natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since the Italian authorities have shown that the research planned under the Sicilian tristeza control programme will be funded in line with the applicable provisions contained in the 1998 rules, the funding in question is eligible for the derogation under Article 87(3)(c) as the aid is designed to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest,
Ker so italijanski organi dokazali, da se bodo raziskovalne dejavnosti po programu Sicilije za boj proti virusu citrus tristeza financirale v skladu z ustreznimi določbami okvira iz leta 1998, je zadevno financiranje upravičeno do odstopanj iz člena 87(3)(c), ker gre za pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, ne da bi se pri tem spremenili trgovinski pogoji v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi –
The research funding provided for in the citrus tristeza control programme for Sicily is compatible with the common market.
Financiranje raziskovalnih dejavnosti po programu Sicilije za boj proti virusu citrus tristeza je združljivo s skupnim trgom.
Implementation of the aid is therefore authorised.
Izvajanje navedene pomoči se zato dovoli.
This decision is addressed to the Italian Republic.
Ta odločba je naslovljena na Republiko Italijo.
Done at Brussels, 21 December 2005.
V Bruslju, dne 21. december 2005.
OJ C 256, 15.10.2005, p. 18.
UL C 256. 15.10.2005, str. 18.
See letter SG(2003) D/228423 dated 7.2.2003.
Glej dopis SG(2003) D/228423 z dne 7.2.2003.
See letter SG(2004)-Greffe D/203509 dated 13.8.2004.
Glej dopis SG(2004)-Greffe D/203509 z dne 13.8.2004.
See letter SG(2005)-Greffe D/203803 dated 22.7.2005.
Glej dopis SG(2005)-Greffe D/203803 z dne 22.7.2005.
OJ C 48, 13.2.1998, p. 2.
UL C 48. 13.2.1998, str. 2.
OJ L 336, 23.12.1994, p. 3.
UL L 336. 23.12.1994, str. 3.
OJ C 45, 17.2.1996, p. 5.
UL C 45.
concerning the aid scheme that the Region of Veneto in Italy plans to introduce to improve processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products
o shemi pomoči, ki jo Italija, dežela Benečija, namerava izvajati za izboljšanje predelave in trženja kmetijskih proizvodov
(notified under document number C(2006) 639)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2006) 639)
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the above provision,
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranim strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenim členom,
By letter dated 23 February 2000, registered as received on 28 February 2000, the Office of the Italian Permanent Representative to the European Union notified to the Commission, within the meaning of Article 88(3) of the Treaty, Article 35 of Region of Veneto Law No 5/2000 (hereafter RL No 5/2000), which provides for aid for the processing and marketing of agricultural products.
V dopisu z dne 23. februarja 2000, evidentiranem 28. februarja 2000, je v skladu s členom 88(3) Pogodbe stalno predstavništvo Italije pri Evropski uniji Komisijo obvestilo o določbah člena 35 Deželnega zakona Benečije št. 5/2000(v nadaljnjem besedilu DZ št. 5/2000), ki določa pomoči za predelavo in trženje kmetijskih proizvodov.
By letters dated 12 May 2000, registered as received on 18 May 2000, 1 August 2000, registered as received on 7 August 2000, 15 November 2000, registered as received on 16 November 2000, and 24 January 2001, registered as received on 30 January 2000, the Office of the Italian Permanent Representative to the European Union provided the Commission with the additional information requested from the Italian authorities by letters dated 18 April 2000, 5 July 2000 and 21 September 2000 and at a bilateral meeting held on 13 December 2000.
V dopisih z dne 12. maja 2000, evidentiranem 18. maja 2000, 1. avgusta 2000, evidentiranem 7. avgusta 2000, 15. novembra 2000, evidentiranem 16. novembra 2000, in 24. junija 2001, evidentiranem 30. januarja 2001, je stalno predstavništvo Italije pri Evropski uniji Komisiji posredovalo dodatne podatke, ki so jih zahtevali od italijanskih organov v dopisih z dne 18. aprila 2000, 5. julija 2000 in 21. septembra 2000 ter na dvostranskem srečanju 13. decembra 2000.
By letter dated 2 April 2001 the Commission notified Italy of its Decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid in question.
V dopisu z dne 2. aprila 2001 je Komisija sporočila Italiji, da bo sprožila postopek v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES glede zadevne pomoči.
The Commission Decision initiating the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Odločitev Komisije, da sproži postopek, je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the measure in question.
