natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It is financed from budgetary resources administered by the Book and Reading Directorate in the Ministry of Culture, i.e. from State resources.
Subvencija je financirana s pomočjo proračunskih sredstev, s katerimi upravlja Uprava za knjigo in branje Ministrstva za kulturo, torej s pomočjo državnih sredstev.
It is intended for book agents and, in practice, has only benefited CELF.
Subvencija je namenjena posrednikom za knjige in v praksi jo je dobivala samo zadruga CELF.
It is therefore selective.
Torej je selektivna.
As to whether the measure affects trade between Member States and distorts competition, the Commission has taken account of the following.
Kar zadeva popačenje izmenjav med državami članicami in izkrivljenost konkurence, ki jo povzroča ta ukrep, je Komisija upoštevala to, kar sledi.
The aid is granted to French agents who export books in the French language principally to non-French-speaking countries.
Podpora je dodeljena francoskim posrednikom, ki izvažajo knjige v francoskem jeziku v glavnem v nefrankofonske države.
The French agents are therefore competing, at least potentially, with other agents for the export of French-language books established in other French-speaking countries of the Community (principally Belgium and Luxembourg).
Ti francoski posredniki so torej vsaj načeloma v konkurenci z drugimi izvoznimi posredniki francoskih knjig, ki se nahajajo v drugih frankofonskih državah Skupnosti (v glavnem Belgija in Luksemburg).
It should be mentioned, however, that given the considerable difference between the volume of French-language books exported to non-French-speaking countries from France and the volume exported from Belgium and Luxembourg, the distortion of competition on the market as a result of aid is by nature very limited.
Vsekakor je potrebno omeniti, da je, ob upoštevanju znatnega razkoraka med količino knjig v francoskem jeziku, ki jih v nefrankofonske države izvaža Francija na eni strani ter Belgija in Luksemburg na drugi strani, izkrivljanje konkurence na trgu, ki jo povzroča podpora, zelo omejena.
The aid may also give rise to a distortion of competition and affect trade by having induced effects on the other activities of CELF.
Podpora lahko prav tako povzroča izkrivljanje konkurence in neugodno vpliva na izmenjave s tem, ko ima sekundarne učinke na ostale dejavnosti zadruge CELF.
However, these seem confined to marketing abroad, and CELF's website [40] clearly states that the company does not sell in France or to individuals.
Vendarle izgleda, da so le-te omejene na distribucijo v tujino in spletna stran zadruge CELF [40] jasno označuje, da zadruga ne prodaja niti v Franciji niti posameznikom.
The aid in question was granted to CELF under the Small Orders programme, which was designed to ensure that all orders from foreign bookshops located in non-French-speaking territories can be met, irrespective of the amount.
Sporna podpora je bila dodeljena zadrugi CELF s „Programom naročila na drobno“, ki je skušal zagotoviti, da bo poskrbljeno za vsa naročila, ki prihajajo od tujih knjigarn na nefrankofonskih območjih, ne glede na njihov znesek.
The Commission notes that the disputed mechanism was able to benefit buyers and publishers of French-language books, since the former could enjoy affordable prices and the latter's sales were facilitated.
Komisija poudarja, da je sporni mehanizem koristil tako kupcem kot založnikom, saj so imeli prvi koristi od čudovitih cen, drugim pa je olajšal prodajo.
Such an effect on trade, however, is extremely indirect and, all things considered, very limited, given the low substitutability between books in French and other languages.
Tako vplivanje na izmenjave je vendarle zelo posredno in konec koncev tudi precej omejeno, če upoštevamo zelo šibko zamenljivost med knjigami v francoskem jeziku in knjigami v drugih jezikih.
In these circumstances, the aid granted to CELF is State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, since it meets the four conditions of aid.
V teh okoliščinah predstavlja podpora, dodeljena zadrugi CELF, državno podporo v smislu člena 87, odstavek 1, Pogodbe, ker izpolnjuje štiri pogoje, ki so neločljivo povezani s pojmom podpore.
It should also be mentioned, however, that the impact on trade and the distortion of competition as a result of the measure are very small.
Kljub temu je potrebno omeniti, da sta vpliv na izmenjave in popačenje konkurence, ki ju povzroča ta ukrep, zelo šibka.
It must be stressed that Member States are obliged to inform the Commission, in sufficient time, of any plans to grant aid, in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Sicer pa je potrebno poudariti, da so države članice, v skladu s členom 88, odstavek 3, Pogodbe, dolžne obvestiti Komisijo v primernem času o načrtih, s katerimi skušajo uvesti podpore.
The French Government did not notify the programme in question or the aid to CELF for processing small orders, before it granted them.
