natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In accordance with Article 4(1)(d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92, the routes concerned were put to tender to select the carriers authorised to operate them on an exclusive basis with financial compensation [5].
V skladu s členom 4(1)(d) Uredbe (EGS) št. 2408/92 so bile zadevne letalske proge predmet javnega razpisa, na podlagi katerega se je izbralo in pooblastilo letalske prevoznike za izključno opravljanje zračnih prevozov na letalskih progah, za katero so dobili finančno nadomestilo [5].
The carriers authorised to operate the routes in accordance with the public service obligations imposed were:
Letalski prevozniki, pooblaščeni za opravljanje zračnih prevozov na letalskih progah v skladu z obveznostmi javnih služb, so:
Alitalia: Cagliari–Rome.
Alitalia: Cagliari–Rim,
Air One: Cagliari–Milan, Alghero–Milan and Alghero–Rome.
Air One: Cagliari–Milano, Alghero–Milano in Alghero–Rim,
Meridiana: Olbia–Rome and Olbia–Milan.
Meridiana: Olbia–Rim in Olbia–Milano.
These arrangements were replaced by the public service obligations imposed by the Italian Decree of 8 November 2004 and published in the Official Journal of the European Union of 10 December 2004 (the ‘Notice of 10 December 2004’) [6].
Ti dogovori so bili nadomeščeni z obveznostmi javnih služb, uvedenimi z italijanskim odlokom z dne 8. novembra 2004 in objavljenimi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije z dne 10. decembra 2004 („Obvestilo z dne 10. decembra 2004“) [6].
Following a decision of the Regional Administrative Tribunal of Lazio of 17 March 2005 which annulled partially the Decree of 8 November 2004, the Italian authorities informed the Commission that they had ‘suspended’ those obligations.
Po odločbi Regionalnega upravnega sodišča Lazia z dne 17. marca 2005, ki je delno razveljavila Odlok z dne 8. novembra 2004, so italijanske oblasti Komisijo obvestile, da so „ukinile“ te obveznosti.
A notice to this effect was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 1 July 2005 [7].
V ta namen je bilo 1. julija 2005 objavljeno obvestilo v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [7].
On 6 December 2005 the Italian authorities informed the Commission that the Decree of 8 November 2004 had been repealed with effect from 15 November 2004.
Italijanske oblasti so dne 6. decembra 2005 Komisijo obvestile, da je bil Odlok z dne 8. novembra 2004 razveljavljen z dne 15. novembra 2004.
On 28 February 2006 the Italian authorities informed the Commission of the adoption on 23 February 2006 of a decree amending Decree No 35, of 29 December 2005, whereby the Decrees of 1 August 2000 and 21 December 2000 were repealed as from 2 May 2006.
Italijanske oblasti so dne 28. februarja 2006 Komisijo obvestile o odloku, sprejetem dne 23. februarja 2006, ki spreminja Odlok št. 35 z dne 29. decembra 2005 in z 2. majem 2006 razveljavlja odloka z dne 1. avgusta 2000 in 21. decembra 2000.
In a communication to the Commission dated 22 March 2005, the Italian authorities stated that the PSOs published in the Notice of 7 October 2000 were being applied ‘on a voluntary basis’.
V sporočilu Komisiji z dne 22. marca 2005 so italijanske oblasti navedle, da so se obveznosti javnih služb, objavljene v Obvestilu z dne 7. oktobra 2000, uporabljale „na prostovoljni osnovi“.
This was the first time that the Italian authorities informed the Commission that those PSOs were still being applied.
To je bilo prvič, da so italijanske oblasti Komisijo obvestile o tem, da se obveznosti javnih služb še vedno uporabljajo.
The rules on public service obligations are laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 (the ‘Regulation’), which defines the conditions for applying the principle of freedom to provide services in the air transport sector.
Pravni sistem obveznosti javnih služb je določen z Uredbo (EGS) št. 2408/92 („Uredba“), katere cilj je opredeliti pogoje za uporabo načela prostega pretoka storitev na področju zračnih prevozov.