Komisija je pozvala vse zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe.
The Italian authorities submitted their comments by letters dated 12 June and 22 June 2001.
Italijanski organi so predložili pripombe k zadevnim ukrepom v dopisih z dne 12. in 22. junija 2001.
The Commission did not receive any comments from other interested parties.
Komisija ni prejela nobenih pripomb zainteresiranih strank.
Article 35 of RL No 5/2000 provides for state aid aimed at improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products. The aid is targeted at projects carried out by agrifood undertakings that applied for funding under Council Regulation (EC) No 951/97 of 20 May 1997 on improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products during the 1994-99 programming period. Some of the undertakings actually went ahead with the work, but failed to receive any public aid due to a funding shortfall.
Člen 35 DZ št. 5/2000 določa državno pomoč za izboljšanje predelave in trženja kmetijskih proizvodov in se dodeli za projekte živilskopredelovalnih podjetij, ki so vložila prošnjo za financiranje v skladu z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 951/97 z dne 20. maja 1997 o izboljšanju predelave in trženja kmetijskih proizvodov v programskem obdobju 1994–1999, nekatera od teh podjetij so dejansko začela izvajati dela, vendar niso bila deležna javne pomoči zaradi pomanjkanja razpoložljivih sredstev.
According to Decision of the Regional Government No 4202 of 14 September 1993, during the above period, the undertakings concerned could submit applications for part-financing under the programme for such projects to the competent authorities (Regional Government — Department for Agriculture and Relations with the EEC) before 30 April and before 30 September each year.
V skladu s Sklepom Deželnega odbora št. 4202 z dne 14. septembra 1993 so lahko zadevna podjetja v zgoraj navedenem obdobju prošnje za financiranje takih projektov predložila pristojnemu deželnemu organu (Deželnemu odboru – oddelku za kmetijstvo in odnose z EGS), in sicer vsako leto do 30. aprila in do 30. septembra, da bi se njihovi projekti sprejeli v program sofinanciranja.
On completion of the project-selection procedure, the competent authorities drew up a ranking list of the projects selected and informed the potential beneficiaries of their ‘eligibility for financing’ by publishing the Decision of the Regional Government approving the ranking list in the Official Journal of the Region of Veneto.
Pristojni organi so po končanem izboru projektov sestavili prednostni seznam in o tem obvestili potencialne „upravičence do financiranja“ z objavo sklepa deželnega odbora o sprejetju prednostnega seznama v uradnem listu dežele.
Those undertakings whose investment projects had not been selected were sent a letter explaining why their application had been rejected.
Podjetja, katerih naložbeni projekti niso bili odobreni, so prejela dopis z obrazložitvijo zavrnitve.
In the opinion of the Italian authorities, the publication of the Decision approving the above ranking list amounted (under the law on the publication of official acts to notification by the official authorities of the acceptance of applications for financing for the projects concerned, which, according to those authorities, created in the undertakings on the ranking list a legitimate expectation that aid would be granted.
Po mnenju italijanskih organov (v skladu z zakonom o objavljanju aktov se objava sklepa o sprejetju omenjenega prednostnega seznama v uradnem listu dežele šteje za obvestilo javne uprave prosilcem o sprejetju vložene prošnje za financiranje priglašenih projektov, zato so po mnenju istih organov podjetja, uvrščena na prednostni seznam, upravičeno pričakovala, da se jim bo odobrila pomoč.
According to the Italian authorities, the investments concerned could be made following notification of the eligibility of expenditure on the projects and, in any case, after submission of applications for funding.
Po mnenju italijanskih organov bi se lahko naložbe izvedle po objavi obvestila o upravičenosti stroškov projekta in vložitvi prošnje za financiranje.
It was planned to compile ranking lists every six months until all the funding provided for in the Veneto Regional Operational Programme (Veneto ROP) had been used up.
Predvideno je bilo, da bo razvrščanje projektov na prednostni seznam potekalo vsakih šest mesecev do porabe razpoložljivih sredstev, ki jih navaja Deželni operativni program Benečije (DOP Benečije).
By Decision of the Regional Government No 4102 of 23 November 1999 the final ranking list of applications submitted up until 14 July 1999 was published.
S Sklepom Deželnega odbora št. 4102 z dne 23. novembra 1999 je bil objavljen dokončni prednostni seznam prošenj, ki so bile vložene do 14. julija 1999.
The resources were used up before all the projects on the ranking list could be financed.
