natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The other comments, including those of an expert who claims to have been involved in the preparatory work on Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 of 29 May 1989 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of spirit drinks [18] or those of a consumer association which has collected 2000 signatures, categorically reject the position taken by the Commission in initiating the procedure, mostly using the same arguments and contending in particular that grain brandy must continue to be classified as an agricultural product and that the Commission should not call into question the traditional methods of manufacturing that product.
Ostala stališča, med drugim stališče izvedenca, ki navaja, da je sodeloval pri pripravi osnutkov Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 1576/89 z dne 29. maja 1989 o določitvi splošnih pravil o opredelitvi, opisu in predstavitvi žganih pijač [18], ali zveze potrošnikov, ki je zbrala 2000 podpisov, strogo zavračajo stališče, ki ga Komisija zastopa v odločitvi o začetku postopka, pri čemer se večinoma poslužujejo istih trditev kot kmetijski proizvajalci žitnega žganja in opozarjajo zlasti na dejstvo, da je žitno žganje proizvod, ki ga je še naprej treba uvrščati med kmetijske proizvode, in da Komisija ne sme dvomiti v tradicionalne metode proizvodnje teh proizvodov.
DKV claims that if the Commission, in its final decision, should insist on the appropriate measures which it proposes, it should observe the principle of proportionality when setting the time limit for their implementation and extend the transitional deadline beyond 1 January 2004 to give the undertakings concerned the opportunity to convert their operations.
DKV trdi, da mora Komisija, če bo v svoji končni odločbi vztrajala pri primernih ukrepih, ki jih je predlagala, pri določanju roka za uveljavitev odločbe upoštevati načelo sorazmernosti in prehodni rok podaljšati preko 1. januarja 2004, da bi zadevnim podjetjem omogočila preusmeritev njihovih dejavnosti.
Germany's comments
Pripombe Nemčije
Germany does not dispute that the system of refunding the manufacturing costs by DKV has the character of operating aid.
Nemčija ne zanika, da ima sistem nadomeščanja proizvodnih stroškov s strani DKV značaj pomoči za tekoče poslovanje.
It considers, however, that grain brandy should continue to be caught by the provisions of the EC Treaty applying to agricultural products and should not be treated by the Commission as an industrial product.
Vendar je mnenja, da mora biti žitno žganje še naprej zajeto v določbah Pogodbe ES, ki veljajo za kmetijske proizvode, in ga Komisija ne sme obravnavati kot industrijski proizvod.
It does not share the Commission's view at all that the grain distillates produced under the monopoly are not an agricultural product that comes under the umbrella concept of ethyl alcohol but a spirituous beverage designated as a spirit and therefore an industrial product.
Nikakor se ne strinja z mnenjem Komisije, da žitni destilati, proizvedeni v okviru monopola, ne predstavljajo kmetijskega proizvoda, ki sodi med etilni alkohol, temveč žgano pijačo, označeno kot žganje, in s tem industrijski proizvod.
It bases its position on the fact that the wording of Annex I of the EC Treaty is clear and that the substance of an EC Treaty text cannot be called into question by a provision of secondary legislation, as it describes Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89.
Svoje stališče utemeljuje z dejstvom, da je vsebina Priloge I Pogodbe ES jasna in da v vsebino besedila Pogodbe ES ni mogoče podvomiti s predpisom izvedenega prava, kot ga prikazuje Uredba (EGS) št. 1576/89.
In support of its arguments, Germany submits that by confirming the non-discriminatory character of alcohol duty in several judgments (inter alia Case 91/78 Hansen v Hauptzollamt Flensburg [19] and Case 253/83 Sektkellerei C.A Kupferberg v Hauptzollamt Mainz) [20] the Court of Justice has acknowledged the compatibility of the duty with the provisions of Articles 37 and 95 (now Articles 31 and 90) [21] and hence indirectly with Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty.
