natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Further, according to information provided by Italy, AEM Torino has submitted information, in the ordinary procedures of tax assessment and collection, pursuant to the decision of the Agenzia delle Entrate.
Poleg tega je podjetje AEM Torino po navedbah Italije informacije sporočalo med rednimi postopki za odmero in pobiranje davkov v skladu z odločitvijo Davčne uprave.
AEM Torino should pay the ascertained amount of illegal aid within 60 days as from the communication of the result of the assessment that, according to the information sent by Italian authorities, should have been notified by the Agenzia delle Entrate not later than 11 January 2006.
Podjetje AEM Torino bi moralo povrniti znesek nezakonitih pomoči v šestdesetih dneh od obvestila o rezultatih ocene, ki bi jo morala pred 11. januarjem 2006 priglasiti Davčna uprava v skladu z informacijami, ki so jih posredovali italijanski organi.
No information has been provided by Italy on the effective payment by AEM Torino in the deadlines indicated.
Italija ni sporočila, ali je podjetje AEM Torino dejansko povrnilo izplačila v določenem roku.
According to the information sent by the Italian authorities in the present case, AEM Torino would not have benefited from loans granted by the Cassa Depositi e Prestiti.
Po informacijah, ki so jih v zvezi s to zadevo predložili italijanski organi, podjetje AEM Torino ni imelo koristi od subvencioniranih posojil, ki jih je odobrila Cassa depositi e prestiti.
Since the Commission cannot control cumulation between the old illegal aid received in application of the Italian scheme for the municipalizzate and the new aid under examination, it has asked Italy to ensure that such effect was avoided by taking the commitment to pay the aid for the stranded costs only after the previous illegal aid had been paid back.
Ker Komisija ni mogla preveriti morebitne kumulacije predhodno nezakonito dodeljene pomoči, prejete pri uporabi italijanske sheme v korist podjetij, imenovanih aziende municipalizzate, in nove pomoči, ki se trenutno proučuje, je od Italije zahtevala, naj zagotovi, da do take kumulacije ne bo prišlo, in sicer tako, da se obveže, da bo pomoč za nepovratne stroške izplačala šele po izterjavi nezakonitih pomoči.
Italy declined to do so.
Italija ni v tem smislu storila ničesar.
REASONS FOR OPENING THE PROCEDURE
RAZLOGI ZA SPROŽITEV POSTOPKA
The Commission has found that the measure under assessment should be considered State aid.
Komisija je ugotovila, da je treba zadevni ukrep obravnavati kot državno pomoč.
The Commission has then analysed the compatibility of the measure with State aid rules, in particular in light of the Commission Communication relating to the methodology for analysing State aid linked to stranded costs. It found that the methodology used for the calculation of the amount and the calculation itself did satisfy all the elements indicated in the Communication.
Komisija je torej proučila združljivost tega ukrepa s predpisi, ki se uporabljajo za državne pomoči, in pri tem upoštevala zlasti Sporočilo Komisije o metodologiji za analiziranje državne pomoči, povezane z nepovratnimi stroški, ter ugotovila, da sta metoda za izračunanje zneska in izračun sam skladna z navedbami v tem sporočilu.
However, in its judgement of 15 May 1997, the Court of Justice has stated that ‘when the Commission examines the compatibility of a State aid with the common market it must take all the relevant factors into account, including, where appropriate, the circumstances already considered in a prior decision and the obligations which that decision may have imposed on a Member State’.
Sodišče je v sodbi z dne 15. maja 1997 (sodba „Deggendorf“) odločilo, da „mora Komisija, kadar proučuje združljivost državne pomoči s skupnim trgom, upoštevati vse ustrezne dejavnike, po potrebi vključno z okoliščinami, že ovrednotenimi v predhodni odločbi, in obveznostmi, ki jih je ta predhodna odločba lahko naložila državi članici“.
According to the Court of Justice, a new aid may not be assessed as compatible with the common market as long as the old unlawful aid has not been repaid, since the cumulative effect of the aids may distort competition in the common market to a significant extent.
Sodišče navaja, da se nove pomoči ne morejo obravnavati kot združljive s skupnim trgom, dokler niso povrnjene predhodne nezakonite pomoči, saj lahko kumulativni učinek teh pomoči povzroči resno izkrivljanje konkurence na skupnem trgu.
Therefore, pursuant to the above case-law, the Commission assesses a new aid measure taking into account if the beneficiary of the new aid has fully repaid any previous aid that has to be recovered pursuant to a negative decision taken by the Commission.
