natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It has been implicitly confirmed in Altmark that state aid which compensates for the costs incurred by an undertaking in providing an SGEI can be regarded as compatible with the common market if it meets the conditions of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty [75].
V Altmark je bilo implicitno potrjeno, da se lahko državna pomoč, ki kompenzira nastale stroške podjetja pri nudenju SGEI smatra, kot združljiva s skupnim trgom, če izpolnjuje pogoje člena 86(2) Pogodbe ES [75].
The Court of Justice has made it clear that, for a measure to benefit from such exemption, the principles of definition, entrustment and proportionality must all be fulfilled.
Sodišče je utemeljilo, da morajo biti izpolnjena načela opredelitve, zadolžitve in proporcionalnosti, da bi lahko bil ukrep upravičen do te izjeme.
The Commission considers that, where these principles are fulfilled, the development of trade is not affected to an extent contrary to the interests of the Community.
Komisija meni, da kjer ta načela niso izpolnjena, razvoj trgovine ni prizadet v takšni meri, da bi le-to bilo v nasprotju z interesi Skupnosti.
The way these principles apply in the broadcasting sector is explained in the Commission communication on the application of state aid rules to public service broadcasting [76].
Kako se ta načela uporabljajo v radiofuzijskem sektorju je obrazloženo v sporočilu Komisije o uporabi pravil državne pomoči v javni službi radiotelevizije [76].
According to the communication, the Commission has to assess whether or not [77]:
V skladu s sporočilom mora Komisija oceniti ali oziroma ne [77]:
the activities of RTP are public service obligations clearly defined as such by the Member State (definition),
so dejavnosti RTP obveznosti javne službe in kot takšne jasno določene s strani države članice (opredelitev),
RTP is officially entrusted by the Portuguese authorities with the provision of that service (entrustment),
je RTP uradno zadolžen za zagotavljanje te službe s strani portugalskih organov oblasti (zadolžitev),
the funding is proportionate to the net cost of providing the public service.
je denarna podpora proporcionalna neto stroškom zagotavljanja javne službe.
As stated in the Amsterdam Protocol [78] and the communication on broadcasting [79], it is for the Member States to define the public service remit of the public service broadcaster.
Kot določa Amsterdamski protokol [78] in sporočilo o radioteleviziji [79] morajo države članice opredeliti javno službo radiotelevizije.
In the broadcasting sector the role of the Commission is limited to checking whether the public service definition contains any manifest error.
Vloga Komisije je v radiofuzijskem sektorju omejena na kontrolo, če opredelitev javne službe vsebuje kakšno očitno napako.
Such error would constitute an abuse of the definition of the public service.
Takšna napaka bi predstavljala zlorabo opredelitve javne službe.
Given the specific nature of the broadcasting sector, the Commission considers, in view of the interpretative provisions of the Protocol, a definition entrusting a given broadcaster with the task of providing balanced and varied programming to be legitimate [80].
Komisija glede na posebno naravo radiofuzijskega sektorja, z ozirom na interpretacijska določila protokola smatra, da je zakonita opredelitev, ki danega izdajatelja televizijskega programa zadolžuje z nalogo zagotavljanja uravnoteženih in različnih programskih vsebin [80].
Such a definition would be consistent with the objective of fulfilling the democratic, social and cultural needs of a particular society.
Takšna opredelitev bi bila v skladu s ciljem izpolnjevanja demokratičnih, socialnih in kulturnih potreb določene družbe.
As described in paragraphs 51 and 52, RTP is, by virtue of Law No 21/92 and the public service contracts, obliged to ensure as a general public television service the broadcasting of two channels with general coverage.
Kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 51 in 52 je RTP na temelju Zakona št. 21/92 in pogodbe za izvajanje javne službe zavezan zagotoviti oddajanje dveh kanalov s splošnim pokritjem, kot splošna javna služba radiotelevizije.
Whereas the first channel has to offer more general programming, the second channel has to aim more at specific audiences.
Medtem ko mora prvi kanal nuditi bolj splošne programske vsebine, mora drugi kanal meriti na bolj določeno publiko.
Furthermore, as described in paragraphs 53 and 54, Law No 21/92 and the public service contracts impose more detailed obligations on RTP regarding programme content and international cooperation, as well as some other specific obligations.
Razen tega, kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 53 in 54, Zakona št. 21/92 in pogodbi za izvajanje javne službe, le-te RTP nalagajo bolj podrobne obveznosti glede programskih vsebin in mednarodnega sodelovanja, kot tudi nekatere druge posebne obveznosti.