V podkrepitev svoje trditve Nemčija navaja, da je Sodišče s potrditvijo nediskriminacijskega značaja davka na alkohol v več sodbah (med drugim v sodbi z dne 13. marca 1979 v zadevi 91/78, Hansen GmbH & Co/Hauptzollamt Flensburg [19], in z dne 15. januarja 1985 v zadevi 253/83, Sektkellerei C.A Kupferberg & Cie KG a.A/Hauptzollamt Mainz [20] priznalo združljivost tega davka z določbami členov 37 in 95 (zdaj člena 31 in 90) [21] in s tem posredno tudi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES.
With regard to the compensatory amounts for distilleries which have decided to leave the monopoly early, Germany explains that these are necessary incentives on account of the long-standing involvement of the distilleries in the spirits monopoly, having first made it clear that, contrary to what the complainant maintains, the distillation rights are not an asset.
Glede zneskov izravnave za žganjarne, ki so se odločile za predčasen izstop iz monopola, Nemčija navaja, da gre zaradi dolgoletne vključenosti žganjarn v alkoholnem monopolu za potrebno spodbudo, potem ko je pojasnila, da v nasprotju s trditvijo pritožnice pri pravicah za žganje ne gre za sredstva.
Moreover, it was also possible for the agricultural distilleries, for reasons of equal treatment, to leave the monopoly, and under the same conditions as the industrial distilleries.
Poleg tega imajo tudi kmetijske žganjarne zaradi enakega obravnavanja možnost, da se izključijo iz monopola, in sicer pod enakimi pogoji kot industrijske žganjarne.
Germany points out that – should the Commission maintain its assessment – in the case of both operating aid for the distilleries remaining in the monopoly and compensatory amounts in return for leaving the monopoly early, a transitional period of several years is essential on account of the traditional involvement of grain brandy producers in the spirits monopoly and the associated protection of legitimate expectations.
Nemčija opozarja na dejstvo, da je, če bo Komisija ostala pri svoji oceni, tako v primeru pomoči za tekoče poslovanje za žganjarne, ki so ostale v monopolu, kot tudi zneskov izravnave v zameno za predčasno izključitev iz monopola, večletni prehodni rok zaradi tradicionalne vključenosti proizvajalcev žitnega žganja v alkoholnem monopolu in s tem povezane zaščite zakonitih pričakovanj nujno potreben.
The distilleries, whether industrial or part of a farm, needed the time to adjust their production structures to the open market or to convert their operations to other types of production.
Ta čas žganjarne, bodisi industrijske bodisi del kmetijskega obrata, potrebujejo, da svoje proizvodne strukture prilagodijo prostemu trgu ali svoje poslovanje preusmerijo na druge proizvodne dejavnosti.
Germany has therefore proposed a transitional time limit of 30 September 2006.
Nemčija je zato predlagala prehodni rok do 30. septembra 2006.
It has given the Commission concrete reasons why the original time limit of 1 January 2004 laid down by the Commission in the appropriate measures should be extended to at least the 2005/2006 operating year.
Komisiji je navedla konkretne razloge, zakaj bi bilo treba prehodni rok 1. januar 2004, ki ga je Komisija prvotno predvidela v okviru primernih ukrepov, podaljšati najmanj do poslovnega leta 2005/2006.
Any other decision would result in the closure of numerous industrial and agricultural distilleries and the loss of many jobs.
Kakršna koli drugačna odločitev bi povzročila zaprtje številnih industrijskih in kmetijskih žganjarn ter izgubo mnogih delovnih mest.
Germany disputes the complainant's contention that the HSanG of 22 December 1999 has led to discrimination against the industrial grain distilleries, since it is limited to reorganising the monopoly through a minimal reduction of the number of aid recipients and with a transitional period of six years and appropriate financial compensation, which is paid to industrial and agricultural distilleries alike.
Nemčija izpodbija trditev pritožnice, da je HSanG z dne 22. decembra 1999 povzročil diskriminacijo industrijskih proizvajalcev žitnega žganja, saj je omejen na preoblikovanje monopola z minimalnim zmanjšanjem števila prejemnikov pomoči ter prehodnim obdobjem šestih let in ustrezno finančno izravnavo, ki je industrijskim in kmetijskim žganjarnam izplačana enako.
