natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Having regard to Council Directive 90/539/EEC of 15 October 1990 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs [1], in particular Article 3(2) and (3),
ob upoštevanju Direktive Sveta 90/539/EGS z dne 15. oktobra 1990 o pogojih zdravstvenega varstva živali, ki veljajo znotraj Skupnosti za trgovanje s perutnino in valilnimi jajci ter za njihov uvoz iz tretjih držav [1], in zlasti člena 3(2) in (3) Direktive,
Commission Decisions 92/139/EEC [2], 92/140/EEC [3], 92/141/EEC [4], 92/281/EEC [5], 92/282/EEC [6], 92/283/EEC [7], 92/342/EEC [8], 92/344/EEC [9], 92/345/EEC [10], 92/379/EEC [11], 92/480/EEC [12], 94/964/EC [13] and 95/141/EC [14] approve plans for establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs submitted by Denmark, Ireland, France, the United Kingdom, Portugal, the Netherlands, Germany, Greece, Spain, Belgium, Italy, Finland and Sweden.
Z Odločbami Komisije 92/139/EGS [2], 92/140/EGS [3], 92/141/EGS [4], 92/281/EGS [5], 92/282/EGS [6], 92/283/EGS [7], 92/342/EGS [8], 92/344/EGS [9], 92/345/EGS [10], 92/379/EGS [11], 92/480/EGS [12], 94/964/ES [13] in 95/141/ES [14] so odobreni načrti za obrate za trgovanje s perutnino in valilnimi jajci znotraj Skupnosti, ki so jih predložili Danska, Irska, Francija, Združeno kraljestvo, Portugalska, Nizozemska, Nemčija, Grčija, Španija, Belgija, Italija, Finska in Švedska.
In view of the developments in the poultry sector those Member States and Austria have been requested to update their plans and resubmit them to the Commission.
Zaradi razvoja v sektorju perutninarstva se od teh držav članic in Avstrije zahteva, da svoje načrte posodobijo in jih ponovno predložijo Komisiji.
The Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia have submitted plans to the Commission for the approval of establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs.
Češka, Estonija, Ciper, Latvija, Litva, Madžarska, Malta, Poljska, Slovenija in Slovaška so Komisiji predložili načrte za odobritev obratov za trgovanje s perutnino in valilnimi jajci znotraj Skupnosti.
Those plans fulfil the criteria laid down in Directive 90/539/EEC and subject to an effective implementation, permit the desired objective to be attained.
Ti načrti izpolnjujejo merila, ki jih določa Direktiva 90/539/EGS, in ob učinkovitem izvajanju omogočajo dosego želenega cilja.
For the sake of clarity and consistency of Community legislation, the amended plans submitted by Member States and the plans submitted by the new Member States and by Austria should be approved.
Zaradi jasnosti in doslednosti zakonodaje Skupnosti je treba odobriti spremenjene načrte, ki so jih predložile države članice, in načrte, ki so jih predložile nove države članice in Avstrija.
Accordingly, Decisions 92/139/EEC, 92/140/EEC, 92/141/EEC, 92/281/EEC, 92/282/EEC, 92/283/EEC, 92/342/EEC, 92/344/EEC, 92/345/EEC, 92/379/EEC, 92/480/EEC, 94/964/EC and 95/141/EC should therefore be repealed and replaced by this Decision.
Odločbe 92/139/EGS, 92/140/EGS, 92/141/EGS, 92/281/EGS, 92/282/EGS, 92/283/EGS, 92/342/EGS, 92/344/EGS, 92/345/EGS, 92/379/EGS, 92/480/EGS, 94/964/ES in 95/141/ES je zato treba razveljaviti in nadomestiti s to odločbo.
The plans and the amended plans for the approval of establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs submitted by the Member States listed in the Annex are approved.
Načrti in spremenjeni načrti o odobritvi obratov za trgovanje s perutnino in valilnimi jajci znotraj Skupnosti, ki so jih predložile države članice, navedene v Prilogi, se odobrijo.
