natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Furthermore, derogations from the normal insolvency rules, which allow undertakings to continue trading in circumstances under which they would not be allowed if the ordinary insolvency rules were applied, may involve an additional burden for the State if public bodies are among the principal creditors of those undertaking or where such action amounts to a de facto waiver of public debts.
Vidjeti, primjerice, presudu Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točku 24.; presudu Općeg suda od 5. travnja 2006., Deutsche Bahn AG protiv Komisije, T-351/02, ECLI:EU:T:2006:104, točku 103.
See Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 June 1999, Piaggio, C-295/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:313, paragraphs 40 to 43 and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 1 December 1998, Ecotrade, C-200/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:579, paragraph 45.
Presuda Općeg suda od 12. prosinca 1996., Air France protiv Komisije, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, točka 62.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 1 December 1998, Ecotrade, C-200/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:579, paragraph 41 and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 March 2013, Bouygues and Bouygues Télécom v Commission and Others, Joined Cases C-399/10 P and C-401/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2013:175, paragraphs 137, 138 and 139.
Koncept javnih poduzetnika može se definirati upućivanjem na Direktivu Komisije 2006/111/EZ od 16. studenoga 2006. o transparentnosti financijskih odnosa između država članica i javnih poduzeća, kao i o financijskoj transparentnosti unutar određenih poduzeća (SL L 318, 17.11.2006., str. 17.), na koju se upućuje u točki 1.a.
As defined in Article 2(f) and (g) of Directive 2006/111/EC referred to at point 1a of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement, see Decision No 55/2007.
Priloga XV.
See also Guidelines on the application of the state aid rules to compensation granted for the provision of services of general economic interest, adopted by EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 12/12/COL of 25 January 2012 amending, for the eighty-fourth time, the procedural and substantive rules in the field of state aid by introducing new chapters on the application of state aid rules to compensation granted for the provision of services of general economic interest and on the framework for state aid in the form of public service compensation (OJ L 161, 13.6.2013, p. 12 and EEA Supplement No 34, 13.6.2013, p. 1), paragraph 33.
Sporazumu o EGP-u; vidjeti Odluku Zajedničkog odbora EGP-a br. 55/2007 od 8. lipnja 2007. o izmjeni Priloga XV.
See Judgment of the General Court of 4 July 2007, Bouygues SA v Commission, T-475/04, ECLI:EU:T:2007:196, where the General Court noted that, in granting access to a scarce public resource such as the radio spectrum, national authorities simultaneously performed the roles of telecommunications regulator and manager of such public resources, paragraph 104.
(Državne potpore) Sporazumu o EGP-u (SL L 266, 11.10.2007., str. 15. i Dodatak o EGP-u br. 48, 11.10.2007., str. 12.).
See to that effect Commission Decision of 20 July 2004 on State aid NN 42/2004 – France – Modification of payments due from Orange and SFR for UMTS licences (OJ C 275, 8.11.2005, p. 3), recitals 28, 29 and 30, upheld by the EEA courts (Judgment of the General Court of 4 July 2007, Bouygues SA v Commission, T-475/04, ECLI:EU:T:2007:196, paragraphs 108 to 111 and 123, and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 April 2009, Bouygues and Bouygues Télécom v Commission, C-431/07 P, ECLI:EU:C:2009:223, paragraphs 94 to 98 and 125).
U članku 2. točki (b) te Direktive navedeno je da „‚javna poduzeća’ znači sva poduzeća nad kojima javna tijela mogu izvršavati, izravno ili neizravno, prevladavajući utjecaj na temelju vlasništva nad njima, financijskog sudjelovanja u njima ili na temelju propisa kojima su ta poduzeća uređena. ”
In this case, as regards the granting of UMTS radio spectrum licences, the State simultaneously performed the roles of telecommunications regulator and manager of these public resources and pursued the regulatory objectives set out in Directive 97/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorisations and individual licences in the field of telecommunication services (OJ L 117, 7.5.1997, p. 15), referred to at point 5cc of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement, see Decision of the EEA Joint Committee Decision No 37/1999 of 30 March 1999 amending Annex XI (telecommunication services) to the EEA Agreement (OJ L 266, 19.10.2000, p. 25 and EEA Supplement No 46, 19.10.2000, p. 147).