LEGAL ASSESSMENT
PRAVNA PRESOJA
Applicability of the competition rules
Uporabnost pravil o konkurenci
Grain brandy not covered by Annex I to the EC Treaty
Žitno žganje ni zajeto v Prilogi I Pogodbe ES
It was explained above that the processing of grain brandy was organised separately from the other alcohol products of agricultural origin covered by the monopoly (see paragraphs 16 to 24).
Že zgoraj je bilo navedeno, da je predelava žitnega žganja v organizacijskem smislu ločena od drugih alkoholnih proizvodov kmetijskega izvora, zajetih v monopolu (glej odstavke 16 do 24).
In 1930, an agency with its own legal personality, DKV, was set up specifically for this product under the spirits monopoly.
Leta 1930 je bila posebej za ta proizvod v okviru alkoholnega monopola ustanovljena institucija s pravno osebnostjo, DKV.
With the Law of 2 May 1976, Germany again confirmed the special treatment of grain brandy by maintaining the coexistence of two different market organisation agencies – the BfB and DKV.
Z Zakonom z dne 2. maja 1976 je Nemčija znova potrdila posebno obravnavanje žitnega žganja z ohranitvijo soobstoja dveh različnih institucij za ureditev trga, BfB in DKV.
The majority of the basic alcohol products (distillates) delivered to the BfB are plainly intended for the manufacture of neutral alcohol which is not ready for use, while the distillates transferred to DKV (described by Germany as ‘grain fine distillate’) are distinguished by their aromatic properties and therefore suited for human consumption
Večina osnovnih alkoholnih proizvodov (destilati), dostavljenih BfB, je očitno namenjenih proizvodnji nevtralnega alkohola, ki ni pripravljen za uporabo, medtem ko destilati, prepuščeni DKV (v Nemčiji označeni kot „čisti žitni destilat“ („Kornfeindestillat“), izstopajo s svojimi aromatskimi lastnostmi in so torej primerni za prehrano ljudi.
The main reasons for this distinction are the condition in which the basic production of the distilleries is delivered to the two marketing organisations, and the quality of the marketed product after conversion and/or rectification by the two agencies.
To razliko pojasnjujeta predvsem stanje, v katerem žganjarne osnovne proizvode oddajo prodajnima organizacijama, ter kakovost prodajnega proizvoda po njegovi predelavi in/ali rektifikaciji v teh organizacijah.
The BfB receives mainly raw alcohol (inter alia fruit-, potato-, molasses- or cereals-based) and sells it generally after rectification and/or conversion as neutral alcohol.
BfB prevzema predvsem surovi alkohol (med drugim na osnovi sadja, krompirja, melase, žita) in ga v splošnem po rektifikaciji in/ali predelavi prodaja kot nevtralni alkohol.
DKV receives a distillate – “grain fine distillate” – which is already regarded as a spirit drink within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89.
DKV prevzema destilat - čisti žitni destilat („Kornfeindestillat“) -, ki je v smislu Uredbe (EGS) št. 1576/89 že obravnavan kot žgana pijača.
The rectification of the distillate carried out by DKV consists in particular in standardising the alcohol content of the end product (32 % in the case of the product known as ‘Korn’, and 37,5 % in the case of ‘Kornbrand’).
Rektifikacija destilata, ki jo opravlja DKV, vključuje zlasti standardizacijo vsebnosti alkohola v končnem proizvodu (32 % pri proizvodu „Korn“ in 37,5 % pri proizvodu „Kornbrand“).
Annex I to the Treaty as amended by Council Regulation No 7a adding certain products to the list in Annex II to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community [22] refers to ‘Ethyl alcohol or neutral spirits, whether or not denatured, of any strength, obtained from agricultural products listed in Annex I to the Treaty, excluding liqueurs and other spirituous beverages and compound alcoholic preparations (known as “concentrated extracts”) for the manufacture of beverages’.