Zato Komisija na podlagi te sodne prakse ocenjuje novo pomoč tako, da preverja, če je upravičenec do nove pomoči prejel predhodno pomoč oziroma če je v celoti povrnil vso predhodno pomoč, ki bi jo bilo treba povrniti na podlagi negativne odločitve, ki jo je sprejela Komisija.
By applying the principle stated in the above judgement to the present case, the Commission realizes that: a) AEM Torino has benefited from a previous aid, notably the aid granted to the municipalizzate (see paragraphs 9 to 15 above), that has to be recovered pursuant to the Decision 2003/193/EC; and b) the Italian authorities have not complied yet with the recovery obligation contained in the Decision 2003/193/EC.
Komisija z uporabo načela iz zgoraj navedene sodbe v tej zadevi ugotavlja, da: a) je imelo podjetje AEM Torino koristi od predhodne pomoči, in sicer pomoči, dodeljene podjetjem, imenovanim aziende municipalizzate (glej točke 9 do 15), ki jo je treba povrniti v skladu z Odločbo 2003/193/ES; b) italijanski organi še niso upoštevali obveze o izterjavi, ki jo vsebuje navedena odločba.
It is true that this decision concerns a scheme, but it also orders recovery of illegal and incompatible aid paid out under that scheme.
Res je, da Odločba 2003/193/ES zadeva shemo pomoči, vendar prav tako predpisuje izterjavo nezakonitih in nezdružljivih pomoči, dodeljenih v okviru zadevne sheme.
Moreover, AEM Torino has expressly admitted that it had benefited from that scheme and there are no reasons to believe that, in its particular case, the measures at stake do not constitute aid, or constitute existing aid, or have been declared compatible with the common market.
Poleg tega je podjetje AEM Torino izrecno priznalo, da je imelo koristi od te sheme, prav tako ni nobenih razlogov za domnevo, da zadevni ukrepi v posebnem primeru ne pomenijo pomoči ali obstoječe pomoči oziroma, da so bili razglašeni za združljive s skupnim trgom.
After four years from the adoption of the Decision 2003/193/EC the Italian authorities still have to recover the illegal aids.
Italijanski organi morajo štiri leta po sprejetju Odločbe 2003/193/ES še vedno izterjati nezakonite pomoči.
They have informed the Commission that they are still in the process of fulfilling their recovery obligation by adopting and implementing the appropriate administrative measures.
Komisijo so ti organi obvestili, da so, kar zadeva izvajanje obveze o izterjavi, še vedno na stopnji sprejemanja in izvajanja ustreznih upravnih ukrepov.
In particular Italy has indicated that AEM Torino has submitted a declaration to the Agenzia delle Entrate committing to pay the sums that the Agenzia will indicate.
Italija je zlasti navedla, da je podjetje AEM Torino Davčni upravi predložilo izjavo, v kateri se zavezuje, da bo plačalo zneske, ki jih bo slednja od njega zahtevala.
However, they have not been able to indicate:
Italijanski organi pa kljub temu niso mogli navesti:
The amount that AEM Torino has to pay back in the recovery process;
zneska, ki ga mora podjetje AEM Torino povrniti med postopkom izterjave; pogojev plačila.
The conditions for the payment: Italy indicates that the company should pay back as of 11 March 2006, but failed to provide any assurance that the payment would be complete (including interests) and immediate (not using the 24 months delay foreseen in the Law 18 April 2005, n. 62).
Italija je navedla, da bi moralo podjetje AEM Torino zneske povrniti do 11. marca 2006, toda dejansko ni zagotovila, da bi bilo plačilo celotno (skupaj z obrestmi) in takojšnje (ne da bi se uporabilo štiriindvajsetmesečno obdobje, določeno v zakonu št. 62 z dne 18. aprila 2005).
Further, it is unclear if AEM Torino has benefited from the subsidised loans granted by the Cassa Depositi e Prestiti which were declared illegal by the previous decision, and, in case it did, if it has reimbursed them.
Poleg tega ni povsem jasno, ali je imelo podjetje AEM Torino koristi od subvencioniranih posojil, ki jih je odobrila Cassa depositi e prestiti, ki so bila razglašena za nezakonita v Odločbi 2003/193/ES ter, če je imelo koristi, ali je ta posojila povrnilo.
In conclusion, Italy has not clarified whether the previous aid that in all likelihood has been received by AEM Torino has been recovered yet.
Italija ni pojasnila, ali je že izterjala predhodno pomoč, ki jo je po vsej verjetnosti prejelo podjetje AEM Torino.
Based on the above mentioned information, it should be inferred that AEM Torino may have received and not yet reimbursed certain aid amounts granted under the scheme declared incompatible by the Decision 2003/193/EC.