Razpoložljiva sredstva so se porabila, preden bi se lahko financirali vsi projekti s seznama.
A number of projects could not be financed although they were on the published list of projects eligible for financing.
Nekaterih projektov ni bilo mogoče financirati, čeprav so bili na podlagi objave upravičeni do financiranja.
Faced with this situation, various sources of financing were used (for example, resources from overbooking, agrimonetary funding and funding under Article 29 of Regional Law No 88 of 31 October 1980), leaving 36 projects of the 150 contained on the final ranking list as eligible for financing still to be financed.
Zaradi takega položaja so bili uporabljeni različni viri financiranja (na primer sredstva, ki izhajajo iz čezmernega števila rezervacij, kmetijsko-monetarni skladi in skladi po členu 29 Deželnega zakona št. 88 z dne 31. oktobra 1980, tako da je od 150 odobrenih projektov, uvrščenih na zadnji prednostni seznam, ostalo za financiranje le še 36.
Article 35 of RL No 5/2000 provided for the financing of the 36 projects that had not received public financing during the 1994-99 programming period but which did, however, figure on the list of selected projects and on some of which work had already started.
Člen 35 DZ št. 5/2000 natančno določa financiranje 36 projektov, ki niso bili deležni javne pomoči v programskem obdobju 1994–1999, čeprav so bili uvrščeni na prednostni seznam izbranih projektov in so se nekateri že začeli izvajati.
The budget allocated for financing the aid was ITL 5 billion (EUR 2582284), but the Italian authorities affirmed that if other financial resources became available at a later date they would allocate further financing to those same projects.
Predvidena sredstva za financiranje pomoči znašajo 5 milijard ITL (2582284 EUR), toda italijanski organi so izjavili, da bi se dodatna finančna sredstva, če bi bila na razpolago, v prihodnje dodelila za iste projekte.
The scheme would continue until the available budget had been used up (as initially indicated or as subsequently increased).
Shema pomoči naj bi se izvajala do porabe razpoložljivih sredstev (kot so bila prvotno določena ali pozneje povečana).
The planned aid could not be combined with other aid granted for the same purpose.
Predvidena pomoč ni združljiva z drugimi pomočmi z istim namenom.
The regional measure is an extraordinary measure and is of limited duration. It concerns initiatives that, at the time they were approved by means of their inclusion in the published ranking list, complied with the sectoral limits and the requirements laid down in the Veneto ROP, approved by the Commission, with Commission Decision 94/173/EC on the selection criteria to be adopted for investments for improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural and forestry products and repealing Decision 90/342/EEC and with Regulation (EC) No 951/97, on the basis of which the regional authorities approved applications for financing.
Deželni ukrep je izredne narave in časovno omejen; zadeva pobude, ki so ob uvrstitvi na objavljeni prednostni seznam izpolnjevale sektorske omejitve in zahteve iz DOP Benečije, ki ga je odobrila Komisija, iz Odločbe Komisije 94/173/ES z dne 22. marca 1994 o merilih izbora za naložbe za izboljšanje pogojev predelave in trženja kmetijskih inXP gozdnih proizvodov ter o razveljavitvi Odločbe 90/342/EGS in iz Uredbe št. 951/97, na podlagi katere so deželni organi odobrili prošnje za financiranje.
In addition, the Italian authorities stated that, although the measure involved the 1994-99 programming period, the compatibility of the projects concerned with the common market had to be evaluated on the basis of the ‘Community guidelines for state aid in the agriculture sector’ (hereafter referred to as ‘the guidelines’), since the state aid scheme was notified after the entry into force of those guidelines.
Poleg tega so italijanski organi navedli, da čeprav gre za programsko obdobje 1994–1999, bi se morala v tem primeru združljivost projektov s skupnim trgom oceniti na podlagi Smernic Skupnosti za državno pomoč v kmetijskem sektorju(v nadaljnjem besedilu „Smernice“), ker je bila zadevna shema državnih pomoči priglašena šele potem, ko so Smernice začele veljati.