Toda francoska vlada spornega programa ni uradno prijavila, nič bolj kot podpore v korist zadruge CELF za obravnavanje naročil na drobno, preden je začela z njihovo dodelitvijo.
The aid was thus granted unlawfully.
Podpore so bile zatorej podeljene protizakonito.
Moreover, since the Court of First Instance partly annulled the Commission Decision of 18 May 1993, and subsequently Decision 1999/133/EC, which authorised the aid granted to CELF, the aid which was granted to CELF for processing small orders is still unlawful.
Vrh tega, ker je Sodišče delno razveljavilo odločbo Komisije z dne 18. maja 1993, potem odločbo 1999/133/ES, ki so odobrile podpore, namenjene zadrugi CELF, je podpora, ki je bila podeljena zadrugi CELF za obravnavo naročil na drobno, ostala protizakonita.
It should now be examined whether one of the derogations provided for in Article 87(2) and (3) was applicable in this case, so that the measure in question could have been exempted from the general prohibition in Article 87(1).
Sedaj je potrebno preveriti, če je bila v tem primeru uporabna ena od izjem, predvidenih v členu 87, odstavka 2 in 3, tako da bi bili lahko sporni ukrepi oproščeni splošne prepovedi, predvidene v odstavku 1 tega člena.
ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURES IN THE LIGHT OF ARTICLE 87(2) AND (3) OF THE TREATY
2/ OCENA UKREPOV NA PODLAGI DOLOČB ČLENA 87, ODSTAVKA 2 IN 3 POGODBE
The derogation provided for in Article 87(3)(b) concerning the promotion of the execution of an important project of common European interest cannot be applied in this case either, since the measure in question was not intended to promote that type of project.
Izjema, predvidena v členu 87, odstavek 3, točka (b), ki se nanaša na promocijo uresničevanja projekta, ki je pomemben za skupni evropski interes, v tem primeru prav tako ne bi mogla biti uporabljena, saj sporni ukrep ni nameraval promovirati tak tip projekta.
Since the aid was not intended either to remedy a serious disturbance in the French economy, the derogation in the second part of Article 87(3)(b) is not applicable either in the case in point.
Ker podpora tudi ni nameravala odpravljati resno krizo francoskega gospodarstva, izjema iz drugega dela člena 87, odstavek 3, točka (b), v tem primeru prav tako ni uporabna.
Lastly, Article 87(3)(c), concerning the facilitation of the development of certain economic activities or certain economic areas cannot be relied on, since the aid did not pursue regional or horizontal objectives and the Commission considers that the provision cannot be used in this case for sectoral purposes.
Končno se prav tako ne more sklicevati na člen 87, odstavek 3, točka (c), ki se nanaša na prispevanje k razvoju nekaterih dejavnosti ali nekaterih gospodarskih območij, ker podpora ni zasledovala regionalnih ali horizontalnih ciljev, in Komisija meni, da ta določba v tem primeru ne more biti uporabljena na sektorski osnovi.
However, under Article 87(3)(d), ‘aid to promote culture and heritage conservation where such aid does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent that is contrary to the common interest’ may be considered to be compatible with the common market.
Nasprotno člen 87, odstavek 3, točka (d) Pogodbe določa, da: „Podpore, ki so namenjene promociji kulture in ohranjanju dediščine in v primeru, ko ne kvarijo pogojev izmenjav in konkurence v Skupnosti v meri, ki bi bila v nasprotju s skupnim interesom, se lahko ima za združljive s skupnim trgom […]“.
It is established that the cultural objective of the aid in question, recognised early on by the complainant [41] was acknowledged by the Commission in its Decision of 18 May 1993, confirmed by the Court of First Instance in its judgment of 18 September 1995, confirmed again in Decision 1999/133/EC, and not called into question in the CFI's annulment decision of 28 February 2002.
Ugotovljeno je, da je bil kulturni cilj spornih podpor, ki ga je tožnica sprva priznavala [41], odslej priznan s strani Komisije v njeni odločbi z dne 18. maja 1993, potem potrjen s strani Sodišča v njegovi sodbi z dne 18. septembra 1995, ponovno potrjen z odločbo 1999/133/ES, in ni bil ponovno obravnavan v sodbi Sodišča z dne 28. februarja 2002.
This objective is clearly affirmed by the French Government, which wanted to conduct a proactive policy aimed at promoting the worldwide marketing of French-language works.
Ta cilj jasno potrjuje francoska vlada, ki je želela voditi premišljeno politiko, ki je skušala spodbujati razširjanje del v francoskem jeziku po celem svetu.
The desire is part of an increasing trend to safeguard and encourage cultural diversity at international level.