Although the definition of RTP's public service broadcasting is of a qualitative and rather broad nature, the Commission, in view of the interpretative provisions of the Amsterdam Protocol, considers such a ‘broad’ definition to be as legitimate [81].
Čeprav je opredelitev RTP javne službe radiotelevizije bolj kvalitativne in dokaj širše narave, Komisija z ozirom na interpretacijska določila Amsterdamskega protokola smatra, da je takšna „širša“opredelitev zakonita [81].
Therefore, it also considers the general definition of RTP's public service remit to provide two television channels of national coverage, one more general and the other more focused on specific audiences, to be legitimate.
Za zakonito se iz tega razloga smatra tudi splošna opredelitev RTP javne službe v zvezi z zagotavljanjem dveh televizijskih kanalov z nacionalnim pokritjem, enega bolj splošnega in drugega bolj osredotočenega na posebne publike.
Such a definition can be regarded as fulfilling the democratic, social and cultural needs of Portuguese society.
Takšna opredelitev se lahko smatra za izpolnjevanje demokratičnih, socialnih in kulturnih potreb portugalske družbe.
Furthermore, the Commission regards as legitimate the obligations which determine in detail how RTP should perform the general public service broadcasting remit.
Komisija razen tega smatra za zakonite obveznosti, ki natančno določajo kako naj RTP opravlja splošno javno službo radiotelevizije.
Indeed, in line with wording of the Amsterdam Protocol, these obligations can also be considered to fulfil the democratic, social and cultural needs of Portuguese society.
V skladu z besedilom Amsterdamskega protokola se te obveznosti v resnici lahko smatrajo za izpolnjevanje demokratičnih, socialnih in kulturnih potreb portugalske družbe.
Although the Commission regards the public service mission of RTP as legitimate, it must, however, ascertain whether or not this definition contains any manifest errors.
Čeprav Komisija upošteva poslanstvo RTP javne službe za zakonito mora vseeno ugotoviti, če ta opredelitev vsebuje katere očitne napake.
Taking into account recital 45 to the Television without Frontiers Directive, the Commission could accept, in so far the resulting film rights are shown on public service television, that the public service definition of public service broadcasters includes the obligation to contribute substantially to investment in European audiovisual production [82].
Komisija bi ob upoštevanju opisa 45 glede televizije brez obmejne direktive lahko sprejela, da se izvirajoče filmske pravice prikazujejo na javni televiziji, če bi opredelitev javne službe izdajatelja televizijskega programa vključevala obveznost bistvenega prispevanja k vlaganjem v Evropsko avdiovizualno produkcijo [82].
The Commission considers that the obligation imposed on RTP to promote the cinema falls within the scope of public service broadcasting, as RTP subsequently broadcasts on public service television the films for which it acquired the distribution rights.
Komisija smatra, da naložena obveznost RTP, da promovira kinematografe spada v obseg javne službe radiotelevizije, ker RTP naknadno na javni televiziji predstavlja filme, za katere je pridobil distribucijske pravice.
The Commission cannot, therefore, agree with the comments by interested parties that RTP's obligation regarding cinema promotion and its financing is discriminatory.
Komisija se zato ne more strinjati s pripombami zainteresiranih strank, da je diskriminatorna RTP obveznost promocije kinematografov in financiranja.
The parties argued that private broadcasters also concluded protocols on cinema promotion with the Portuguese authorities that do not provide for compensation.
Stranke so dokazovale, da so zasebni izdajatelji televizijskega programa tudi sklenili protokole o promociji kinematografov s portugalskimi organi oblasti, ki niso zagotovili kompenzacije.
The Commission is of the opinion that a distinction has to be made between the voluntary agreements on cinema promotion concluded between the State and the private broadcasters, on the one hand, and the public service broadcasting obligations imposed on RTP to broadcast cinema productions and to finance them, on the other.
Komisija meni, da je potrebno razlikovati med prostovoljnimi pogodbami o promociji kinematografov, sklenjenimi med zasebnimi izdajatelji televizijskih programov in državo na eni strani ter naloženimi obveznostmi javne službe radiotelevizije RTP, da prikazuje in financira kinematografsko produkcijo na drugi strani.
It is clear that RTP is explicitly entrusted with a public service task to support certain film productions that are subsequently broadcast as public service television programmes, whereas no such public service task is entrusted to private broadcasters.