Public service obligations are defined as an exception to the principle of the Regulation that ‘subject to this Regulation, Community air carriers shall be permitted by the Member State(s) concerned to exercise traffic rights on routes within the Community’ [8].
Obveznosti javnih služb so opisane kot izjema pri načelu Uredbe, na podlagi katere „ob upoštevanju te uredbe zadevna(-e) država(-e) članica(-e) dovoli(-jo) letalskim prevoznikom Skupnosti, da uresničujejo prometne pravice na letalskih progah znotraj Skupnosti“ [8].
The adequacy of scheduled air services is assessed by the Member States having regard to the public interest, the possibility of having recourse to other forms of transport, the ability of such forms to meet the transport needs under consideration and the combined effect of all air carriers operating or intending to operate on the route.
Primernost rednih zračnih prevozov presodijo države članice zlasti glede na javni interes, možnost uporabe drugih oblik prevoza, zmožnost, da te oblike prevoza zadostijo prevoznim potrebam, in skupni učinek vseh letalskih prevoznikov, ki opravljajo ali nameravajo opravljati prevoze na zadevni progi.
Article 4 provides for a two-phase mechanism: in the first phase (Article 4(1)(a)) the Member State concerned imposes a public service obligation on one or more routes, which is open to all Community carriers, provided they meet the obligations.
Člen 4 določa mehanizem v dveh fazah: v prvi fazi (člen 4(1)(a)) zadevna država članica uvede obveznost javnih služb za eno ali več letalskih prog, ki ostane na voljo vsem letalskim prevoznikom Skupnosti, če slednji izpolnjujejo obveznosti.
Where no carrier applies to operate the route on which the public service obligation has been imposed, the Member State can move on to a second phase (Article 4(1)(d)) which limits access to that route to only one carrier for a renewable period of up to three years.
Če noben letalski prevoznik ne začne opravljati redne zračne prevoze na letalski progi v skladu z obveznostjo javne službe, ki je bila uvedena na tej progi, lahko država članica preide v drugo fazo (člen 4(1)(d)) in omeji dostop do te letalske proge na enega samega letalskega prevoznika za obdobje največ treh let, ki se lahko podaljša.
The selected carrier can then receive financial compensation for operating the route in accordance with the public service obligation.
Izbrani letalski prevoznik lahko prejme finančno nadomestilo za povrnitev stroškov, nastalih zaradi izpolnjevanja obveznosti javnih služb.
Elements raising serious doubts as to the conformity of the public service obligations imposed on routes between the Sardinian airports and the main national airports with Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92
Elementi, ki povzročajo resen dvom v zvezi s skladnostjo obveznosti javnih služb, uvedenih med letališči na Sardiniji in glavnimi italijanskimi letališči, s členom 4 Uredbe (EGS) št. 2408/92
Type of route eligible: routes to an airport serving a peripheral or development region in the territory of the Member State concerned or on a thin route to any regional airport in that territory.
vrsta upravičenih letalskih prog: letalske proge do letališča, ki oskrbuje obrobno območje ali območje v razvoju na ozemlju zadevne države članice, ali letalske proge z redkim prometom do katerega koli regionalnega letališča na njenem ozemlju,
It must be recognised that the route is vital for the economic development of the region in which the airport served is located.
letalska proga mora veljati kot izredno pomembna za gospodarski razvoj območja, kjer je takšno letališče,
In addition, the public service obligations must comply with the basic principles of proportionality and non-discrimination (see, for example, Court of Justice decision of 20 February 2001, in case C-205/99, Asociación Profesional de Empresas Navieras de Líneas Regulares (Analir) and others v Administración General del Estado, [2001] ECR p. I-01271).