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 52.
In such a situation, the EEA courts confirmed that the award of licences without maximising the revenues which could have been achieved did not involve the granting of State aid, given that the measures in question were justified by the regulatory objectives set out in Directive 97/13/EC and complied with the principle of non-discrimination.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294.
In contrast, in the Judgment of the Court of Justice of 8 September 2011, Commission v Netherlands, C-279/08 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:551, paragraphs 88 et seq. the Court did not identify regulatory reasons that would have justified the award without consideration of freely tradable emission rights.
Vidjeti i presudu Općeg suda od 26. lipnja 2008., SIC protiv Komisije, T-442/03, ECLI:EU:T:2008:228, točke 93. do 100.
See also Judgment of the Court of Justice of 14 January 2015, Eventech v The Parking Adjudicator, C-518/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:9, paragraphs 46 et seq.
[56] Nadalje, nije potrebno dokazati da bi u određenom slučaju ponašanje javnog poduzetnika bilo drukčije da je djelovao autonomno; vidjeti presudu Općeg suda od 25. lipnja 2015., SACE i Sace BT protiv Komisije, T-305/13, ECLI:EU:T:2015:435, točku 48.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 13 March 2001, PreussenElektra, C-379/98, ECLI:EU:C:2001:160, paragraph 62.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 53.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 March 1993, Sloman Neptun Schiffahrts, Joined Cases C-72/91 and C-73/91, ECLI:EU:C:1993:97, paragraph 20 and 21.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 54.
See also Judgment of the Court of Justice of 7 May 1998, Viscido et al., Joined Cases C-52/97, C-53/97 and C-54/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:209, paragraphs 13 and 14 and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 30 November 1993, Kirsammer-Hack, C-189/91, ECLI:EU:C:1993:907, paragraphs 17 and 18, on the fact that the non-application of certain provisions of employment law does not constitute a transfer of State resources.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 55.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 January 1978, Van Tiggele, 82/77, ECLI:EU:C:1978:10, paragraphs 25 and 26.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točke 55. i 56.
See, for instance Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 July 2008, Essent Netwerk Noord, C-206/06, ECLI:EU:C:2008:413, paragraph 70; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 May 2000, France v Ladbroke Racing Ltd and Commission, C-83/98 P, ECLI:EU:C:2000:248, paragraph 50.
Vidjeti i mišljenje nezavisnog odvjetnika Jacobsa od 13. prosinca 2001., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2001:685, točke 65. do 68.
See Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 1996, Air France v Commission, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, paragraphs 65, 66 and 67, concerning an aid granted by the Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations which was financed with the voluntary deposits of private citizens which could be withdrawn at any time.
Presuda Suda od 23. listopada 2014., Commerz Nederland, C-242/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2224, točka 35.
That did not affect the conclusion that those funds were State resources because the Caisse was able to use them from the balance produced by deposits and withdrawals as if they were permanently at its disposal.
Primjerice, kad mjere poduzimaju javne razvojne banke koje rade na ostvarivanju ciljeva javne politike (presuda Općeg suda od 27. veljače 2013., Nitrogenmuvek Vegyipari, Zrt. protiv Komisije, T-387/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:98, točka 63.) ili kad mjere poduzimaju agencije za privatizaciju ili javni mirovinski fondovi (presuda Općeg suda od 28. siječnja 2016., Slovenija protiv Komisije („ELAN”), T-507/12, ECLI:EU:T:2016:35, točka 86.).
See also Judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 May 2000, France v Ladbroke Racing Ltd and Commission, C-83/98 P, ECLI:EU:C:2000:248, paragraph 50.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 57.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 July 1974, Italy v Commission, 173/73, ECLI:EU:C:1974:71, paragraph 16; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 March 1992, Compagnie Commerciale de l'Ouest, Joined Cases C-78/90 to C-83/90, ECLI:EU:C:1992:118, paragraph 35; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 July 2008, Essent Netwerk Noord, C-206/06, ECLI:EU:C:2008:413, paragraphs 58 to 74.