Videti je, da je RTP izrecno zaupana naloga javne službe, da podpira določene filmske produkcije, ki se kasneje prikazujejo kot televizijski programi javne službe, medtem ko nobena takšna naloga ni zaupana zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskih programov.
In fact, RTP becomes an instrument used by the State to support the cinema.
RTP dejansko postane sredstvo, ki ga uporablja država za podporo kinematografom.
Any resulting advantages granted by RTP to the cinema could constitute state aid and should be assessed as such.
Katere koli posledične ugodnosti, odobrene kinematografom s strani RTP lahko predstavljajo državno pomoč in bi se morale kot takšne tudi ocenjevati.
This decision is without prejudice to any assessment of possible advantages granted to film producers.
Ta odločitev je brez vpliva na katero koli ocenitev možnih ugodnosti, odobrenih filmskim producentom.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the co-financing by RTP of Portuguese cinematographic works that are shown on the public service channels can be considered as a legitimate specific obligation that is instrumental in fulfilling RTP’s general public service broadcasting obligation.
Glede na to Komisija zaključuje, da se lahko RTP sofinanciranje kinematografskih del, ki se prikazujejo na kanalih javne službe smatra kot posebna zakonita obveznost, ki je koristna pri izpolnjevanju RTP obveznosti splošne javne službe radiotelevizije.
This obligation does not, therefore, constitute a manifest error.
Ta obveznost zato ne predstavlja očitne napake.
However, the Commission considers that the legal obligation imposed on RTP to provide ‘other services to be specified on an ad hoc basis’ [83] is not sufficiently precise to enable the Commission to assess beforehand with sufficient legal certainty whether such services can be considered as a public service.
Komisija vseeno meni, da naložena obveznost RTP, da nudi „druge storitve, ki bodo določene na začasni osnovi“ [83] ni dovolj določna, da bi lahko Komisija predhodno z zadostno pravno gotovostjo ocenila, če se storitve lahko upoštevajo kot javna služba.
Although it takes the view that the ‘other services to be specified’ are not clearly defined, it notes that no payments were made under this provision during the period under investigation [84].
Čeprav je videti, da „druge storitve, ki bodo določene“ niso dovolj jasno določene, poudarja, da v obdobju preiskave niso bila izvedena nobena plačila v skladu s tem določilom [84].
In view of the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the activities of RTP as described in Law No 21/92 and redefined in the public service contracts are clearly defined public service obligations.
Komisija glede na zgoraj navedeno zaključuje, da so dejavnosti RTP, kot opisane v Zakonu št. 21/92 in ponovno opredeljene v pogodbah za izvajanje javne službe, jasno določene obveznosti javne službe.
Although the obligation to provide ‘other services to be provided on an ad hoc basis’ is not sufficiently precise for it to be concluded beforehand that all the services provided under this heading could be considered public services, no payments were made under this provision in the period 1992 to 1998.
Čeprav obveznost zagotavljanja „drugih storitev, ki bodo določene na začasni osnovi“ ni dovolj natančna, da bi se lahko predhodno ugotovilo, če se vse določene obveznosti pod tem naslovom lahko smatrajo za javno službo, v skladu s tem določilom niso bila izvedena nobena plačila v obdobju 1992-1998.
Entrustment
Zadolžitev
Secondly, the Commission has to assess whether the public service obligations were entrusted to the recipient of the funding.
Komisija drugič ocenjuje, če so bile obveznosti javne službe poverjene prejemniku denarnih sredstev.
In line with the Communication on broadcasting, the Commission has to verify whether the public service remit has been entrusted to RTP by means of an official act [85].
Komisija mora v skladu s sporočilom o radioteleviziji preveriti, če je bila RTP javna služba poverjena z uradnim aktom [85].
As can be seen from paragraph 55, the public service obligations are clearly entrusted to RTP under various laws and contracts: Article 5 of Law No 58/90, Articles 4(1) and 5 of Law No 21/92 and Clause 1 of the public service contracts.
Kot je mogoče videti v uvodni izjavi 55 so obveznosti javne službe brez dvoma poverjene RTP, v skladu z različnimi zakoni in pogodbami: člen 5 Zakona št. 58/90, členi 4(1) in člen 5 Zakona št. 21/92 in določba 1 pogodbe za izvajanje javne službe.
The Commission did not receive any comments from interested parties or the Portuguese Government to the effect that the public service was not sufficiently entrusted to RTP by means of an official act.