Decisions 92/139/EEC, 92/140/EEC, 92/141/EEC, 92/281/EEC, 92/282/EEC, 92/283/EEC, 92/342/EEC, 92/344/EEC, 92/345/EEC, 92/379/EEC, 92/480/EEC, 94/964/EC and 95/141/EC are repealed.
Odločbe 92/139/EGS, 92/140/EGS, 92/141/EGS, 92/281/EGS, 92/282/EGS, 92/283/EGS, 92/342/EGS, 92/344/EGS, 92/345/EGS, 92/379/EGS, 92/480/EGS, 94/964/ES in 95/141/ES se razveljavijo.
OJ L 150, 2.6.1992 p. 24.
UL L 150, 2.6.1992, str. 24.
List of Member States referred to in Article 1
Seznam držav članic iz člena 1
of 6 December 2004
z dne 6. decembra 2004
amending and correcting Decision 2004/4/EC authorising Member States temporarily to take emergency measures against the dissemination of Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith as regards Egypt
o spremembi Odločbe 2004/4/ES o začasni dovolitvi državam članicam, da sprejmejo nujne ukrepe proti razširjanju Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith v zvezi z Egiptom
(notified under document number C(2004) 4602)
(notificirana pod dokumentarno številko K(2004) 4602)
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community [1], and in particular Article 16(3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Direktive Sveta 2000/29/ES z dne 8. maja 2000 o varstvenih ukrepih proti vnosu organizmov, škodljivih za rastline ali rastlinske proizvode, v Skupnost in proti njihovemu širjenju v Skupnosti [1], in zlasti člena 16(3) Direktive,
Under Commission Decision 2004/4/EC [2], tubers of Solanum tuberosum L., originating in Egypt, must not in principle be introduced into the Community.
V skladu z Odločbo Komisije 2004/4/ES [2] je vnos gomoljev Solanum tuberosum L. s poreklom iz Egipta v Skupnost prepovedan.
However for the 2003/2004 import season the entry into the Community of such tubers is permitted from ‘pest-free areas’ and subject to specific conditions.
Toda za sezono uvoza 2003/2004 je vnos takih gomoljev v Skupnost načelno dovoljen le iz neokuženih območij in skladno z določenimi pogoji.
During the 2003/2004 import season, a number of interceptions of Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith were recorded and Egypt itself decided to ban all exports of Egyptian potatoes to the Community as of 9 April 2004.
Med sezono uvoza 2003/2004 je bila odkrita najdba bakterije Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith in Egipt sam se je odločil prepovedati ves izvoz krompirja iz Egipta v Skupnost od 9. aprila 2004.
The situation was reassessed.
Situacija je bila ponovno pregledana.
Egypt informed the Commission that stringent measures are taken against producers, inspectors, exporters and packing stations which violate Egyptian instructions on the export of potatoes destined for the Community.
Egipt je obvestil Skupnost, da je sprejel brezpogojne ukrepe proti pridelovalcem, inšpektorjem, izvoznikom in pakirnim postajam, ki kršijo navodila Egipta o izvozu krompirja, namenjenega za Skupnost.
Additional measures were taken with regard to the identification of the pest-free areas, the reduction of the period of validity of the Phytosanitary Certificate from 15 to 7 days, an increase of the number of inspectors, stricter rules on the labelling of bags and stringent rules on companies who want to export potatoes to the Community.
Za označitev neokuženih območij so bili sprejeti dodatni ukrepi, skrajšanje veljavnosti fitosanitarnega potrdila s 15 na 7 dni, povečanje števila inšpektorjev, strožja pravila glede označevanja vreč in brezpogojni predpisi za podjetja, ki želijo izvažati krompir v Skupnost.
In the light of the information provided by Egypt, the Commission has established that there is no risk of spreading Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith with the entry into the Community of tubers of Solanum tuberosum L. from pest-free areas of Egypt, provided that specific conditions are satisfied.
Glede na podatke, ki jih je zagotovil Egipt, Komisija meni, da ni tveganja širjenja Pseudomonas solanacearum (Smith) Smith v Skupnost z gomolji Solanum tuberosum L. iz neokuženih področij Egipta, pod pogojem da so izpolnjeni določeni pogoji.