Vidjeti presudu Suda od 23. travnja 2009., Puffer, C-460/07, ECLI:EU:C:2009:254, točku 70., o pravu na porezni odbitak u okviru sustava PDV-a koji je uspostavila Unija te presudu Općeg suda od 5. travnja 2006.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2012, France et al. v Commission, Joined Cases T-139/09, T-243/09 and T-328/09, ECLI:EU:T:2012:496, paragraphs 63 and 64.
Deutsche Bahn AG protiv Komisije, T-351/02, ECLI:EU:T:2006:104, točku 102., o oslobođenjima od poreza koja se zahtijevaju prema pravu Unije.
See Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 July 2004, Pearle, C-345/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:448, paragraph 41 and Judgment of the Court of Justice of 30 May 2013, Doux élevages SNC et al, C-677/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013:348.
Vidjeti presudu Suda od 10. prosinca 2013.
Decision 2010/606/EU.
Komisija protiv Irske i dr., C-272/12 P, ECLI:EU:C:2013:812, točke 45. do 53., o odobrenju uvođenja određenih oslobođenja od poreza danom određenoj državi članici odlukom Vijeća.
See, for instance, concerning structural funds, Commission Decision of 22 November 2006 on State aid N 157/06, United Kingdom South Yorkshire Digital Region Broadband Project, recitals 21 and 29 on a measure partly financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (OJ C 80, 13.4.2007, p.
Tom presudom također je objašnjeno da je činjenica da je odluka Vijeća u području usklađivanja zakonodavstva donesena na prijedlog Komisije nebitna jer je pojam državne potpore objektivan pojam.
2).
Odluka Komisije 2010/606/EU od 26. veljače 2010. o državnoj potpori C 9/2009 (ex NN 45/08, NN 49/08 i NN 50/08), koju su Kraljevina Belgija, Francuska Republika i Veliko Vojvodstvo Luksemburg primijenili za društvo Dexia SA (SL L 274, 19.10.2010., str. 54.).
As regards financing for the production of and trade in agricultural products, the scope of application of the State aid rules is limited by Article 42 of the Treaty.
Presuda Suda od 24. siječnja 1978., Van Tiggele, 82/77, ECLI:EU:C:1978:10, točke 25. i 26.; Presuda Općeg suda od 12. prosinca 1996., Air France protiv Komisije, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, točka 63.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 13 March 2001, PreussenElektra, C-379/98, ECLI:EU:C:2001:160, paragraphs 59 to 62.
Presuda Općeg suda od 12. prosinca 1996., Air France protiv Komisije, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, točka 56.
The Court held that the imposition of a purchase obligation on private undertakings does not constitute a direct or indirect transfer of State resources, and that this qualification does not change because of the lower revenues of the undertakings subject to that obligation which is likely to cause a diminution of tax revenues, because this constitutes an inherent feature of the measure.
Presuda Suda od 14. listopada 1987., Njemačka protiv Komisije, 248/84, ECLI:EU:C:1987:437, točka 17.; presuda Općeg suda od 6. ožujka 2002., Territorio Histórico de Álava i dr. protiv Komisije, spojeni predmeti T-92/00 i 103/00, ECLI:EU:T:2002:61, točka 57.
See also Judgment of the Court of Justice of 5 March 2009, UTECA, C-222/07, ECLI:EU:C:2009:124, paragraphs 43 to 47, on compulsory contributions imposed on broadcasters in favour of film production not involving a transfer of State resources.
[70] Presuda Općeg suda od 12. prosinca 1996., Air France protiv Komisije, T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, točke 58. do 62.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 July 2008, Essent Netwerk Noord, C-206/06, ECLI:EU:C:2008:413, paragraphs 69 to 75.
Smjernice o primjeni pravila o državnim potporama za poticajne mjere u korist banaka u kontekstu financijske krize počevši od 1. prosinca 2013.