Komisija ni prejela nobenih pripomb zainteresiranih strank ali portugalske vlade, da javna služba z uradnim aktom ni bila v zadostni meri poverjena RTP.
In line with the communication and in view of the above laws and contracts, it concludes that there is no doubt that RTP has to perform the public service television obligations and the public service remit has, therefore, been officially entrusted to RTP.
V skladu s sporočilom in glede na zgornje zakone in pogodbe ugotavlja, da ni nobenega dvoma, da mora RTP opravljati obveznosti javne službe radiotelevizije in iz tega razloga je bila javna služba uradno poverjena RTP.
Not only should the public service be entrusted to RTP by means of an official act; steps should also be taken to ensure that the public service is provided as provided for.
Ne samo, da bi morala biti javna služba RTP poverejena z uradnim aktom; morali bi tudi biti podvzeti koraki za zagotovitev javne službe, kot bi morala biti zagotovljena.
As stated in paragraphs 56 to 59, different control mechanisms were in place to ensure that RTP carried out the public service obligation in the manner provided for.
Kot je določeno v uvodnih izjavah 56 do 59 so bili zagotovljeni različni kontrolni mehanizmi, da je RTP opravljala obveznost javne službe na določen način.
Firstly, RTP had to present reports on the public service performance as well as plans accompanied by an opinion of the internal board of auditors.
Prvič mora RTP predložiti poročila opravljanja javne službe, kot tudi načrte, katere spremlja mnenje notranjega odbora revizorjev.
In the period 1992 to 1998 it did indeed present such reports describing how each public service obligation had been fulfilled and identifying the costs of each public service obligation by using an analytical accounting system.
V obdobju 1992-1998 dejansko ni predložila takšnih poročil, ki bi opisovala, kako je bila vsaka obveznost javne službe izpolnjena in navajala stroške vsake obveznosti javne službe z uporabo analitičnega računovodskega sistema.
Secondly, the Minister for Finance and the member of the Government responsible for the media verified compliance with the public service contracts and the Inspector-General of Finances audited the financial plan.
Minister za finance in član vlade, pristojen za sredstva javnega obveščanja sta drugič preverila skladnost pogodb za izvajanje javne službe in generalni inšpektor za finance je finančni načrt tudi revidiral.
Thirdly, an external audit had to be carried out each year.
Tretjič mora biti zunanje revizija vsako leto opravljena.
The Commission cannot agree with SIC that the public service costs as presented by the Portuguese authorities and the RTP figures included in its public service contracts and annual accounts are not reliable and therefore could not be properly verified.
Komisija se s SIC ne more strinjati, da stroški javne službe, kot so jih predložili portugalski organi oblasti in RTP številke, vključene v njegove pogodbe za izvajanje javne službe ter letni računovodski izkazi niso zanesljivi in da se zato ne morejo ustrezno preveriti.
It points out that a statutory auditor carried out an annual audit of RTP's financial accounts in the period 1992 to 1998.
Izpostavlja, da je v obdobju 1992-1998 statutorni revizor izvedel letno revizijo RTP finančnih poročil.
Furthermore, although an audit statement did not systematically accompany the public service reports, the strict rules of the cost accounting system ensured that the costs of each public service obligation eligible for compensation payments could be identified and properly verified.
Razen tega so stroga pravila stroškovno računovodskega sistema zagotovila, da se lahko identificirajo in ustrezno preverijo stroški vsake obveznosti javne službe, ki je upravičena do kompenzacijskih plačil, četudi revizijsko poročilo ni sistematično priloženo poročilu javne službe.
From the above it is clear that verification took place at three different levels: internally by the board of auditors, by the responsible government bodies and by an external auditing firm.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega je očitno, da je bila opravljena preveritev na treh različnih ravneh: notranja s strani odbora revizorjev, s strani pristojnih državnih organov in s strani zunanje revizijske družbe.
Although no systematic external auditing of the public service reports seems to have taken place, the system described ensured that the public service obligation was carried out in the manner provided for.
Čeprav je videti, da se niso opravila zunanja poročila javne službe je opisan sistem zagotovil, da se je obveznost javne službe izvršila na določen način.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that an effective mechanism was in place in the period 1992-98 to ensure effective monitoring of the fulfilment of RTP's public service obligations.
Iz tega razloga Komisija ugotavlja, da je v obdobju 1992-1998 obstajal učinkovit mehanizem, ki je zagotovil učinkovito nadzorovanje izpolnjevanja RTP obveznosti javne službe.