V Prilogi I Pogodbe ES v obliki Uredbe Sveta št. 7a z dne 18. decembra 1959 o vključitvi določenih izdelkov na seznam Priloge II Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske gospodarske skupnosti [22] gre za „etilni alkohol, denaturiran ali ne, s poljubno vsebnostjo alkohola, proizveden iz kmetijskih proizvodov, navedenih v Prilogi I Pogodbe ES (razen žganja, likerja in drugih alhokolnih pijač, sestavljeni alkoholni pripravki – esence – za proizvodnjo pijač)“.
This text can be interpreted with the aid of headings ex 22.08 and 22.09 (now 22.07 and 22.08) of the Harmonised System Tariff Nomenclature, where undenatured ethyl alcohol, spirits, liqueurs and other spirituous beverages are defined.
To besedilo se lahko pojasni s pomočjo nekdanjih postavk 22.08 in 22.09 (zdaj 22.07 in 22.08) nomenklature carinske tarife, ki opredeljujeta alkohol, žganje, liker in druge alkoholne pijače.
In the Explanatory Notes to the Harmonised System, spirits, which are thus not covered by Annex I, are defined as follows: ‘Spirits produced by distilling wine, cider or other fermented beverages or fermented grain or other vegetable products, without adding flavouring; they retain, wholly or partly, the secondary constituents (esters, aldehydes, acids, higher alcohols, etc.) which give the spirits their peculiar individual flavours and aromas.’
V pojasnilih k nomenklaturi carinske tarife je žganje, ki torej ni zajeto v Prilogi I, opredeljeno, kot sledi: „(…) pridobljen (brez dodatka aromatičnih snovi) z destilacijo fermentiranih naravnih tekočin, kot sta vino, jabolčnik, ali fermentiranega sadja, fermentiranih grozdnih tropin, žita ali podobnih fermentiranih rastlinskih proizvodov; zanj sta značilna poseben okus in vonj; to gre pripisati vsebnosti drugotnih sestavin (ester, aldehid, kisline, višji alkoholi itd), ki so odvisne od vrste surovin, uporabljenih pri destilaciji.“
The heading also includes ‘undenatured ethyl alcohol with an alcoholic strength by volume of less than 80 % …’.
Postavka vključuje tudi „etilni alkohol, nedenaturiran, z vsebnostjo alkohola manj kot 80 % […]“.
Concerning this product, the Explanatory Notes state ‘… contrary to those at (A) [e.g. spirits], these spirits are characterised by the absence of secondary constitutents giving a flavour or aroma, whether intended for human consumption or for industrial purposes’.
V pojasnilih glede tega proizvoda piše: „… primeren za pitje ali tehnične namene; od proizvodov pod A [npr. žganje], tudi če je primeren za pitje, se razlikuje po tem, da ne vsebuje aromatičnih sestavin.“
Grain brandy is therefore a spirit which is characterised by the presence of aromatic components, and hence cannot be regarded as ethyl alcohol.
Žitno žganje je torej žganje, za katerega je značilna vsebnost aromatičnih sestavin in ga zato ne moremo obravnavati kot etilni alkohol.
This is also supported by point (C)(4) of the explanatory notes to heading ex 22.09 (now 22.08, point (C)(2)), which stresses that this heading, as well as ethyl alcohol, covers ‘Whiskies and other spirits obtained by distilling fermented mash of cereal grains (barley, oats, rye, wheat, corn, etc.)’.
To potrjuje tudi točka C(4) pojasnil k nekdanji postavki 22.09 (zdaj 22.08, točka C(2)); v njej je poudarjeno, da v to postavko poleg etilnega alkohola sodijo tudi „viski in druga žganja, proizvedena z destilacijo žitne drozge (ječmena, ovsa, rži, pšenice, koruze itd)“.
In its replies to the Commission, Germany confuses grain alcohol (Kornalkohol), which under the above-mentioned conditions (see paragraph 53) can be regarded as ethyl alcohol, with the spirit drink grain brandy (Kornbranntwein).