Commission Decision 2011/528/EU of 8 March 2011 on State aid C-24/09 (ex NN 446/08) – State aid for energy-intensive businesses under the Green Electricity Act in Austria (notified under document C(2011) 1363) Text with EEA relevance (OJ L 235, 10.9.2011, p. 42), recital 76.
(„Smjernice o bankarstvu iz 2013.”), donesene Odlukom Nadzornog tijela EFTA-e br. 464/13/COL od 27. studenoga 2013. o 91. izmjeni postupovnih i materijalnih pravila u području državnih potpora uvođenjem novog poglavlja o primjeni pravila o državnim potporama za poticajne mjere u korist banaka u kontekstu financijske krize počevši od 1. prosinca 2013. („Smjernice o bankarstvu iz 2013.”)
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2013, Vent de Colère and Others, C-262/12, ECLI:EU:C:2013:851, paragraphs 25 and 26.
( SL L 264, 4.9.2014., str. 6. i Dodatkom o EGP-u br. 50, 4.9.2014., str. 1., a posebno točka 62.).
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 July 1996, SFEI and Others, C-39/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, paragraph 60; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 29 April 1999, Spain v Commission, C-342/96, ECLI:EU:C:1999:210, paragraph 41.
No Tijelo je pojasnilo da, ako središnja banka na bankarsku krizu reagira općim mjerama otvorenim svim usporedivim tržišnim sudionicima na tržištu (npr. davanje zajmova cijelom tržištu pod jednakim uvjetima), a ne selektivnim mjerama u korist pojedinačnih banaka, takve opće mjere često ne pripadaju području primjene kontrole državnih potpora.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 July 1974, Italy v Commission, 173/73, ECLI:EU:C:1974:71, paragraph 13.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2002., Francuska protiv Komisije (Stardust), C-482/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:294, točka 38.
The term ‘State interventions’ does not only refer to positive actions by the State but also covers the fact that the authorities do not take measures in certain circumstances, for example to enforce debts.
Vidjeti i presudu Suda od 29. travnja 2004., Grčka protiv Komisije, C-278/00, ECLI:EU:C:2004:239, točke 53. i 54. te presudu Suda od 8. svibnja 2003., Italija i SIM 2 Multimedia SpA protiv Komisije, spojeni predmeti C-328/99 i C-399/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:252, točke 33. i 34.
See for example Judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 October 2000, Magefesa, C-480/98, ECLI:EU:C:2000:559, paragraphs 19 and 20.
Presuda Suda od 11. srpnja 1996., SFEI i dr., C-39/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, točka 62.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 July 1974, Italy v Commission, 173/73, ECLI:EU:C:1974:71 paragraph 13.
Presuda Općeg suda od 24. ožujka 2011., Freistaat Sachsen i Land Sachsen-Anhalt i dr. protiv Komisije, spojeni predmeti T-443/08 i T-455/08, ECLI:EU:T:2011:117, točka 143.
Commission Decision 2004/339/EC of 15 October 2003 on the measures implemented by Italy for RAI SpA (OJ L 119, 23.4.2004, p. 1), recital 69; Opinion of Advocate General Fennelly of 26 November 1998, France v Commission, C-251/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:572, paragraph 26.
Presuda Suda od 22. ožujka 1977., Steinike & Weinlig, 78/76, ECLI:EU:C:1977:52, točka 21.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 July 2003, Altmark Trans, C-280/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 84.
Presuda Suda od 22. ožujka 1977., Steinike & Weinlig, 78/76, ECLI:EU:C:1977:52, točka 22.
Such as, for example, tax advantages or reductions of social security contributions.
Presuda Suda od 16. svibnja 2000., Francuska protiv Ladbroke Racing Ltd i Komisije, C-83/98 P, ECLI:EU:C:2000:248, točke 48. do 51.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 March 1994, Banco Exterior de España, C-387/92, ECLI:EU:C:1994:100, paragraph 13; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 September 2000, Germany v Commission, C-156/98, ECLI:EU:C:2000:467, paragraph 25; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 May 1999, Italy v Commission, C-6/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:251, paragraph 15; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 3 March 2005, Heiser, C-172/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:130, paragraph 36.
