natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In its decision to initiate proceedings in respect of the measure under scrutiny, the Commission noted that at that stage of the procedure the derogations set out in paragraph (2)(a) and (c) and in paragraph (3) (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of Article 87 did not appear to be applicable in view of the features of the aid and the circumstance that the notification was not intended to meet the conditions for the application of those derogations.
V odločbi o sprožitvi postopka v zvezi z zadevnim ukrepom je Komisija ugotovila, da na tej stopnji postopka odstopanja iz točk a) in c) člena 87(2) ter točk a), b), c), d) in e) člena 87(3) zaradi lastnosti pomoči, in ker namen obvestila ni bil izpolniti pogoje uporabe zgoraj navedenih odstopanj, niso veljala.
The Commission also noted that the Italian authorities had indicated in their notification that the strike and the roadblock concerned should be regarded as an exceptional occurrence, as referred to in Article 87(2)(b), and that the aid measure should therefore be assessed in accordance with that provision.
Komisija je ugotovila tudi, da so italijanski organi v obvestilu navedli, da se morajo zadevna stavka in cestne zapore šteti za izjemni pojav vrste, navedene v členu 87(2)(b), pri katerem se mora ocena ukrepa pomoči izvesti na podlagi tega predpisa.
The Commission recalled in the decision to initiate a procedure that according to its practice, because they constitute exceptions to the general principle of the incompatibility of State aid with the common market enshrined in Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the Commission has consistently held that ‘natural disaster’ and ‘exceptional occurrence’, as referred to in Article 87(2)(b), must be interpreted restrictively.
Komisija je v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka opozorila, da je, ker sta pojma „naravna nesreča“ in „izjemni pojav“ iz člena 87(2)(b) izjema od splošnega načela nezdružljivosti javnih pomoči s skupnim trgom iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe, omejeno razlaganje teh pojmov stalna praksa Komisije.
Exceptional occurrences which have hitherto been accepted by the Commission include war, internal disturbances or strikes, and with certain reservations and depending on their extent, major nuclear or industrial accidents and fires which result in widespread loss.
Med izjemne pojave, ki jih je doslej priznala Komisija, sodijo vojna, notranji nemiri in stavke z določenimi omejitvami in glede na razsežnosti pa tudi večje jedrske ali industrijske nesreče in požari, ki povzročijo velike izgube.
Once the existence of a natural disaster or an exceptional occurrence has been demonstrated, the Commission will permit aid of up to 100 % to compensate for material harm.
Ko se dokaže naravna nesreča ali izjemni pojav, Komisija dovoli pomoč do 100 % za nadomestilo materialne škode.
Compensation should normally be calculated at the level of the individual beneficiary, and in order to avoid over-compensation, any payments due, for example under insurance policies, should be deducted from the amount of aid.
Nadomestilo se navadno izračuna za posamezne upravičence, da bi se izognili previsokim nadomestilom, pa se vsako izplačilo, na primer iz zavarovalnih polic, odšteje od zneska pomoči.
The Commission will also allow aid to compensate farmers for loss of income resulting from the destruction of the means of agricultural production, provided that there is no over-compensation.
Komisija bo priznala tudi pomoč kmetom kot nadomestilo za izgubo dohodka zaradi uničenja kmetijskih proizvajalnih sredstev, če nadomestila ne bodo previsoka.
In its decision to initiate the procedure the Commission noted that the information available did not make it possible to conclude that the event concerned by the case under examination constituted an ‘exceptional occurrence’ within the meaning of Article 87(2)(b).
Komisija je v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka ugotovila, da podatki, ki so bili na voljo, niso zadostovali za ugotovitev, ali je bil zadevni dogodek „izjemni pojav“ v smislu člena 87(2)(b).
In their notification the Italian authorities had indicated that the strike and the roadblocks concerned were to be considered an exceptional occurrence such as referred to in Article 87(2)(b) of the Treaty, as an event of similar proportion and with similar consequential harm to the local economy had never previously taken place in Sicily.
Italijanski organi so v svojem obvestilu navedli, da se morajo zadevna stavka in cestne zapore šteti za izjemni pojav v smislu člena 87(2)(b) Pogodbe, ker se pojav podobne razsežnosti in s podobno posledično škodo za lokalno gospodarstvo na Siciliji še ni zgodil.
In order to prove the exceptional nature of the event under examination the competent authorities had submitted some newspaper cuttings and a copy of a report from the Office of the Prefect for Palermo.
Da bi dokazali izjemnost zadevnega dogodka, so pristojni organi poslali nekaj časopisnih izrezkov in izvod poročila prefekture v Palermu.
According to the said report, on 29 September 2000 the road hauliers gave the police authorities one day’s notice of the demonstration they planned to hold at the points of access to Palermo.
Iz zgoraj navedenega poročila je razvidno, da so avtoprevozniki 29. septembra 2000 obvestili kvesturo o shodu, napovedanem za naslednji dan na mestnih vpadnicah v Palermo.
According to the information provided in the report, the demonstration should have featured the distribution of leaflets aimed at raising the public’s awareness of the road hauliers’ problems and the road hauliers had expressly undertaken not to block the traffic at access points to the port of Palermo or the Palermo-Catania and Palermo-Trapani motorways.