The entry into the Community of tubers of Solanum tuberosum L., originating in Egypt, should therefore be permitted for the 2004/2005 import season.
Vnos gomoljev Solanum tuberosum L. s poreklom iz Egipta v Skupnost se dovoli za uvozno sezono 2004/2005.
In addition, certain textual errors should be corrected.
Poleg tega je treba popraviti nekatere napake v besedilu.
Decision 2004/4/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
Odločbo 2004/4/ES je zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
Decision 2004/4/EC is amended as follows:
Odločba 2004/4/ES se spremeni:
in paragraph 1, ‘2003/2004’ is replaced by ‘2004/2005’;
v odstavku 1 se „2003/2004“ nadomesti z „2004/2005“.
in paragraph 2, ‘2003/04’ is replaced by ‘2004/2005’;
v odstavku 2 se „2003/2004“ nadomesti z „2004/2005“.
in Article 3, ‘2003/2004’ is replaced by ‘2004/2005’;
V členu 3 se „2003/2004“ nadomesti z „2004/2005“.
in Article 4, ‘30 August 2004’ is replaced by ‘30 August 2005’;
V členu 4 se „30. avgust 2004“ nadomesti z „30. avgust 2005“.
in Article 7, ‘30 September 2004’ is replaced by ‘30 September 2005’;
V členu 7 se „30. september 2004“ nadomesti s „30. september 2005“.
the Annex is amended as follows:
Priloga se spremeni:
in point 1(a), the words ‘as established by the Commission’ are deleted;
v točki 1(a) se besede „ki jih je določila Komisija“ črtajo;
in point 1(b)(iii), ‘2003/04’ is replaced by ‘2004/2005’;
v točki 1(b)(iii) se „2003/2004“ nadomesti z „2004/2005“;
in point 1(b)(iii), second indent, ‘1 January 2004’ is replaced by ‘1 January 2005’;
v točki 1(b)(iii) se druga alinea „1. januar 2004“ nadomesti s „1. januar 2005“;
point 1(b)(x) is replaced by:
točka 1(b)(x) se nadomesti z naslednjim:
clearly labelled on each bag which is sealed, under the control of the competent Egyptian authorities, with an indelible indication of the relevant official code number as given in the list of “approved pest-free areas” compiled under Article 2 of this Decision, and of the relevant lot number;’
jasno označen na vsaki zapečateni vreči, pod nadzorom pristojnih egiptovskih organov, z neizbrisno navedbo ustrezne uradne kodne številke, kot je navedeno v seznamu ‚potrjenih neokuženih območij‘, ki so zbrani v okviru člena 2 te odločbe, ter zadevne številke partije“;
in point 1(b)(xii), ‘1 January 2004’ is replaced by ‘1 January 2005’;
v točki 1(b)(xii) se „1. januar 2004“ nadomesti s „1. januar 2005“;
in point 5, second subparagraph, ‘2003/04’ is replaced by ‘2004/2005’.
v drugem pododstavku točke 5 se „2003/2004“ nadomesti z „2004/2005“.
Done at Brussels, 6 December 2004.
V Bruslju, 6. decembra 2004
OJ L 2, 6.1.2004, p. 50.
UL L 2, 6.1.2004, str. 50.
Council Decision 2004/837/CFSP
Sklep Sveta 2004/837/SZVP
concerning the implementation of Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission
o izvajanju Skupnega ukrepa 2002/210/SZVP o Policijski misiji Evropske unije
Having regard to Council Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP of 11 March 2002 on the European Union Police Mission [1], and in particular Article 9(1) thereof, in conjunction with the second indent of Article 23(2) of the Treaty on European Union,
ob upoštevanju Skupnega ukrepa Sveta 2002/210/SZVP z 11. marca 2002 o Policijski misiji Evropske unije [1] in zlasti člena 9(1) tega skupnega ukrepa, v zvezi z drugo alineo člena 23(2) Pogodbe o Evropski uniji,
Whereas the Council should decide on the final budget for the year 2005,
ker mora Svet sprejeti odločitev o dokončnem proračunu za leto 2005 –
An amount of EUR 17410000 covering operational running costs of EUPM in 2005 shall be financed in common from the general budget of the European Union.