Na podlagi teh informacij je treba sklepati, da je podjetje AEM Torino morebiti že prejelo, ni pa še povrnilo nekaterih zneskov pomoči, izplačanih v okviru sheme pomoči, ki je bila z Odločbo 2003/193/ES razglašena za nezdružljivo.
The Commission is unable to determine the amount of aid which AEM Torino had already received prior to the new aid under examination and which still has to be reimbursed and cannot assess the cumulative effect of both the ‘old’ and ‘new’ aid accruing to AEM Torino and its likely distortionary impact on the common market.
Komisija ne more določiti zneska pomoči, ki ga je podjetje AEM Torino že prejelo pred novo pomočjo, ki se trenutno proučuje, in ki ga mora še povrniti, prav tako ne more oceniti kumulativnega učinka „predhodne“ in „nove“ pomoči v korist AEM Torino ter možnega izkrivljanja konkurence, ki bi ga ta kumulacija povzročila na skupnem trgu.
The Commission, pursuant to the Deggendorf judgement, must take into account the circumstances already considered in a prior decision and the obligations which that decision may have imposed on a Member State and cannot decide upon the compatibility with the common market of a new aid as long as the old unlawful aid has not been repaid.
Komisija mora v skladu s sodbo Deggendorf upoštevati okoliščine, že ovrednotene v predhodni odločbi, ter obveznosti, ki bi jih lahko podobna odločba naložila državi članici, ne more pa sprejeti odločitve o združljivosti nove pomoči s skupnim trgom, dokler se predhodna nezakonita pomoč ne povrne.
Further, aid to reimbourse stranded costs cannot be cumulated with any other aid.
Pomoč za povračilo nepovratnih stroškov se nadalje ne sme kumulirati z nobeno drugo pomočjo.
Only a commitment to ensure that the payment of the new aid would follow after the full reimbursement of the previous aid would have avoided any risk of cumulative effect of the two aid measures and any distortion of competition, under the principle established by the Court in the Deggendorf judgement.
Po načelu, ki ga je določilo sodišče v sodbi Deggendorf, bi lahko le obveza, ki zagotavlja izplačilo nove pomoči šele potem, ko je v celoti povrnjena predhodna pomoč, preprečila vsako tveganje kumulativnega učinka obeh ukrepov in vsako izkrivljanje konkurence.
Italy has been asked repeatedly to take such commitment but has refused to do so.
Italija je bila večkrat pozvana, naj sprejme to obvezo, a je odklonila.
Thus, the cumulative effect of the two aids was present but could not be fully assessed by the Commission.
Zato kumulativni učinek obeh pomoči obstaja in ga Komisija ne more ustrezno oceniti.
Therefore, at that stage, the notified aid could not be declared compatible with the common market.
Na tej stopnji se priglašena pomoč torej ne more razglasiti za združljivo s skupnim trgom.
OBSERVATION BY THE ITALY AND AEM TORINO
PRIPOMBE ITALIJE IN PODJETJA AEM TORINO
Neither Italy nor the beneficiary dispelled the doubts in the decision to open the procedure.
Niti Italija niti upravičenec nista razpršila pomislekov, zaradi katerih je bila sprejeta odločitev o sprožitvi postopka.
Italy did not reply to the letter opening this procedure. AEM Torino neither submitted any information.
Italija ni odgovorila na dopis, ki vsebuje sporočilo o sprožitvi postopka, podjetje AEM Torino pa ni predložilo nobene informacije.
The grounds on which the Commission opened the procedure have not been disputed.
Razlogi, zaradi katerih je Komisija sprožila postopek, niso bili predmet ugovora.
The measure constitutes an aid that can be declared compatible on the basis of the methodology for the stranded costs.
Ukrep pomeni pomoč, ki se lahko razglasi za združljivo na podlagi metode za nasedle stroške.
However, because of the potential cumulation with a previous aid that the beneficiary has not reimbursed, the Commission cannot control the combined effect of the two aids.
Vendar Komisija zaradi morebitne kumulacije s predhodno pomočjo, ki je upravičenec ni povrnil, ne more preveriti skupnega učinka obeh pomoči.
Italy has not provided any information that would allow the Commission to assess the potential cumulation.
Italija ni predložila nobenih informacij, ki bi Komisiji omogočale oceniti morebitno kumulacijo.
Furthermore, the recovery process has been particularly slow and difficult.
Poleg tega je bil postopek izterjave precej počasen in težaven.
Therefore, the Commission decided on 19 January 2005 to refer the matter to the Court of Justice under art. 88(2) of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure an immediate and effective execution of the Decision 2003/193/EC.