Nemčija je v svojih odgovorih Komisiji žitni alkohol („Kornalkohol“), ki ga je v skladu z zgoraj (glej odstavek 53) navedenimi pogoji mogoče obravnavati kot etilni alkohol, zamenjala z žgano pijačo žitno žganje („Kornbranntwein“).
Judging by the wording of the Spirits Monopoly Law as amended by the HsanG of 22 December 1999, the German legislator has in fact treated grain alcohol and grain brandy differently, precisely because they are different products.
Sodeč po Zakonu o alkoholnem monopolu v obliki HSanG z dne 22. decembra 1999 je nemška zakonodajna oblast dejansko obravnavala žitni alkohol in žitno žganje različno, ker gre za različna proizvoda.
The Commission, consequently, sticks to its view that these are different products; the former is used for producing neutral alcohol, while the latter, which is the subject of these proceedings, has components which give it aroma and taste.
Komisija zato vztraja pri svojem mnenju, da gre za različna proizvoda; prvi se uporablja za proizvodnjo nevtralnega alkohola, medtem ko drugi, in to je tudi predmet tega postopka, vsebuje sestavine, ki dajejo vonj in okus.
Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 states that the Regulation covers the definition, description and presentation of spirit drinks.
V členu 1(1) Uredbe (EGS) št. 1576/89 je natančno pojasnjeno, da se uredba nanaša na opredelitev, opis in predstavitev žganih pijač.
Article 1(4) of the said Regulation lists the different categories of spirit drinks.
V členu 1(4) navedene uredbe so navedene različne kategorije žganih pijač.
In subparagraph (c), ‘grain spirit’ is defined as:
Pod črko c) je žitno žganje („Getreidespirituose“) opredeljeno kot
A spirit drink produced by the distillation of a fermented mash of cereals and having organoleptic characteristics derived from the raw materials used.
Naravno žganje, proizvedeno z destilacijo fermentirane drozge žitaric in z organoleptičnimi lastnostmi uporabljenih surovin.
‘Grain spirit’ may be replaced by Korn or Kornbrand, for the drink produced in Germany and in regions of the Community where German is one of the official languages provided that this drink is traditionally produced in these regions and if the grain spirit is obtained there without any additive:
Ime „žitno žganje“ se lahko zamenja z imenoma „Korn“ ali „Kornbrand“ za pijačo, proizvedeno v Nemčiji in na območjih Skupnosti, kjer je nemščina eden od uradnih jezikov, pod pogojem, da se to žganje proizvaja na teh območjih po tradicionalnih postopkih in brez uporabe aditivov:
either exclusively by the distillation of a fermented mash of whole grains of wheat, barley, oats, rye or buckwheat with all their component parts,
bodisi izključno z destilacijo fermentirane drozge celih žitnih zrn pšenice, ječmena, ovsa, rži ali ajde z vsemi njihovimi sestavinami,
or by the redistillation of a distillate obtained in accordance with the first subparagraph.
ali z redestilacijo destilata, dobljenega po prvem pododstavku. 2.
For a grain spirit to be designated ’grain brandy’, it must have been obtained by distillation at less than 95 % vol from a fermented mash of cereals, presenting organoleptic features deriving from the raw materials used.’
Da bi lahko žitno žganje označili kot „žitni brandy“, mora biti pridobljeno z destilacijo na manj kakor 95 vol % alkohola iz fermentirane žitne drozge in imeti organoleptične lastnosti, ki izhajajo iz uporabljenih surovin.“
In the present case, the grain brandy producers deliver to DKV a product (grain fine distillate) obtained in accordance with the procedure described in Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 which, if necessary, is subsequently rectified and/or transformed by DKV so that it can then be marketed.
V zadevnem primeru proizvajalci žitnega žganja DKV dostavijo proizvod (čisti žitni destilat), pridobljen v skladu s postopkom, opisanim v Uredbi (EGS) št. 1576/89, ki ga potem DKV, preden ga trži, po potrebi rektificira in/ali predela.
Germany takes the view that the Commission should not rely on this text, because it only establishes rules for the sale of spirit drinks in the interests of consumer protection.