Znesek 17410000 EUR za kritje operativnih tekočih stroškov EUPM v letu 2005 se v celoti financira iz splošnega proračuna Evropske unije.
The management of the expenditure financed by the general budget of the European Union specified in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the procedures and rules of the Community applying to budget matters with the exception that any pre-financing shall not remain the property of the Community.
Vodenje odhodkov, financiranih iz splošnega proračuna Evropske unije in določenih v odstavku 1, poteka glede na postopke in pravila Skupnosti, ki veljajo za proračunske zadeve, z izjemo, da zneski predfinanciranja ne ostanejo last Skupnosti.
OJ L 70, 13.3.2002, p. 1.
UL L 70, 13.3.2002, str. 1.
Joint Action as last amended by Joint Action 2003/188/CFSP (OJ L 73, 19.3.2003, p. 9).
Skupni ukrep, kakor je bil nazadnje spremenjen s Skupnim ukrepom 2003/188/SZVP (UL L 73, 19.3.2003, str. 9).
of 10 December 2003
z dne 10. decembra 2003
on State aid implemented by France for France 2 and France 3
o državnih pomočeh, ki jih Francija izvaja v korist France 2 in France 3
(notified under document number C(2003) 4497)
(notificirana pod dokumentarno številko K(2003) 4497)
(Only the French text is authentic)
(Besedilo v francoskem jeziku je edino verodostojno)
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti prve alinee člena 88(2) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru (EGP) in zlasti člena 62(1)(a) Sporazuma,
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above [1] and having regard to their comments,
po povabilu vseh zainteresiranih, da predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi členi [1] in ob upoštevanju teh pripomb,
On 10 March 1993, Télévision Française 1 SA (hereinafter TF1) submitted a complaint to the Commission concerning the methods used to finance and operate the public broadcasters France 2 and France 3 [2].
Dne 10. marca 1993 je Francoska televizija 1 SA (v nadaljnjem besedilu „TF1“) vložila pri Komisiji pritožbo v zvezi z načini financiranja in izkoriščanja javnih kanalov France 2 in France 3 [2].
The complaint alleged infringements of Article 81, Article 86(1), and Article 87 of the Treaty.
Ta pritožba se nanaša na kršitve člena 81, člena 86(1) in člena 87 Pogodbe.
With regard to Article 81 of the Treaty, TF1 argued that France 2 and France 3 had implemented a number of concerted practices which had as their object and effect the restriction of competition.
V skladu s členom 81 Pogodbe, TF1 meni, da sta France 2 in France 3 izvedli določeno število usklajenih postopkov, katerih namen in učinek je bil omejevanje konkurence.
As far as Article 86 was concerned, TF1 considered that the French State was maintaining in force measures that were contrary to the principle of equal treatment of public and private enterprises and imposed or encouraged anticompetitive agreements.
V skladu s členom 86 Pogodbe, TF1 trdi, da francoska država vzdržuje ukrepe, ki so v nasprotju z načelom enakosti obravnavanja med javnimi in zasebnimi podjetji, in ukrepe, ki vsiljujejo ali vzpodbujajo protikonkurenčne dogovore.
Lastly, as regards Article 87 of the Treaty, TF1 claimed that the licence fee, various grants and capital injections and authorisations to incur deficits which France 2 and France 3 received in the early 1990s constituted State aid.
Navsezadnje, v skladu s členom 87 Pogodbe, TF1 zatrjuje, da pristojbina, različne subvencije in dotacije v kapitalu kot tudi dovoljenja za primanjkljaj, ki sta jih France 2 in France 3 izkoristili v začetku devetdesetih let, predstavljajo obliko državne pomoči.
also regarded as a measure with equivalent effect to State aid the fact that the French Broadcasting Authority could not impose fines on the public broadcasters.