Obveznosti javnih služb morajo poleg tega upoštevati temeljni načeli sorazmernosti in nediskriminacije (glej npr. sodbo Sodišča z dne 20. februarja 2001 v zadevi C-205/99 Asociación Profesional de Empresas Navieras de Líneas Regulares (Analir) in drugi proti Administración General del Estado, [2001] Recueil str. I-01271).
In the case in point, the notices imposing public service obligations published in the Official Journal at the request of the Italian Republic contains several provisions which raise serious doubts as to their conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation.
V tem primeru obvestilo o uvedbi obveznosti javnih služb, objavljeno v Uradnem listu na zahtevo Republike Italije, vsebuje več določb, ki povzročajo resen dvom v zvezi s skladnostjo obveznosti javnih služb s členom 4 Uredbe.
No adequate explanation has been provided in order to justify the appropriateness and the proportionality of the public service obligations in relation to the objective pursued.
Predloženo ni bilo nobeno ustrezno pojasnilo za utemeljitev primernosti in sorazmernega značaja obveznosti javnih služb z želenim ciljem.
It is not evident that the routes on which public service obligations have been imposed are vital for the economic development of the regions of Sardinia where the airports concerned are located; considering in particular:
Za letalske proge, pri katerih so bile uvedene obveznosti javnih služb, ni razvidno, da so izredno pomembne za gospodarski razvoj območij Sardinije, kjer so zadevna letališča; pri tem se zlasti upošteva:
The nature and the number of routes concerned.
značaj in število zadevnih letalskih prog,
The existence of alternative air routes which allow an adequate and continuous service to be provided to the airports concerned, via the main Italian hubs, linked in a satisfactory manner with Sardinia.
obstoj nadomestnih letalskih prog, ki omogočajo ustrezno in neprekinjeno opravljanje storitev v povezavi z zadevnimi letališči preko glavnih italijanskih središč, zadovoljivo povezanih s Sardinijo,
The relationship between the PSOs and the traffic between the different airports affected by the new routes.
razmerje med obveznostmi javnih služb in prometom med različnimi letališči, na katera vplivajo nove letalske proge.
The requirement that interested carriers operate six of the routes to which the public service obligations apply as packages may be particularly restrictive of the freedom to provide services.
Obveznost, uvedena za zainteresirane letalske prevoznike za opravljanje zračnih prevozov za šest letalskih prog kot skupine, lahko še posebno omejuje prosti pretok storitev.
It seems to have no basis in Article 4(1) of the Regulation and could be in breach of the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination; considering in particular that:
Zdi se, da ne temelji na členu 4(1) Uredbe in je lahko v nasprotju z načeli sorazmernosti in nediskriminacije; pri tem se zlasti upošteva:
It is not established that bundling those routes together is vital for the economic development of the regions of Sardinia in which the airports concerned are located.
ni ugotovljeno, da bi bilo združevanje teh letalskih prog izredno pomembno za gospodarski razvoj območij Sardinije, kjer so zadevna letališča,
There does not seem to be any obvious legal basis or operational justification for these bundlings (e.g. in terms of the geographical location of the airports concerned), given that the imposition refers to non-compensated PSOs.
zdi se, da ne obstaja nobena pravna podlaga ali operativna utemeljitev za takšno združevanje (npr. zemljepisna lega zadevnih letališč), saj se uvedba nanaša na obveznosti javnih služb brez nadomestila,
The risk of unjustified discrimination between carriers, where only the largest ones have the means to operate in such conditions.
tveganje neupravičene diskriminacije med letalskimi prevozniki, saj le najpomembnejši med njimi razpolagajo s sredstvi za opravljanje prevozov v takšnih pogojih.
The possibility mentioned in point 1.6 of both Notices that, if several carriers accept the operation of a route subject to PSOs, ENAC shall ‘intervene’ in order to avoid ‘overcapacity’ by ‘redistributing routes and frequencies’ among the carriers concerned appears to have no basis on Article 4(1) of the Regulation and could be contrary to Article 3(1) insofar as these measures restrict the freedom of each carrier to choose which routes and frequencies it wishes to serve.