In particular, the Italian authorities undertook to comply with the conditions, limits and provisions laid down in point 4.2 of the guidelines, i.e:
Sami italijanski organi so se obvezali upoštevati pogoje, omejitve in zahteve iz točke 4.2 Smernic, in sicer:
the aid rate would not exceed 40 % of eligible investments,
stopnja pomoči ne presega 40 % upravičenih naložb,
no aid would be granted to undertakings in financial difficulty,
izključena je vsaka pomoč podjetjem, ki so v finančnih težavah,
to be eligible, undertakings had to comply with minimum standards regarding the environment, hygiene and animal welfare, it being understood that aid would be granted to allow undertakings to comply with newly introduced minimum standards regarding the environment, hygiene and animal welfare,
podjetjem se odobri finančna pomoč, če izpolnjujejo minimalne zahteve glede okolja, higiene in dobrega počutja živali, pri čemer pa se lahko podjetjem odobrijo finančna sredstva za prilagoditev novim minimalnim zahtevam glede okolja, higiene in dobrega počutja živali,
the regional authorities would verify that normal market outlets for the undertaking's products can be found, obtaining and verifying contracts for marketing such products.
dežela preveri, ali obstaja primeren trg za proizvode, ki jih predeluje podjetje, tako da je pridobi in preveri pogodbe o trženju takih proizvodov.
As regards the requirements referred to in point 16(b), (c) and (d), the Italian authorities stated that they would comply with the Rural Development Plan for the Region of Veneto for 2000-06 (Veneto RDP).
Italijanski organi so sporočili, da se bodo elementi iz točke 16(b), (c) in (d) uskladili z določbami Načrta za razvoj podeželja dežele Benečije za 2000–2006 (NRP Benečije).
The aid was to be provided in the form of a capital grant not exceeding 40 % of the duly certified eligible expenditure in accordance with the conditions, limits and provisions laid down in point 4.2 of the guidelines.
Pomoč se izplača v obliki denarnega prispevka in v višini, ki ne sme presegati 40 % upravičenih in ustrezno preverjenih stroškov ob upoštevanju pogojev, omejitev in zahtev iz točke 4.2 Smernic.
Costs arising from the application of this Article would be borne entirely by the region and combination with other existing aid instruments or schemes is prohibited.
Obveznosti pri uporabi navedenega člena krije v celoti dežela, prepovedano pa je vsakršno združevanje veljavnih instrumentov ali shem pomoči.
The Italian authorities stated that no aid would be granted to projects in contravention of any prohibitions or restrictions laid down in the common organisations of the market or that concerned the manufacture and marketing of products which imitated or substituted for milk and milk products.
Do pomoči niso upravičeni projekti, ki kršijo prepovedi ali omejitve iz skupnih ureditev trga ali se nanašajo na proizvodnjo ali trženje posnetkov mleka ali mlečnih proizvodov in nadomestkov zanje.
THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORWARD BY THE COMMISSION WHEN INITIATING THE PROCEDURE
MNENJE KOMISIJE OB SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
The Commission initiated the procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the Treaty because it had doubts regarding the compatibility with the common market of the new aid scheme introduced by Article 35 of RL No 5/2000.
Komisija je sprožila postopek na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe, ker je imela pomisleke glede združljivosti nove sheme pomoči iz člena 35 DZ št. 5/2000 s skupnim trgom.
The doubts were raised by the fact that the aid could be granted to undertakings that had already made the investments planned under a project for which they had submitted applications for financing for the 1994-99 programming period, i.e. under a part-financed aid scheme.
Pomisleki izhajajo iz dejstva, da bi se pomoč lahko dodelila tudi podjetjem, ki so že izvedla naložbe iz projekta, za katerega so vložila prošnjo za financiranje v programskem obdobju 1994–1999, tj. po shemi sofinancirane pomoči.
The Commission could therefore not rule out when it initiated the procedure the possibility that the aid constituted retroactive funding for activities already carried out by the beneficiaries and therefore lacking the necessary incentive element and that it should consequently be regarded as operating aid with the sole aim of relieving the beneficiary of a financial burden.
Zato Komisija ob sprožitvi postopka ni mogla izključiti, da gre za dodelitev pomoči za nazaj, in sicer za dejavnosti, ki jih je upravičenec že izvedel, zato taka pomoč ne vsebuje potrebnega elementa spodbude in jo je treba šteti za pomoč za tekoče poslovanje, ki je namenjena le lajšanju finančnih obremenitev upravičenca.
Under points 3.5 and 3.6 of the guidelines, in order to be considered compatible with the common market, any aid measure must contain some incentive element or require some counterpart on the part of the beneficiary.
S skupnim trgom so združljive tiste pomoči, ki v skladu s točkama 3.5 in 3.6 Smernic vsebujejo element spodbude ali zahtevajo neko obveznost tudi od upravičenca.
The notified aid scheme therefore appeared to fall within the scope of points 3.5 and 3.6 of the guidelines.