The third criterion the Commission has to assess is whether the financing is proportionate to the net cost of the public service.
Tretji kriterij, ki ga mora Komisija oceniti je, ali je financiranje proporcionalno neto stroškom javne službe.
Firstly, in order to determine the cost of the public service activities correctly, the communication requires a proper allocation of costs and revenue between the public service and commercial activities.
Sporočilo prvič zahteva ustrezno razporeditev stroškov in dohodkov med javno službo in gospodarskimi dejavnostmi, da se lahko pravilno ugotovijo stroški dejavnosti javne službe.
As described in paragraphs 62 to 64, the public service contracts define the method of cost and revenue allocation that RTP has to apply.
Pogodbe za izvajanje javne službe, kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 62 do 64, določajo metodo razporeditve stroškov in dohodkov, ki jo mora RTP uporabiti.
In the present case, the Commission's task is, in principle, made easier by the fact that RTP has implemented an analytical accounting system which permits quantification of the eligible costs incurred by the undertaking to fulfil each of the reimbursable public service obligations.
V konkretnem primeru je načeloma naloga Komisije olajšana z dejstvom, da je RTP izvajal analitičen računovodski sistem, ki dovoljuje merljivost primernih stroškov, ki so nastali podjetju pri izpolnjevanju vsake povračilne obveznosti javne službe.
By means of this system, each item of eligible expenditure is allocated to an activity and subsequently divided between the different reimbursable public service tasks of RTP on the basis of objective accounting principles.
S tem sistemom je vsaka postavka primernega odhodka razporejena na dejavnost in posledično razdeljena med različne povračilne naloge javne službe RTP na osnovi objektivnih računovodskih načel.
As the revenues derived from each reimbursable public service task are deducted from the operating costs, the system guarantees that the annual compensation payments are limited to the net cost of each public service obligation (see paragraph 65).
Jamči, da so letna kompenzacijska plačila omejena na neto stroške vsake obveznosti javne službe, ker se dohodki, ki izvirajo iz vsake povračilne naloge javne službe odbijejo od stroškov poslovanja (glej uvodno izjavo 65).
The Commission has, therefore, come to the conclusion that the parameters for determining the cost are, in principle, established in an objective and transparent manner.
Iz tega razloga je Komisija ugotovila, da so načeloma parametri za določanje stroškov vzpostavljeni na objektiven in pregleden način.
However, it notes that the rules of cost compensation might underestimate the real net cost of RTP's public service and could lead to structural underfinancing of the real funding needs.
Vendar pripominja, da bi pravila kompenzacije stroškov lahko podcenila realne neto stroške javne službe RTP in vodila do strukturnega podfinanciranja realnih potreb denarne podpore.
As can be seen from paragraph 65, under the cost calculation method laid down in the contracts, certain public service costs were excluded from payment by means of annual compensation [87].
Kot je mogoče videti v uvodni izjavi 65 so bili v skladu z metodo izračuna stroškov, določeno v pogodbah, opredeljeni stroški javne službe izključeni iz plačila letnih kompenzacij [87].
Moreover, the Portuguese authorities informed the Commission that, although RTP had to pay VAT on the annual compensation payments received, the resulting costs could not be taken into account under the accounting rules (paragraph 96).
Poleg tega so portugalski organi oblasti obvestili Komisijo, da čeprav je RTP plačal DDV na prejeta letna kompenzacijska plačila se nastali stroški niso mogli upoštevati v skladu z računovodskimi pravili (uvodna izjava 96).
Finally, in its public service reports RTP did not include all the investments made in public service equipment, although these were accounted for in its financial accounts (see paragraph 67).
Končno RTP v svojih poročilih javne službe ni vključil vseh izvedenih vlaganj v opremo javne službe, čeprav so le-ti bili knjiženi v finančnih računovodskih izkazih (glej uvodno izjavo 67).
However, under the Amsterdam Protocol, it is for the Member State to provide for the funding of the public service broadcasters.
V skladu z Amsterdamskim protokolom morajo države članice vseeno omogočiti denarno podporo javni službi radiotelevizije.
In the present case, the Portuguese authorities decided not to reimburse some of the costs incurred by the service provider in fulfilling its tasks.
V konkretnem primeru so portugalski organi oblasti odločili, da ne bodo povrnili nekaterih stroškov, ki so nastali ponudniku storitev pri izvrševanju svojih nalog.