Komisija se je tako 19. januarja 2005 odločila, da na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES zadevo predloži Sodišču, da se zagotovi takojšnje in učinkovito izvajanje Odločbe 2003/193/ES.
On 1st June 2006, the Court ruled that, by failing to take within the prescribed period all the measures necessary for repayment of the aid found to be unlawful and incompatible with the common market, Italy has failed to fulfil its obligations under that article.
Sodišče je 1. junija 2006 odločilo, da Italija v določenem roku ni sprejela vseh ukrepov, potrebnih za povračilo pomoči, ki je bila razglašena za nezakonito in nezdružljivo s skupnim trgom, in zato ni izpolnila svojih obveznosti iz Pogodbe.
The Commission has to ensure that the granting of the new aid takes place only at a time when this risk of cumulation can be excluded, that is only after AEM Torino has fully reimbursed the illegal and incompatible aid received.
Komisija mora zagotoviti, da bi se nova pomoč izplačala le takrat, ko tveganje kumulacije ne obstaja ali ko bo podjetje AEM Torino v celoti povrnilo prejeto nezakonito in nezdružljivo pomoč.
As a consequence, the Commission has to follow closely that the condition mentioned above is fully respected.
Zato mora Komisija paziti, da se zgoraj navedeni pogoj v celoti upošteva.
Consequently, Italy should be allowed to grant the new aid only after having submitted evidence to the Commission about the full recovery from AEM Torino.
Posledično se Italiji dopusti, da dodeli novo pomoč šele potem, ko Komisiji predloži dokaz, da je od podjetja AEM Torino izterjala predhodno pomoč v celoti.
In light of the foregoing, the Commission confirms its assessment that the notified measure concerning aid for stranded costs that Italy intends to grant to AEM Torino is to be considered an aid which is compatible with the EC Treaty.
Komisija glede na zgoraj navedeno potrjuje svojo oceno, na podlagi katere je treba priglašeni ukrep, ki zadeva pomoč za nepovratne stroške, ki jih je Italija nameravala odobriti v korist podjetja AEM Torino, obravnavati kot pomoč, združljivo s Pogodbo ES.
However, the investigation has confirmed that the Commission is unable to control that the combined effect of the new aid and the previous illegal and incompatible aid brings about undue distortion of competition which could be contrary to the EC Treaty.
Vendar je opravljena preiskava potrdila, da Komisija ne more preveriti, ali skupni učinek nove in predhodne nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči povzroča nepotrebno izkrivljanje konkurence, ki je lahko v nasprotju s Pogodbo ES.
Henceforth, acting on the basis of article 7 (4) of Regulation (EC) n. 659/1999, the Commission concludes that the notified aid shall not be granted to the beneficiary before it will have reimbursed the previous illegal and incompatible aid.
Zato Komisija na podlagi člena 7(4) Uredbe (ES) 659/1999 sklepa, da se lahko priglašena pomoč upravičencu izplača šele potem, ko je povrnjena predhodna nezakonita in nezdružljiva pomoč.
Finally, before granting the aid under assessment, Italy has to submit to the Commission evidence that the previous aid has been fully reimbursed by AEM Torino,
Pred dodelitvijo nove pomoči mora Italija Komisiji predložiti dokaz, da je podjetje AEM Torino v celoti povrnilo predhodno pomoč –
The aid which Italy is planning to implement for AEM Torino amounting to EUR 16,338 million for the stranded costs is compatible with the common market, subject to the conditions set out in Article 2.
Pomoč, ki jo namerava Italija dodeliti podjetju AEM Torino za nepovratne stroške, ki znaša 16,338 milijonov EUR, je skladna s skupnim trgom, če se bodo upoštevali pogoji, navedeni v členu 2.
The aid referred to in article 1 may not be granted before Italy has submitted evidence to the Commission that AEM Torino either has not benefited from previous aid granted under the ‘municipalizzate’ scheme declared illegal and incompatible by the Decision 2003/193/EC or that it has reimbursed with interests the previous aid received under the above-mentioned scheme.
Pomoč iz člena 1 se ne more dodeliti, dokler Italija Komisiji ne predloži dokaza, da podjetje AEM Torino ni prejemnik pomoči, ki je bila predhodno odobrena v okviru sheme v korist podjetij, imenovanih aziende municipalizzate, ter v Odločbi 2003/193/ES razglašena za nezakonito in nezdružljivo s Pogodbo, ali dokaza, da je podjetje AEM Torino povrnilo predhodno prejeto pomoč s pripadajočimi obrestmi v okviru prej omenjene sheme.