Priglašena shema je bila torej izvedljiva v skladu s točkama 3.5 in 3.6 Smernic.
On the basis of the information available to it when it initiated the procedure, the Commission took the view that the reasons put forward by Italy were not sufficient to demonstrate the existence, either under the aid scheme implemented during the 1994-99 programming period nor under the notified aid scheme, of a legal obligation towards the (potential) beneficiaries that might have given rise to (or justified the existence of) a legitimate expectation on their part and therefore constitute a sufficient incentive for starting the work.
Komisija je na podlagi podatkov, ki jih je imela na voljo ob sprožitvi postopka, menila, da italijanski organi niso ne za shemo pomoči za programsko obdobje 1994–1999 ne za priglašeno shemo navedli zadostnih razlogov, ki bi dokazali obstoj pravne obveznosti do (potencialnih) upravičencev, ki bi določala (in upravičila) legitimno pričakovanje slednjih in jih s tem dovolj spodbudila za začetek del.
The Commission took the view that neither the Law on the publication of official acts nor the letters sent by the regional authorities to those concerned to acknowledge receipt of their applications for funding nor the fact that the regional authorities had always granted the expected funding to projects that, after assessment, they had decided to put on the ranking list of projects eligible for public financing should have created in the undertakings on that list a legitimate expectation of receiving any of the financing planned for the 1994-99 programming period.
Komisija je ocenila, da podjetij, uvrščenih na prednostni seznam, do legitimnega pričakovanja dodelitve pomoči za financiranje za programsko obdobje 1994–1999 niso upravičili ne „zakon o preglednosti aktov“ ne dopisi deželnih organov, s katerimi so prosilcem potrdili prejem prošnje za financiranje, ne „praksa“, po kateri so deželni organi vedno dodeljevali finančna sredstva za projekte, ki so bili po ocenitvi s sklepom deželnega odbora uvrščeni na prednostni seznam projektov, upravičenih do javnega financiranja.
The Commission takes the view that the regional authorities have no legal obligation as regards applications for financing considered to be eligible and entered on the ranking list published in the Official Journal of the Region of Veneto during the 1994-99 period and consequently there is no basis for a legitimate expectation by the undertakings concerned.
Komisija meni, da deželni organi nimajo nobenih pravnih obveznosti do prošenj, upravičenih do financiranja in uvrščenih na prednostni seznam, ki je bil objavljen v uradnem listu dežele v obdobju 1994–1999, zato pričakovanja zadevnih podjetij niso utemeljena.
The absence of such an incentive element is confirmed by the following: the undertakings eligible for financing, when they did not receive the financing concerned from the competent authorities, did not take steps to enforce their rights, rights which the regional authorities moreover consider to be acquired rights, on the basis in particular of Italian administrative law.
Naslednje ugotovitve potrjujejo, da element spodbude dejansko ne obstaja: podjetja, ki so upravičena do financiranja, vendar jim pristojni organi dejansko niso dodelili pomoči, niso ukrenila nič, da bi uveljavljala svoje pravice, ki jih dežela poleg vsega šteje za pridobljene, in sicer zlasti tako, da bi se sklicevala na državno upravno pravo.
According to the Commission, no appeals were lodged because, in the absence of a legal obligation on the part of the regional authorities, the applicants probably did not have any right to request payment of the aid.
Komisija meni, da se potencialni upravičenci verjetno niso pritožili, ker niso mogli verodostojno zahtevati izplačila pomoči
The Commission expressed doubts as to whether aid for expenditure incurred before it was confirmed that projects had been accepted could still be deemed to be aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Komisija je izrazila svoje pomisleke, ali bi se lahko pomoč za stroške, ki so nastali pred potrditvijo odobrenih projektov, štela za pomoč za razvoj določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti na podlagi člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
In accordance with the Commission's constant practice, as confirmed by the Court of Justice, aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or certain regions may be considered as such only if the Commission can establish that the aid will contribute to the attainment of one of the objectives specified, which under normal market conditions the recipient undertakings would not attain by their own actions.
V skladu z uveljavljeno prakso Komisije, ki jo je potrdilo Sodišče, se pomoč za razvoj nekaterih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali nekaterih gospodarskih regij dodeli samo, če Komisija lahko potrdi, da brez dodelitve take pomoči samo delovanje trga ne more doseči, da upravičena podjetja ravnajo tako, da sama pripomorejo k doseganju predvidenih cilj.