Po drugi strani pa je TF1 upravičen do enake državne pomoči, zaradi česar Višji svet avdiovizije (v nadaljnjem besedilu „CSA“) ni zmožen izreči denarne sankcije proti javnim kanalom.
alleged that these State aid measures had enabled the public broadcasters to disregard all commercial profitability constraints by outbidding for the purchase of television rights and offering introductory prices and artificial reductions on their advertising slots or sponsorship activities.
meni, da so te državne pomoči javnim kanalom dovolile, da so se otresle vsakršnega pritiska komercialne donosnosti in so obljubljale več kot drugi za nakup televizijskih pravic in z uporabo izklicnih cen in z umetnimi znižanji cen na njihovih reklamnih zaslonih ali v njihovih pokroviteljskih akcijah.
On 16 July 1993, the Commission sent a request for information to TF1, which replied by letter dated 30 September 1993.
julija 1993 je Komisija poslala zahtevo po informacijah na TF1, ki je odgovorila s pismom z dne 30. septembra 1993.
A request for information was addressed on 12 August 1993 to the French authorities, which replied by letter dated 9 December 1993.
Zahteva po informacijah je bila 12. avgusta 1993 naslovljena na francoske oblasti, ki so odgovorile s pismom dne 9. decembra 1993.
On 17 March 1994, TF1 wrote to the Commission reiterating the main points set out in the complaint.
marca 1994 je TF1 poslala pismo Komisiji in v njem je povzela najpomembnejše elemente, ki so vsebovani v njeni pritožbi.
By letter of 23 September 1994 and in a document dated 12 December 1994, TF1 provided further information.
S pismom z dne 23. septembra 1994 in v dokumentu z datumom 12. decembra 1994 je TF1 navedla dodatne informacije.
During the same period, several meetings took place between Commission representatives and representatives of TF1.
V istem obdobju je bilo opravljenih več srečanj predstavnikov Komisije in predstavnikov TF1.
By letter dated 9 June 1995, TF1 expressed concern about the examination of the complaint.
S pismom z dne 9. junija 1995 je TF1 izrazila zaskrbljenost glede rezultata pritožbe.
The Commission replied by letter of 5 July 1995 that the study it had ordered on the funding of public service broadcasting in all the Member States was not yet available.
Komisija je odgovorila s pismom z dne 5. julija 1995, da študija, ki jo je bila naročila v zvezi s problematiko financiranja javne televizije v vseh državah članicah, še zmeraj ni na voljo.
By means of a document dated 27 November 1995, TF1 provided additional information.
V dokumentu z dne 27. novembra 1995 je TF1 navedla dopolnilne informacije.
On 2 February 1996, TF1 brought an action before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities against the Commission for failure to act.
Dne 2. februarja 1996 je TF1 proti Komisiji vložila pritožbo zaradi nedejavnosti pred Sodiščem prve stopnje Evropskih skupnosti.
By letter of 16 February 1996, the French authorities replied to the request for information addressed to them on 21 November 1995.
S pismom z dne 16. februarja 1996 so francoske oblasti odgovorile na zahtevo po informacijah, ki jim je bila poslana dne 21. novembra 1995.
By letters dated 22 February, 28 June, 4 October and 18 October 1996, the Commission sent further requests for information to the French authorities, which replied by means of a number of letters and fax messages dated 21 March, 28 March, 12 April, 18 July and 20 December 1996.
S pismi z dne 22. februarja, 28. junija, 4. in 18. oktobra 1996 je Komisija francoskim oblastem poslala nove zahteve po informacijah in francoske oblasti so odgovorile z raznimi pismi in s sporočili po telefaksu, z datumi 21. marec, 28. marec, 12. april, 18. julij in 20. december 1996.
By letter dated 10 March 1997, TF1 lodged an additional complaint with the Commission.
S pismom z dne 10. marca 1997 je TF1 Komisiji poslala dopolnitev svoje prvotne pritožbe.
In a letter addressed to TF1 on 15 May 1997, the Commission stated that in its view no measure taken by the French State infringed Article 86 read in conjunction with Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty.