Presuda Suda od 15. ožujka 1994., Banco Exterior de España, C-387/92, ECLI:EU:C:1994:100, točka 14. o oslobođenjima od poreza.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 20 November 2003, GEMO SA, C-126/01, ECLI:EU:C:2003:622, paragraphs 28 to 31 on the free collection and disposal of waste.
Osim toga, odstupanja od uobičajenih pravila o insolventnosti, kojima se poduzetnicima dopušta nastavak trgovanja u okolnostima u kojima im se on ne bi dopustio da se primjenjuju uobičajena pravila o insolventnosti, mogu uključivati dodatno opterećenje za državu ako su javna tijela među glavnim vjerovnicima tih poduzetnika ili ako takvo djelovanje dovodi do de facto odricanja od javnih dugova.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 26 September 1996, France v Commission, C-241/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:353, paragraph 40; Judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 December 2002, Belgium v Commission, C-5/01, ECLI:EU:C:2002:754, paragraphs 38 and 39; Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2012, Corsica Ferries France SAS v Commission, T-565/08, ECLI:EU:T:2012:415, paragraphs 137 and 138, upheld on appeal, see Judgment of the Court of Justice of 4 September 2014, SNCM and France v Commission, Joined Cases C-533/12 P and C-536/12 P, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2142.
Vidjeti presudu Suda od 17. lipnja 1999., Piaggio, C-295/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:313, točke 40. do 43. i presudu Suda od 1. prosinca 1998., Ecotrade, C-200/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:579, točku 45.
See Guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines, adopted by EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 216/14/COL of 28 May 2014 amending for the 96th time the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid by adopting new Guidelines on State aid to airports and airlines [2016/2051] (OJ L 318, 24.11.2016, p. 17 and EEA Supplement No 66, 24.11.2016, p. 1) recital 37.
Presuda Suda od 1. prosinca 1998., Ecotrade, C-200/97, ECLI:EU:C:1998:579, točka 41. i presuda Suda od 19. ožujka 2013., Bouygues i Bouygues Télécom protiv Komisije i dr., spojeni predmeti C-399/10 P i C-401/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2013:175, točke 137.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 March 2015, Belgium v Commission, T-538/11, ECLI:EU:T:2015:188, paragraphs 74 to 78.
i 139.
For instance, if a company receives a subsidy to carry out an investment in an assisted region, it cannot be argued that this does not mitigate costs normally included in the budget of the undertaking given that, in the absence of the subsidy, the company would not have carried out the investment.
[80] Kako je definirano u članku 2. točkama (f) i (g) Direktive 2006/111/EZ, na koju se upućuje u točki 1.a.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 8 December 2011, France Télécom SA v Commission, C-81/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:811, paragraphs 43 to 50.
Priloga XV.
This logically applies to the relief of costs incurred by an undertaking to replace the status of officials with the status of employees comparable to that of its competitors, which confers an advantage on the undertaking concerned (on which there was some previous uncertainty following the judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2004, Danske Busvognmænd v Commission, T-157/01, ECLI:EU:T:2004:76, paragraph 57).
Sporazumu o EGP-u; vidjeti Odluku br. 55/2007.
On compensation for stranded costs, see also Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2009, Iride SpA and Iride Energia SpA v Commission, T-25/07, ECLI:EU:T:2009:33, paragraphs 46 to 56.
[81] Vidjeti i Smjernice o primjeni pravila o državnim potporama na naknadu dodijeljenu za pružanje usluga od općeg gospodarskog interesa, donesene Odlukom Nadzornog odbora EFTA-e br. 12/12/COL (SL L 161, 13.6.2013., str. 12. i Dodatkom o EGP-u br. 34, 13.6.2013., str. 1.), stavak 33.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 July 2003, Altmark Trans, C-280/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:415, paragraphs 87 to 95.