Zdi se, da možnost iz točke 1.6 obeh obvestil, da ENAC, če več letalskih prevoznikov sprejme opravljanje storitev na letalski progi, ki je predmet obveznosti javnih služb, „posreduje“, da bi se izognili „presežku zmogljivosti“ z „razdelitvijo letalskih prog in pogostosti opravljanja zračnih prevozov“ med zadevnimi letalskimi prevozniki, ne temelji na členu 4(1) Uredbe in je lahko v nasprotju s členom 3(1) glede dejstva, da ti ukrepi omejujejo pravico posameznega letalskega prevoznika, da svobodno izbere letalske proge in pogostost opravljanja zračnih prevozov.
Furthermore, the existence of ‘overcapacity’ seems to indicate that there is no need of regulatory intervention to ensure that transport operators meet basic demand.
Poleg tega obstoj „presežka zmogljivosti“ kaže, da ni potrebe po zakonodajnem posredovanju za zagotovitev, da bi prevozniki zadostili povpraševanju.
The requirement, in point 4.8 of both Notices, that reduced fares must be applied to passengers solely because of their place of birth (in this case Sardinia) does not appear to have a legitimate justification and may constitute prohibited indirect discrimination for reasons of nationality (see for example case C-338/01 Commission v Italy [2003] ECR p. I-00721).
Zdi se, da obveznost iz točke 4.8 obeh obvestil, ki se nanaša na uporabo znižanih prevoznin za potnike izključno glede na njihov kraj rojstva (v tem primeru na Sardiniji), ni pravno utemeljena in lahko predstavlja nezakonito posredno diskriminacijo, ki temelji na narodnosti (glej npr. zadevo C-388/01 Komisija proti Italiji [2003] Recueil str. I-00721).
No adequate explanation has been given in order to justify why:
Predloženo ni bilo nobeno ustrezno pojasnilo za utemeljitev, zakaj:
50 % of the connections between Sardinian airports and Rome and Milan must be operated from and to Fiumicino and from and to Milan.
je treba 50 % povezav med letališči na Sardiniji ter letališčema Rim in Milano opravljati iz/na letališče Fiumicino in iz/na Linate.
Despite calls from the Commission drawing the attention of the Italian authorities to these problems and expressing doubts as to the conformity of the notices imposing public service obligations with the Regulation, the Italian Republic decided to have them published.
Kljub večkratnem pozivu služb Komisije, ki so skušale opozoriti italijanske oblasti na te probleme in ki so izrazile dvom o skladnosti obvestil o uvedbi obveznosti javnih služb z Uredbo, se je Republika Italija odločila obvestila objaviti.
As soon as these were published, several interested parties contacted the Commission to informally express their concerns and complaints regarding the disproportionate and discriminatory nature of the public service obligations.
Od njihove objave so nekatere zainteresirane strani Komisiji na neformalni način izrazile svojo zaskrbljenost in se pritožile v zvezi z nesorazmernim in diskriminatornim značajem obveznosti javnih služb.
In the light of the above, and by virtue of Article 4(3) of the Regulation, the Commission may carry out an investigation to determine whether the development of one or more routes is unduly restricted by the imposition of public service obligations, in order to decide whether these obligations should continue to be imposed on the routes in question.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno in v skladu s členom 4(3) Uredbe Komisija lahko izvede preiskavo za ugotovitev, ali je razvoj ene ali več letalskih povezav neupravičeno oviran zaradi uvedbe obveznosti javnih služb, preden odloči, ali se uvedba navedenih obveznosti še naprej uporablja za zadevne letalske proge.
On 9 March 2006 the Commission requested the Italian authorities, as provided in Article 12 of the Regulation, to supply certain information with respect to the public service obligations in issue.
Komisija je dne 9. marca 2006 italijanske oblasti prosila, kot je določeno v členu 12 Uredbe, da predložijo nekatere informacije v zvezi z zadevnimi obveznostmi javnih služb.
