopisima od 25. travnja 2008., 12. rujna 2008., 14. kolovoza 2009., 12. veljače 2010. i 2. kolovoza 2011. nizozemskim nadležnim tijelima poslala dodatne zahtjeve za dostavljanje informacija.
The Dutch authorities replied to these requests by letters of 30 May 2008, 7 November 2008, 30 October 2009, 12 April 2010, 29 September 2011 and 3 October 2011, respectively.
Nizozemska nadležna tijela na te su zahtjeve odgovorila dopisima od 30. svibnja 2008., 7. studenoga 2008., 30. listopada 2009., 12. travnja 2010., 29. rujna 2011., odnosno 3. listopada 2011.
On 12 March 2010, a meeting took place between the Commission departments and the Dutch authorities and, as a result, additional information was submitted to the Commission by letter of 30 August 2010.
Sastanak službi Komisije i nizozemskih nadležnih tijela održan je 12. ožujka 2010. te su, kao rezultat toga, dopisom od 30. kolovoza 2010. Komisiji dostavljene dodatne informacije.
The non-confidential version of these comments was forwarded to the Dutch authorities by letter of 16 May 2012.
Verzija tih primjedaba koja nije povjerljiva proslijeđena je nizozemskim nadležnim tijelima dopisom od 16. svibnja 2012.
By letter of 14 June 2012, the Dutch authorities submitted their reaction to the Stichting's comments.
Dopisom od 14. lipnja 2012. nizozemska nadležna tijela dostavila su svoju reakciju na primjedbe zaklade Stichting.
According to the timeline which was set up in March 2004, construction works on the Damplein were initially planned to start in November 2005.
U skladu s vremenskim rasporedom koji je utvrđen u ožujku 2004. početak građevinskih radova na Dampleinu početno je planiran za studeni 2005.
However, owing to several national court proceedings, the building permits SJB needed to commence construction were delayed and eventually only obtained in November 2008.
Međutim, zbog nekoliko nacionalnih sudskih postupaka odgođeno je izdavanje građevinskih dozvola koje su SJB-u bile potrebne za početak izgradnje te su na kraju dobivene u studenome 2008.
The works had to be finished by December 2011.
Radovi su morali biti dovršeni do prosinca 2011.
In case of late delivery, SJB was to reimburse part of the decreased price.
U slučaju kašnjenja SJB je morao vratiti dio snižene cijene.
Furthermore, the Dutch authorities informed the Commission that price decreases with regard to SJB were discussed within the PPP already in 2006 and 2008.
Nadalje, nizozemska nadležna tijela obavijestila su Komisiju da se o sniženjima cijene u pogledu SJB-a s JPP-om raspravljalo već 2006. i 2008.
In 2006, the PPP apparently decided to lower the land sales price for the commercial premises owing to the fact that less commercial space could be constructed than initially planned, whereas in 2008 the PPP apparently decided to grant SJB compensation for the delay in the delivery of the building permit.
JPP je navodno 2006. odlučio sniziti prodajnu cijenu zemljišta za poslovne prostore jer se moglo izgraditi manje poslovnih prostora nego što je početno planirano, dok je 2008. JPP navodno odlučio SJB-u odobriti naknadu zbog kašnjenja u izdavanju građevinske dozvole.
The fact that SJB could no longer invoke the 70 % clause had an implication on the assumptions made in the initial valuation of the land in 2003 and the price agreed in the 2004 Cooperation Agreement.
Činjenica da se SJB više nije mogao pozivati na klauzulu o 70 % utjecala je na pretpostavke iznesene u okviru početnog vrednovanja zemljišta 2003. i cijenu dogovorenu u Sporazumu o suradnji iz 2004.
According to the Dutch authorities, the decrease in the sales price for the land and the waiver of the fees was the consideration which the Municipality had to pay so that SJB would agree to waive its right to invoke the 70 % clause.
Nizozemska nadležna tijela tvrdila su da su sniženje prodajne cijene zemljišta i otpis naknada bili protuusluga koju je općina morala platiti kako bi se SJB pristao odreći svojeg prava na primjenu klauzule o 70 %.
The Dutch authorities contend that SJB could not be forced to start construction works on the Damplein owing to the 70 % clause in the 2004 Cooperation Agreement.
Nizozemska nadzorna tijela tvrde da se SJB nije moglo prisiliti da započne građevinske radove na Dampleinu zbog klauzule o 70 % iz Sporazuma o suradnji iz 2004.
By the time SJB received a valid building permit, the credit crisis had had its effect on the Dutch real estate market, which made it even more unlikely that SJB would swiftly pre-sell 70 % of the free sector housing units.
Do trenutka kad je SJB primio valjanu građevinsku dozvolu kreditna kriza utjecala je na nizozemsko tržište nekretnina, zbog čega je bilo još nevjerojatnije da će SJB brzo unaprijed prodati 70 % jedinica na slobodnom tržištu.