Ta želja izvira iz težnje, ki skuša bolj in bolj ohranjati in spodbujati kulturno raznolikost na mednarodni ravni.
The Commission has already expressed its views on this topic in its communication to the Council and the European Parliament entitled: ‘Towards an international instrument on cultural diversity’ [42].
Komisija se je glede te teme že izrazila v svojem sporočilu Svetu in Evropskemu parlamentu, pod naslovom „Naproti mednarodnemu instrumentu za kulturno raznolikost“ [42].
It considers that cultural diversity has become one of the major issues of the international debate taking place among international and regional organisations, which makes it possible to answer growing concerns of civil society and governments regarding the preservation of cultural diversity as a common heritage of populations.
Komisija meni, da je kulturna raznolikost postala glavni predmet mednarodnih debat mednarodnih in regionalnih organizacij, ki omogoča odgovoriti na naraščajočo skrb civilne družbe in vlad glede ohranitve kulturnih posebnosti kot skupne dediščine ljudstev.
The preservation and promotion of cultural diversity are among the founding principles of the European model.
Ohranjanje in promocija kulturne raznolikosti se pojavljata med ustanovitvenimi načeli evropskega modela.
They are incorporated in the Treaty, in Article 151(1), which states: ‘The Community shall contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States, while respecting their national and regional diversity and at the same time bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore’, or again in Article 151(4), which states: ‘The Community shall take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of this Treaty, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures’.
Vpisana sta v Pogodbo, v člen 151, odstavek 1, ki določa: „Skupnost prispeva k razcvetu kultur držav članic, v spoštovanju njihove nacionalne in regionalne raznolikosti, hkrati pa tudi poudarja skupno kulturno dediščino“, ali še v člen 151, odstavek 4, ki določa: „Skupnost pri svoji dejavnosti upošteva kulturne vidike v skladu z drugimi določbami iz Pogodbe, zlasti zato, da se spoštuje in promovira raznolikost njenih kultur“.
The Treaty requires the Community and the Member States to promote cultural diversity in their international relations as a contribution to a world order based on sustainable development, peaceful coexistence and dialogue between cultures.
Pogodba zahteva od Skupnosti in od držav članic, ki jo sestavljajo, da v mednarodnih odnosih promovirajo kulturne raznolikosti v imenu prispevka k ureditvi sveta, osnovani na trajnostnem razvoju, mirnem sobivanju in dialogu med kulturami.
By fostering and financially supporting the marketing of French-language works, the French authorities have implemented a cultural policy which meets the objectives laid down in the Treaty.
Francoske oblasti so, s tem ko so spodbujale in finančno podpirale razširjanje del v francoskem jeziku, izvajale kulturno politiko, ki ustreza ciljem, določenim s Pogodbo.
Accordingly, the Commission considers that the aid which was granted to CELF by the French authorities for marketing French-language works, irrespective of the amount of the order, was pursuing a cultural objective as understood in the Treaty.
V teh okoliščinah Komisija meni, da so podpore, ki so bile dodeljene zadrugi CELF z namenom razširjanja del v francoskem jeziku, in sicer ne glede na znesek naročila, pač zasledovale kulturni cilj iz Pogodbe.
COMPATIBILITY OF THE AID WITH COMMUNITY LAW
3/ ZDRUŽLJIVOST SPORNIH PODPOR Z ZAKONODAJO SKUPNOSTI
Under Article 87(3)(d) of the Treaty, aid to promote culture and heritage conservation where such aid does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent that is contrary to the common interest may be compatible with the common market.
Na podlagi člena 87, odstavek 3, točka (d) Pogodbe, so podpore, namenjene promociji kulture in ohranjanju dediščine, lahko združljive s skupnim trgom, v primeru, ko ne kvarijo pogojev izmenjav in konkurence v meri, ki je v nasprotju s skupnim interesom.
Preliminary remarks by the Commission on the comments of third parties
a/ Uvodne pripombe Komisije glede mnenj tretjih oseb
The Commission notes that the third parties which expressed their views, following publication of the decision to initiate the proceeding, are not, except for SIDE and CELF, export agents but rather providers of specialist ‘wholesale’ services.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se tretje osebe, ki so se pojavile po objavi odločbe o odprtju postopka, niso predstavile, z izjemo družbe SIDE in zadruge CELF, kot izvozni posredniki, ampak bolj kot specializirani ponudniki storitev „na debelo“.
None of the intervening third parties states that it had applied to the Ministry of Culture for the aid in question.
Nobena od tretjih oseb, ki so posegle vmes, ni nakazala, da je vložila prošnjo pri Ministrstvu za kulturo za pridobitev spornih podpor.