V pismu, poslanem TF1 dne 15. maja 1997, je Komisija izrazila mnenje, da noben državni ukrep ni prekršil člena 86, v povezavi s členoma 81 in 82 Pogodbe.
By letter dated 21 October 1997, the French authorities provided the Commission with further information.
S pismom z dne 21. oktobra 1997 so francoske oblasti Komisiji posredovale dopolnilne informacije.
On 10 July 1998, a meeting was held between the Commission and TF1.
Dne 10. julija 1998 je bil sklican sestanek predstavnikov Komisije in TF1.
By decision adopted on 2 February 1999, the Commission rejected the arguments set out in TF1’s complaint and based on Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty.
Z odločbo, sprejeto dne 2. februarja 1999, je Komisija zavrnila dokaze, navedene v pritožbi TF1, ki so temeljili na členih 81 in 82 Pogodbe.
On 26 February 1999, the Commission issued an injunction requiring the French authorities to provide information; the latter replied by letter dated 29 April 1999.
Dne 26. februarja 1999 je Komisija francoskim oblastem poslala izrecno zahtevo po informacijah, francoske oblasti so odgovorile s pismom z dne 29. aprila 1999.
With the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam on 1 May 1999, the Protocol on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States (hereinafter the Protocol) was annexed to the Treaty.
Z začetkom veljavnosti Amsterdamske pogodbe, dne 1. maja 1999, je bil Pogodbi dodan Protokol o sistemu javne radiodifuzije v državah članicah (v nadaljnjem besedilu „Protokol“).
On 3 June 1999, the Court of First Instance delivered a judgment declaring that the Commission had failed to fulfil its obligations by failing to adopt a decision concerning the part of the complaint lodged by TF1 concerning State aid [3].
Dne 3. junija 1999 je Sodišče prve stopnje Komisijo obsodilo zaradi nedejavnosti, potem ko je ugotovilo, da je Komisija opustila sprejem odločitve glede tistega dela pritožbe TF1, ki se nanaša na državne pomoči [3].
By letter dated 27 September 1999, the Commission informed France that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the Treaty in respect of the investment grants received by France 2 and France 3 and the capital injections received by France 2 between 1988 and 1994.
S pismom z dne 27. septembra 1999 je Komisija obvestila Francijo o svoji odločitvi, da sproži postopek, ki ga predvideva člen 88(2) Pogodbe, proti subvencijam investicij, ki sta jih prejeli France 2 in France 3, kot tudi proti dotacijam v kapital, ki jih je prejemala France 2, v letih od 1988 do 1994.
The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities [4].
Odločitev Komisije, da sproži postopek, je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropskih Skupnosti [4].
The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the measures concerned.
Komisija je povabila zainteresirane, da predstavijo svoje pripombe glede zadevnih ukrepov.
A meeting was held between the French authorities and the Commission on 19 November 1999.
Sestanek med predstavniki francoskih oblasti in Komisijo je bil opravljen dne 19. novembra 1999.
The French authorities submitted their comments by letter dated 10 December 1999.
Francoske oblasti so svoje pripombe predstavile v pismu z dne 10. decembra 1999.
On 1 February 2000, the Association of Commercial Television in Europe (hereinafter the ACT) submitted its comments to the Commission.
Dne 1. februarja 2000 je Zveza evropskih komercialnih televizij (l’Association des Télévisions Commerciales Européennes – v nadaljnjem besedilu „ACT“) poslala svoje pripombe Komisiji.
The French authorities reacted to those comments by letter dated 15 June 2000.
Francoske oblasti so odgovorile na te pripombe s pismom z dne 15. junija 2000.
Meetings took place on 10 February 2000, between the Commission and representatives of TF1, then on 6 April and 2 October 2000, between the Commission and representatives of the French authorities and France Télévisions.
Dne 10. februarja 2000 je bil sklican sestanek predstavnikov Komisije in TF1, nato, dne 6. aprila in 2. oktobra 2000, sestanek predstavnikov Komisije in predstavnikov francoskih oblasti ter predstavnikov France Télévisions.