Nemčija je mnenja, da se Komisija ne sme opirati na to besedilo, saj so v slednjem določena le pravila za prodajo žganih pijač v interesu varstva potrošnikov.
The Commission does not dispute that such is the purpose of the Regulation, but this by no means prevents the text from being used to describe and define grain brandy as a spirit drink, which as such is directly subject to the competition rules.
Komisija ne zanika, da je to namen te uredbe, vendar to nikakor ne izključuje dejstva, da se besedilo lahko uporablja tudi za opis in opredelitev žitnega žganja kot žgane pijače, ki je kot taka neposredno podvržena pravilom o konkurenci.
It therefore considers, without wanting to give a definitive ruling on the matter, that this passage taken from secondary legislation supports its view as regards the classification of the product in question.
Zato meni, vendar ne želi podati končne sodbe, da ta odlomek, vzet iz izvedenega prava, krepi njeno stališče glede vprašanja uvrstitve zadevnega proizvoda.
In one of its communications to the Commission, Germany points out that the wording of Annex I to the EC Treaty varies according to the language version.
Nemčija v svojih sporočilih Komisiji opozarja, da se vsebina Priloge I Pogodbe ES spreminja glede na jezikovne različice.
Thus the word ‘spirits (Branntwein)’ is missing in the English and Dutch versions, where there is only mention of ‘liqueurs’ and ‘spirituous beverages’.
V angleški in nizozemski različici manjka beseda „Branntwein“ (žganje); tu sta uporabljeni samo besedi „Likör“ (liker) in „Spirituosen“ (žgane pijače).
The Commission would comment in this respect that the German and other language versions are clear in this connection and that ‘spirits’ are undoubtedly mentioned in them.
Komisija v tej zvezi opaža, da so nemška jezikovna različica in druge različice v tem pogledu jasne in nedvomno navajajo besedo „Branntwein“.
The language versions which, like the English and the Dutch, do not specifically exclude spirits must be interpreted and applied in the light of the other language versions and can only be understood in such a way that spirits are among the alcoholic beverages which are also excluded from the scope of Annex I.
Jezikovne različice, ki tako kot angleška in nizozemska te besede ne izpostavljajo izrecno, je treba pojasniti in uporabiti le ob upoštevanju ostalih jezikovnih različic in le tako je mogoče razumeti, da žganje sodi k drugim alkoholnim pijačam, ki so prav tako izvzete s področja uporabe Priloge I.
As part of the operation and development of the common market in agricultural products, the Council on 8 April 2003 adopted Council Regulation (EC) No 670/2003 laying down specific measures concerning the market in ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin [23].
V okviru upravljanja in nadaljnjega razvoja skupnega trga za kmetijske proizvode je Svet dne 8. aprila 2003 izdal Uredbo (ES) št. 670/2003 o posebnih ukrepih glede trga z etanolom kmetijskega porekla [23].
The Regulation creates for the first time a common organisation of the market for alcohol of agricultural origin.
S to uredbo naj bi bila prvič vzpostavljena skupna ureditev trga za alkohol kmetijskega porekla.
In its decision to introduce the procedure the Commission used some points from the Regulation, which was still in the preparation stage at the time, to support its arguments.
Komisija je v svoji odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka nekaj točk te uredbe, ki je bila sicer še v fazi posvetovanja, uporabila v podkrepitev svojih trditev.
It believes it is still appropriate to refer to the preparatory work on this legal instrument as well as to the final version of the Regulation in order to support, where necessary, its analysis that grain brandy is an industrial product.
Še vedno je aktualno zatekanje k osnutkom tega pravnega akta in končni vsebini uredbe, saj podpirajo, kadar je to primerno, spoznanje Komisije, da gre pri žitnem žganju za industrijski izdelek.
Thus, in a first draft of Article 1, spirit drinks within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 were explicitly excluded from the scope of the Regulation.
Tako so bile v prvem osnutku v členu 1 žgane pijače v smislu Uredbe (EGS) št. 1576/89 izrecno izvzete s področja uporabe uredbe.