Vidjeti presudu Općeg suda od 4. srpnja 2007., Bouygues SA protiv Komisije, T-475/04, ECLI:EU:T:2007:196 u kojoj je Opći sud istaknuo da su pri dodjeli pristupa oskudnom javnom resursu poput radiofrekvencijskog spektra nacionalna tijela istodobno imala uloge regulatora telekomunikacija i upravitelja tim javnim sredstvima, točka 104.
Decision No 12/12/COL and EEA Supplement No 34, 13.6.2013, p. 1.
Vidjeti u tom smislu Odluku Komisije od 20. srpnja 2004. o državnoj potpori NN 42/2004 – Francuska – Izmjena plaćanja dospjelih od društava Orange i SFR za UMTS dozvole (SL C 275, 8.11.2005., str. 3.), uvodne izjave 28., 29. do 30., koju su potvrdili Sudovi EGP-a (presuda Općeg suda od 4. srpnja 2007., Bouygues SA protiv Komisije, T-475/04, ECLI:EU:T:2007:196, točke 108. do 111. i točka 123. te presuda Suda od 2. travnja 2009., Bouygues i Bouygues Télécom protiv Komisije, C-431/07 P, ECLI:EU:C:2009:223, točke 94. do 98. i točka 125.).
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 27 March 1980, Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato, 61/79, ECLI:EU:C:1980:100, paragraphs 29 to 32.
U tom predmetu, kad je riječ o dodjeli dozvola radiofrekvencijskog spektra za UMTS, država je istodobno imala ulogu regulatora telekomunikacija i upravitelja takvim javnim sredstvima i slijedila je regulatorne ciljeve utvrđene Direktivom 97/13/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 10. travnja 1997. o zajedničkom okviru za opća ovlaštenja i pojedinačne dozvole u području telekomunikacijskih usluga (SL L 117, 7.5.1997., str. 15.), na koju se upućuje u točki 5.cc Priloga XI.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 27 September 1988, Asteris AE and Others v Greece, Joined Cases 106 to 120/87, ECLI:EU:C:1988:457, paragraphs 23 and 24.
Sporazumu o EGP-u, vidjeti Odluku Zajedničkog odbora EGP-a br. 37/1999 od 30. ožujka 1999. o izmjeni Priloga XI.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 July 2010, Nuova Terni Industrie Chimiche SpA v Commission, T-64/08, ECLI:EU:T:2010:270, paragraphs 59 to 63 and 140 to 141, clarifying that while the payment of compensation for an expropriation does not grant an advantage, an extension ex post of such compensation can constitute State aid.
(Telekomunikacijske usluge) Sporazumu o EGP-u (SL L 266, 19.10.2000., str. 25. i Dodatak o EGP-u br. 46, 19.10.2000., str. 147.).
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 2 July 1974, Italy v Commission, 173/73, ECLI:EU:C:1974:71, paragraph 17.
Sudovi EGP-a u takvoj su situaciji potvrdili da dodjela dozvola bez maksimiziranja prihoda koji su se mogli ostvariti nije uključivala dodjelu državne potpore s obzirom na to da su predmetne mjere bile opravdane regulatornim ciljevima iz Direktive 97/13/EZ te da su bile usklađene s načelom nediskriminacije.
See also Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2000, Confederación Espanola de Transporte de Mercancías v Commission, T-55/99, ECLI:EU:T:2000:223, paragraph 85.
Suprotno tome, u presudi Suda od 8. rujna 2011., Komisija protiv Nizozemske, C-279/08 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:551, točki 88. i dalje, Sud nije utvrdio regulatorne razloge kojima bi bila opravdana dodjelu bez razmatranja prava za emisije kojima se slobodno može trgovati.
Article 125 of the EEA Agreement provides that ‘This Agreement shall in no way prejudice the rules of the Contracting Parties governing the system of property ownership’.
Vidjeti i presudu Suda od 14. siječnja 2015., Eventech protiv The Parking Adjudicator, C-518/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:9, točku 46. i dalje.
See, for instance, Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 July 1986, Belgium v Commission, 40/85, ECLI:EU:C:1986:305, paragraph 12.
Presuda Suda od 13. ožujka 2001., PreussenElektra, C-379/98, ECLI:EU:C:2001:160, točka 62.