It is clear from several of the third-party comments that the mechanism of assistance set up by the French authorities was not, at least initially, called into question by those members of the profession who expressed their views.
Vse kaže, na podlagi več mnenj tretjih oseb, da mehanizem podpore, ki so ga izvedle francoske oblasti, ni bil, vsaj ne v prvem času, sporen za predstavnike stroke, ki so se oglasili.
The Commission would also observe that the complainant, like the third parties, was fully aware of the aid which CELF had been granted since it was set up in 1980.
Komisija je prav tako lahko ugotovila, da tožnica, tako kot tudi tretje osebe, ni prezrla podpor, ki so bile podeljene zadrugi CELF od njene ustanovitve leta 1980 dalje.
It was only in 1991 [43] that SIDE asked the Ministry of Culture to grant it the aid as well, the Commission being informed of the case only several months later, in March 1992.
Toda šele leta 1991 [43] je družba SIDE zahtevala od Ministrstva za kulturo, naj tudi njej dodeli sporne podpore. Zadeva pa je bila predložena Komisiji šele več mesecev kasneje, marca 1992.
The Commission notes that the third-party comments are basically critical of CELF's policy of diversification [44].
Komisija poudarja, da so mnenja tretjih oseb v glavnem kritična do politike diverzifikacije njenih dejavnosti s strani zadruge CELF [44].
CELF is accused of having gone, over a period of time and with the complicity of the publishers that granted it preferential discounts, into markets other than that for which it was originally set up, i.e. the small orders market.
Očitajo ji, da je sčasoma in s pomočjo založnikov, ki so ji namenjali preferenčne popuste, posegla na trge, druge od tistega, za katere je bila izvorno ustanovljena, torej za trg naročil na drobno.
It is clear from the documents supplied that, when it was set up, CELF served bookshops only.
Na podlagi predloženih dokumentov je razvidno, da je zadruga CELF v trenutku njene ustanovitve dejansko oskrbovala zgolj knjigarne.
It is only later, during the 1990s, that it started to canvas other types of customer.
Šele pozneje, v letih 1990 je začela pridobivati druge tipe odjemalcev.
However, nothing indicates that CELF financed the diversification of its business from the disputed grants, indeed the opposite is the case, since the purpose and effect of the grants was to compensate only the extra costs generated by small orders, as is shown in recital 198 et seq.
Kljub temu ni razvidno, da bi se diverzifikacijo njenih dejavnosti financiralo s pomočjo spornih subvencij, ravno nasprotno, saj so le-te imele za cilj in učinek nadomestiti izključno povišane stroške, ki so jih povzročila naročila na drobno, kot je to prikazano v uvodni izjavi 198 in nadalje.
Some third parties, exporting wholesalers or exporting booksellers, point out that the aid was not appropriate for satisfying demand, though no relevant information in support of these claims was produced.
Nekatere od tretjih oseb, ki se predstavijo kot grosisti izvozniki ali pa izvozne knjigarne, trdijo, da so bile podpore neuporabne za zadovoljitev povpraševanja, ne da bi pri tem predložile ustrezne podatke, ki bi potrjevali to trditev.
Lastly, some third parties claimed that CELF benefited from the privileged relations it maintained with certain public organisations, such as France édition.
Končno so nekatere od tretjih oseb trdile, da je zadruga CELF imela koristi zaradi privilegiranih odnosov, ki jih je to podjetje vzdrževalo z nekaterimi javnimi organizacijami, kot je „France édition“.
Hexalivre, in particular, criticised the attitude of France édition, which, it said, had given CELF special treatment by allowing it access to its stand at international fairs, which it refuses to do for Hexalivre.
Posebno Hexalivre je kritiziral odnos založbe „France édition“, ki naj bi zadrugo CELF obravnavala na privilegiran način, s tem ko ji je dajala dostop do razstaviščnega prostora na mednarodnih sejmih, ravno to, kar je podjetju Hexalivre odklonila.
The Commission has been able to establish, as the documents communicated by the French authorities testify, that CELF, which is a member of France édition, paid both for the space rental on France édition's stand and for the catalogues it ordered from that organisation.
Komisija je lahko ugotovila, kot to potrjujejo dokumenti, ki so jih sporočile francoske oblasti, da je zadruga CELF, ki je članica založbe „France édition“, plačala tako najem lokacije na razstaviščnem prostoru založbe „France édition“ kot tudi kataloge naročene pri založbi „France édition“.
In any event, as the French authorities have noted, this type of relation in no way concerns the public authorities.
Vsekakor, kot so to napisale francoske oblasti, se ta tip odnosov na noben način ni nanašal na javne oblasti.