The reponse provided by the Italian authorities on 22 March 2006 was incomplete.
Odgovor italijanskih oblasti z dne 22. marca 2006 je bil nepopoln –
The Commission will carry out an investigation, as provided for in Articles 4(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92, in order to determine whether the public service obligations imposed on routes between the Sardinian airports and the main national airports, published at the request of the Italian Republic in Official Journal of the European Union C 72 of 24 March 2006 and C 93 of 21 April 2006, should continue to apply to these routes.
Komisija sklene izvesti preiskavo, predvideno v členu 4(3) Uredbe (EGS) št. 2408/92, za ugotovitev, ali se uvedba obveznosti javnih služb na letalskih progah med letališči na Sardiniji in glavnimi italijanskimi letališči, objavljena na zahtevo Republike Italije v Uradnem listu Evropske unije C 72 z dne 24. marca 2006 in C 93 z dne 21. aprila 2006, še naprej uporablja za zadevne letalske proge.
The Italian Republic shall transmit to the Commission, within one month following the notification of this Decision, all the information necessary for examining the conformity of the public service obligations referred to in Article 1 with Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92.
Republika Italija mora Komisiji v enem mesecu po obvestilu o tej odločbi Komisiji predložiti vse potrebne informacije za preiskavo v zvezi s skladnostjo obveznosti javnih služb iz člena 1 s členom 4 Uredbe (EGS) št. 2408/92.
In particular, the following shall be transmitted:
Predložiti mora zlasti:
A detailed explanation of the socio-economic objectives pursued by the imposition of the public service obligations referred to in Article 1 and a justification of how such obligations are adequate and proportionate in order to attain these objectives — in particular with respect to the new 10 routes not covered by the Notice of 7 October 2000.
podrobno pojasnilo o socialno-ekonomskih ciljih uvedbe obveznosti javnih služb iz člena 1 in utemeljitev ustreznosti in sorazmernosti navedenih obveznosti za dosego teh ciljev – zlasti za novih deset letalskih prog, ki niso zajete v Obvestilu z dne 7. oktobra 2000,
A detailed explanation of how the measures envisaged in point 1.6 of the two Notices referred to in Article 1 with a view to avoiding ‘overcapacity’ if several carriers accept a route subject to public service obligations will operate in practice and of their justification under Article 4(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92.
podrobno pojasnilo o učinku ukrepov iz točke 1.6 obeh obvestil iz člena 1 v praksi za izognitev „presežku zmogljivosti“, če bi več letalskih prevoznikov sprejelo opravljanje storitev na letalski progi, ki je predmet obveznosti javnih služb, ter utemeljitev teh ukrepov v skladu s členom 4(1) Uredbe (EGS) št. 2408/92,
A legal analysis, with regard to Community law, justifying the different conditions contained in the public service obligations referred to in Article 1, and particularly:
pravno analizo glede zakonodaje Skupnosti z utemeljitvijo različnih pogojev, ki jih vsebujejo obveznosti javnih služb iz člena 1, in zlasti:
The justification for applying reduced fares to persons born in Sardinia, even if they do not live in Sardinia, particularly in view of the already existing available discounts for flights for students that fall within this category of passengers.
utemeljitev uporabe znižanih prevoznin v korist oseb, rojenih na Sardiniji, tudi če ne prebivajo na tem otoku, zlasti glede na že obstoječe popuste za lete za študente, ki spadajo v to kategorijo potnikov,
An explanation of how the requirement to be born in Sardinia in order to qualify for a reduced fare will be enforced in practice.
pojasnilo, kako se bo obveznost upravičenosti do znižanih prevoznin za osebe, rojene na Sardiniji, izvajala v praksi,
The justification for the requirement to provide the performance security and the method for establishing its amount.
utemeljitev obveznosti zagotovitve jamstva za stalno izvajanje storitve in način za določitev njegove višine,
The justification for the differences between the new fare structures and those imposed by the public service obligations published on 10 December 2004.