Italy shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Italija v roku dveh mesecev od datuma priglasitve te odločbe obvesti Komisijo o ukrepih, sprejetih za uskladitev z njo.
This Decision is addressed to Italy.
Ta odločba je naslovljena na Italijansko republiko.
Done at Brussels, 8 November 2006.
V Bruslju, dne 8. novembra 2006.
OJ C 116, 17.5.2006, p. 2.
UL C 116, 17.5.2006, str. 2.
Cf. footnote 1.
Glej opombo 1.
Commission decision of 1 December 2004, on case N 490/00, in particular the part on the ‘stranded impianti’.
Odločitev Komisije z dne 1. decembra 2004 o zadevi N 490/00, še zlasti tisti del, ki zadeva obrate za proizvodnjo električne energije.
Article 3 of the Commission decision stipulates that all necessary measures must be taken by Italy in order to recover from the beneficiaries the unlawful aid thus granted.
V členu 3 Odločbe Komisije je določeno, da mora Italija sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe, da bo od prejemnikov izterjala pomoč, ki jim je bila dodeljena nezakonito.
Adopted by the Commission on 26.7.2001.
Komisija ga je sprejela dne 26. junija 2001.
Available on the Commission's Competition Directorate General's web site at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/state_aid/legislation/stranded_costs/pt.pdf.
Na voljo je na spletnih straneh Generalnega direktorata Komisije za konkurenco na naslovu: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/state_aid/legislation/stranded_costs/it.pdf.
Communicated to Member States by letter ref. SG(2001) D/290869 of 6.8.2001.
Državam članicam je bilo posredovano z dopisom št. SG(2001) D/290869 z dne 6. avgusta 2001.
Court of Justice, 15.05.1997, TWD/Commission,C-355/93, Rec., I-2549, par. 25-26 (the ‘Deggendorf’ judgement).
Sodba Sodišča z dne 15. maja 1997 v zadevi C-355/95 (TWD proti Komisiji), Recueil I–2549, odstavka 25 in 26 (sodba „Deggendorf“).
ECJ, 1.6.2006, C-207/05, Commission v. Italy, (nyr).
Sodba Sodišča z dne 1.6.2006 v zadevi C-207/05 Komisija/Italija (še neobjavljeno).
The measure under assessment concerns the reimbursement that Italy intends to grant to AEM Torino for the stranded costs in the energy sector. AEM Torino is one of the so-called ‘aziende municipalizzate’ and is active, in particular, in the energy sector.
Italija namerava s tem ukrepom podjetju AEM Torino povrniti nepovratne stroške v energetskem sektorju.
determining the respective emission levels allocated to the Community and each of its Member States under the Kyoto Protocol pursuant to Council Decision 2002/358/EC
o določitvi ravni emisij, ki se dodelijo Skupnosti in vsaki od njenih držav članic v okviru Kjotskega protokola v skladu z Odločbo Sveta 2002/358/ES
(notified under document number C(2006) 6468)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2006) 6468)
Having regard to Council Decision 2002/358/EC of 25 April 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder [1], and in particular Article 3 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Odločbe Sveta 2002/358/ES z dne 25. aprila 2002 o odobritvi Kjotskega protokola k Okvirni konvenciji Združenih narodov o spremembi podnebja v imenu Evropske skupnosti in skupnega izpolnjevanja iz njega izhajajočih obveznosti [1] ter zlasti člena 3 Odločbe,
Annex II to Decision 2002/358/EC sets quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments for the purpose of determining the emission levels allocated to the Community and its Member States subject to Article 4 of the Kyoto Protocol.
Priloga II k Odločbi 2002/358/ES določa obveznosti količinskega omejevanja in zmanjševanja emisij za namene določanja ravni emisij, ki se dodelijo Skupnosti in njenim državam članicam v skladu s členom 4 Kjotskega protokola.
Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol sets quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments for the purpose of determining the emission levels allocated to the Member States that acceded to the Community after 25 April 2002, except Cyprus and Malta which do not yet have quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.
Priloga B Kjotskega protokola določa obveznosti količinskega omejevanja in zmanjševanja emisij za namene določanja ravni emisij, ki se dodelijo državam članicam, ki so pristopile k Skupnosti po 25. aprilu 2002, razen za Ciper in Malto, ki še nimata obveznosti količinskega omejevanja in zmanjševanja emisij v okviru Kjotskega protokola.
The emission levels allocated to the Community and its Member States, expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, are determined in the Annex to this Decision.
Ravni emisij, izražene v tonah ekvivalenta ogljikovega dioksida, ki se dodelijo Skupnosti in njenim državam članicam, so določene v Prilogi k tej odločbi.