However, as these factors did not figure in the decision to initiate proceedings of 30 July 1996, they have no bearing on the ‘small orders’ problem.
Vendarle, ker ti podatki niso bili vključeni v odločbo o odprtju postopka z datumom 30. julij 1996, se ne nanašajo na problematiko „naročil na drobno“.
Consequently, the Commission will not give an opinion on this question in the present proceedings.
Zato se Komisija v tem postopku ne bo izrazila glede tega vprašanja.
The French authorities are also accused of favouring CELF through public procurement.
Francoskim oblastem se prav tako očita, da so dajale prednost zadrugi CELF po ovinkih s pomočjo javnih naročil.
These claims relate in particular to the assistance granted for implementing the ‘Nouveautés’ programme administered by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and the impact of orders placed by associations linked to that Ministry and the Ministry for Cooperation (such as the Association pour le développement de la pensée française (ADPF) and the Association pour le développement de l'enseignement et de la culture en Afrique et à Madagascar (Audecam).
Te trditve se nanašajo predvsem na podporo, namenjeno izvedbi programa „novosti“, ki ga je vodilo Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve in pri katerem so igrala vlogo naročila s strani združenj povezanih s tem ministrstvom in z Ministrstvom za sodelovanje, kot so Združenje za razširjanje francoske misli (ADPF) in Združenje za razvoj izobraževanja in kulture v Afriki in na Madagaskarju (AUDECAM).
As these factors did not figure in the decision to initiate the proceeding of 30 July 1996, they have no bearing on the problem of small orders.
Ker ti podatki niso bili vključeni v odločbo o odprtju postopka z datumom 30. julij 1996, se ne nanašajo na problematiko „naročil na drobno“.
Lastly, SIDE objects to ‘the complex bundle of aid benefiting not only CELF but also various organisations bringing together, like CELF, publishers and public authorities in the greatest obscurity’ and the cultural policy of the public authorities generally.
Končno družba SIDE razkrije „zapleteno celoto podpor, od katerih ni imela koristi samo zadruga CELF, ampak tudi različne organizacije, ki so kot ona združevale založnike in javne oblasti v največji netransparentnosti“, kot tudi kulturno politiko, ki so jo na splošno vodile javne oblasti.
In support of its claims, SIDE produces in particular a report by the Cour des comptes from November 1996.
Za podkrepitev svojih trditev družba SIDE predloži zlasti poročilo Računskega sodišča z datumom november 1996.
The Commission notes that the report basically contains general criticisms of the way cultural aid was awarded in France.
Komisija opaža, da to poročilo v glavnem vsebuje splošne kritike glede načina, kako so bile v Franciji razdeljene podpore za kulturo.
It contains nothing about the aid granted to CELF for the processing of small orders.
Poročilo ne vsebuje nobenega podatka glede podpor dodeljenih zadrugi CELF za obravnavo naročil na drobno.
CELF is mentioned, but only in connection with the programme Page à page and the Programme Plus operation, which were approved by the Court of First Instance in its judgment of 18 September 1995 [45].
Zadruga CELF je sicer omenjena, toda izključno v povezavi s „Programom stran na stran“ in akcijo „program plus“, programov, ki jih je Sodišče v svoji sodbi z dne 18. septembra 1995 [45] proglasilo za veljavne.
In the circumstances, the Commission considers that the conclusions of the Cour des comptes' report are not likely to help its assessment in these proceedings.
Zato Komisija meni, da pri tem postopku sklepi iz poročila Računskega sodišča ne pripomorejo k jasnejši oceni.
In any event, SIDE's general criticisms of French cultural aid policy were not included in the decision to initiate proceedings of 30 July 1996 with regard to the Small Orders programme.
Vsekakor splošne kritike, ki jih je družba SIDE izrazila glede francoske politike v zvezi s podporami za kulturo, niso bile vključene v odločbo o odprtju postopka z datumom 30. julij 1996, ki se nanaša na „Program naročila na drobno“.
Consequently, the Commission will not give its views on this question in these proceedings.
Zato se v tem postopku Komisija ne bo izrazila glede tega vprašanja.
Reply concerning SIDE's related claims
b/ Odgovor na s tem povezane trditve, ki jih je izrazila družba SIDE
In the first stage of the aid procedure, SIDE raised certain specific questions about the recapitalisation of CELF and the advantages it would receive from ‘administering public programmes’.
V prvi fazi postopka preiskave podpor je družba SIDE odprla nekatera konkretna vprašanja glede rekapitalizacije zadruge CELF in koristi, ki jih je imela zaradi „upravljanja javnih programov“.