utemeljitev razlik med novo strukturo prevoznin in tisto, uvedeno z obveznostmi javnih služb, objavljenimi dne 10. decembra 2004,
An explanation of the reasons why the public service obligations apply with respect to the airport systems of Rome and Milan, rather than with respect to individual aiports within those systems, and of the reasons why 50 % of the connections between Sardinian airports and Rome and Milan must be operated from and to Fiumicino and from and to Milano–Linate.
pojasnilo o razlogih, zakaj obveznosti javnih služb veljajo za sisteme letališč v Rimu in Milanu in ne za posamezna letališča znotraj teh sistemov, ter o razlogih, zakaj je treba 50 % povezav med letališči na Sardiniji ter letališčema Rim in Milano opravljati iz/na letališče Fiumicino in iz/na Linate,
The legal basis and the justification for bundling together the following two sets of routes into packages:
pravno podlago in utemeljitev za združevanje naslednjih dveh nizov letalskih prog v skupine:
Alghero–Rome, Rome–Alghero, Alghero–Milan and Milan–Alghero, and
Alghero–Rim, Rim–Alghero, Alghero–Milano in Milano–Alghero, in
Olbia–Rome, Rome–Olbia, Olbia–Milan and Milan–Olbia.
Olbia–Rim, Rim–Olbia, Olbia–Milano in Milano–Olbia,
A detailed analysis of the economic relations between the regions of Sardinia and the other regions of Italy where the airports concerned by the public service obligations referred to in Article 1 are located.
podrobno analizo ekonomskih odnosov med območji na Sardiniji in drugimi območji Italije, kjer so letališča, za katere veljajo obveznosti javnih služb iz člena 1,
A detailed analysis of the current supply of air transport between the Sardinian airports and the other Italian airports concerned by the public service obligations referred to in Article 1 including the supply of indirect flights, as well as an indication of when Decree No 36 entered into force.
podrobno analizo trenutne ponudbe zračnega prevoza med letališči na Sardiniji in drugimi italijanskimi letališči, za katera veljajo obveznosti javnih služb iz člena 1, vključno s ponudbami indirektnih letov, ter navedbo, kdaj je Odlok št. 36 začel veljati,
A detailed analysis of the availability of other means of transport and their capacity to meet the transport needs under consideration.
podrobno analizo možnosti uporabe drugih prevoznih sredstev in zmožnost teh sredstev, da izpolnjujejo zadevne potrebe po prevozu,
An analysis of the current demand for air transport for each route concerned by these obligations, including the operating forecasts (passenger traffic, freight, financial forecasts, etc.) communicated by the carrier or carriers.
analizo dejanskega povpraševanja po zračnem prevozu za vsako zadevno letalsko progo, za katero veljajo te obveznosti, vključno z napovedmi opravljanja storitev (potniški promet, tovorni promet, finančne napovedi itd.), ki jih je (so jih) sporočil(-i) letalski prevoznik(-i),
A precise description of the journey times and frequency required to connect by road the different Sardinian airports concerned by these obligations.
podrobni opis potrebnega časa leta in pogostost letov na letalskih progah, ki povezujejo različna zadevna letališča na Sardiniji, za katera veljajo te obveznosti,
A description of the situation on the day of notification of this Decision regarding the operation of services in accordance with the obligations and the identity of the carrier or carriers operating services under the PSO regime.
na dan obvestila o tej odločbi opis stanja v zvezi z izpolnjevanjem teh obveznosti in identiteto letalskega(-ih) prevoznika(-ov), ki opravlja(-jo) storitve v skladu z obveznostmi javnih služb,
Any claims existing before the national courts on the day of notification of this Decision and the legal situation of the notice imposing the public service obligations.
na dan obvestila o tej odločbi obstoj morebitnih pritožb na nacionalna sodišča in pravni položaj uvedbe obveznosti javnih služb,