The Dutch authorities stated that the set-up of the project by the Municipality has been transparent and described in the ‘Concept Masterplan Damcentrum’, approved on 6 April 2004.
Nizozemska nadležna tijela navela su da je općina transparentno uspostavila projekt te da je on opisan u „Konceptu glavnog plana Damcentrum” koji je odobren 6. travnja 2004.
Only financially sensitive agreements or parts thereof were kept confidential.
Samo su financijski osjetljivi sporazumi ili njihovi dijelovi bili povjerljivi.
In the case at hand it is not contested, as stated in recital 30 above, that the construction works on the Damplein, which were initially planned to start in November 2005, were delayed since owing to several national court proceedings the necessary building permits could only be obtained in November 2008.
U ovom se predmetu ne osporava, kako je navedeno u prethodnoj uvodnoj izjavi 30., da su građevinski radovi na Dampleinu, čiji je početak početno planiran u studenome 2005., kasnili jer su se zbog nekoliko nacionalnih sudskih postupaka potrebne građevinske dozvole mogle dobiti tek u studenome 2008.
In these circumstances SJB was no longer willing to implement the 2004 Cooperation agreement as initially agreed and, on the basis of contractual provisions, it requested the Municipality to renegotiate the initial arrangements.
U tim okolnostima SJB više nije htio provesti Sporazum o suradnji iz 2004. kako je početno dogovoreno te je, na temelju ugovornih odredaba, zatražio od općine ponovne pregovore o početnim dogovorima.
Therefore it was in the financial interest of the Municipality that the ground exploitation works were carried out promptly so that the land could be delivered and the sales price of the land was paid, pursuant to Article 10.5 of the 2004 Cooperation agreement.
Stoga je bilo u financijskom interesu općine da se radovi na razvoju građevinskog zemljišta brzo provedu kako bi se zemljište moglo isporučiti, a prodajna cijena zemljišta platiti u skladu s člankom 10. stavkom 5. Sporazuma o suradnji iz 2004.
In these particular circumstances, the Commission accepts that, while the public authority considerations of the Municipality in the realisation of the project are not relevant for the MEOP, a hypothetical private operator, who would have been in a similar contractual and financial position, would have sought to renegotiate the price rather than immediately annulling the agreement and putting out a call for tender, especially as the contract for the construction of the parking garage had already been awarded to SJB.
U tim konkretnim okolnostima Komisija prihvaća da bi, iako razmatranja tijela javne vlasti u pogledu općine u provedbi projekta nisu relevantna za načelo subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu, hipotetski privatni subjekt, koji bi se nalazio u sličnoj ugovornoj i financijskoj situaciji, zatražio bi ponovne pregovore o cijeni umjesto da odmah raskine sporazum i objavi natječaj, posebno jer je ugovor za izgradnju garaže već bio dodijeljen SJB-u.
In addition, SJB was willing to waive its right to invoke the 70 % clause contained in the 2004 Cooperation agreement.
Osim toga, SJB je bio spreman odreći se svojeg prava na primjenu klauzule o 70 % iz Sporazuma o suradnji iz 2004.
Furthermore, half of the reduced costs of the sales price would be borne by SJB itself, through its participation in the PPP.
Nadalje, polovinu sniženih troškova prodajne cijene snosio bi sam SJB u okviru svojeg sudjelovanja u JPP-u.
Therefore, to determine whether the Municipality, by agreeing to a reduction in the initially agreed sales price for the land sold to SJB and the waiver of fees, conferred an economic advantage on SJB, it needs to be examined whether the Municipality respected the MEOP. That is, whether a hypothetical private vendor in the same situation as the Municipality would have agreed to the same price reduction and fee waivers, so as to preclude the existence of an advantage as a result of the contested measures.
Stoga, kako bi se odredilo je li općina, pristavši na sniženje početno dogovorene prodajne cijene zemljišta prodanog SJB-u i na otpis naknada, SJB-u dodijelila gospodarsku prednost, potrebno je ispitati je li općina poštovala načelo subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu, odnosno, bi li hipotetski privatni prodavatelj, u jednakoj situaciji kao što je situacija u kojoj se nalazila općina, pristao na jednako sniženje cijene i otpis naknada kako bi se isključilo postojanje prednosti kao rezultata spornih mjera.
Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/650
Provedbena odluka Komisije (EU) 2016/650
laying down standards for the security assessment of qualified signature and seal creation devices pursuant to Articles 30(3) and 39(2) of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market
o utvrđivanju normi za ocjenu sigurnosti kvalificiranih sredstava za izradu potpisa i pečata u skladu s člankom 30. stavkom 3. i člankom 39. stavkom 2. Uredbe (EU) br. 910/2014 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća o elektroničkoj identifikaciji i uslugama povjerenja za elektroničke transakcije na unutarnjem tržištu