Glede na podatke, predložene v poročilu, bi shod moral vključevati deljenje letakov za osveščanje meščanov o težavah avtoprevoznikov, ti pa so se jasno zavezali, da ne bodo zaustavljali prometa v prehodih do pristanišča v Palermu in na avtocestnih priključkih Palermo–Catania in Palermo–Trapani.
However the next day (30 September 2000) a demonstration of an entirely different nature was said to have taken place, with roads being blocked in Palermo and in other Provinces.
Vseeno je bil shod naslednjega dne (30. septembra 2000) povsem drugačen, s cestnimi zaporami v Palermu in drugih pokrajinah.
After scrutinising the said report, the Commission departments concerned asked the competent authorities to reply to a number of specific questions in order to evaluate the possible exceptional nature of the event in question.
Po tem ko so službe Komisije preverile zgoraj navedeno poročilo, so od pristojnih organov zahtevale odgovor na nekatera podrobnejša vprašanja, da bi lahko ocenile možnost izjemnosti zadevnega dogodka.
Since these questions did not receive a reply, the Commission departments concerned expressed doubts as to whether the event concerned could constitute an ‘exceptional occurrence’ within the meaning of Article 87(2)(b), for the following reasons:
Ker službe Komisije niso dobile odgovora na zgoraj navedena vprašanja, so izrazile dvom o tem, da bi se lahko navedeni dogodki šteli za „izjemni pojav“ v smislu člena 87(2)(b) zaradi naslednjih razlogov:
Advance notice in Palermo.
Predhodno obvestilo v Palermu.
In the case at hand the road hauliers had given the police authorities one day’s notice of the demonstration in Palermo.
V zadevnem primeru so avtoprevozniki obvestili kvesturo o shodu v Palermu dan pred dogodkom.
If a day’s notice is sufficient under national law, it follows that the competent authorities were informed of the demonstration in good time and could have taken the necessary measures to keep it under control.
Če v skladu z nacionalnim zakonom zadostuje obvestilo dan pred dogodkom, so bili pristojni organi o shodu obveščeni dovolj zgodaj in bi lahko sprejeli potrebne ukrepe za obvladovanje shoda.
In the absence of a reply from the competent authorities the Commission was unable to evaluate the extraordinary nature of the demonstration.
Ker pristojni organi niso odgovorili, Komisija ni mogla oceniti izjemnosti zadevnega shoda.
Possible advance notice in other provinces.
Možno predhodno obvestilo v drugih pokrajinah.
From the information provided it would appear that the demonstration took place not only in Palermo, but also in other Provinces.
Iz predloženih podatkov se zdi, da shod ni bil le v Palermu, ampak tudi v drugih pokrajinah.
In the absence of a reply from the competent authorities the Commission cannot exclude that the road hauliers also gave advance notice of demonstrations to the authorities in Provinces other than Palermo and that therefore those were informed in advance of the events and were in a position to foresee their likely extent.
Ker pristojni organi niso odgovorili, Komisija ne more izključiti, da avtoprevozniki o shodu niso predhodno obvestili tudi odgovornih organov drugih pokrajin razen Palerma in so bili zgornji organi zato predhodno obveščeni o dogodkih ter bi lahko predvidevali njihov možen obseg.
Possible application of the Law on strikes to the events concerned.
Možna uporaba zakona o stavkah v primeru zadevnih dogodkov.
In order to evaluate the possible exceptional nature of the events concerned, the Commission had asked the Italian authorities to provide information as to the possible application of the Italian Law on strikes (Law No 146 of 12 June 1990, as amended by Law No 83 of 11 April 2000) to the case at hand.
Za oceno možnosti opredelitve kot „izjemni pojav“ na podlagi zadevnih dogodkov so službe Komisije od italijanskih organov zahtevale predložitev podatkov o možni uporabi italijanskega zakona o pravici do stavke (Zakon št. 146 z dne 12. junija 1990, spremenjen z Zakonom št. 83 z dne 11. aprila 2000) v zadevnem primeru.
In the absence of a clear reply from the competent authorities, the Commission was unable to rule out that, had the Law been applied/or applicable, the adverse effects of the strike and the roadblocks would or could have been eliminated or reduced to a minimum (e.g. essential services could have been provided, the advance notice required would have given the farmers sufficient time to seek alternative means of transport or storage, and if the situation had become so serious as to affect rights guaranteed under the Constitution, the competent authorities could have ordered the transporters to interrupt the strike, etc.).
Ker pristojni organi niso predložili jasnega odgovora, Komisija ni mogla izključiti, da bi bile lahko v primeru uporabe ali predvidene uporabe zakona posledice stavke in cestnih zapor odpravljene ali zmanjšane do najmanjše mere (zaščitile bi se lahko, na primer, obvezne storitve, zahtevana predhodna obvestitev bi kmetijskim podjetjem omogočila dovolj časa, da bi poiskali nadomestno vrsto/sredstva prevoza in skladiščenja, če so bile razmere tako težke, da so škodovale ustavnim pravicam, bi lahko pristojni organi od avtoprevoznikov zahtevali prekinitev stavke itd.).
In order to assess the extraordinary nature of the strike and roadblocks, the Commission also asked for information on the types of offences allegedly linked to them, information which has not been provided.
Za oceno izjemnosti stavke in cestnih zapor je Komisija zahtevala tudi podatke o vrstah domnevnih kaznivih dejanj, povezanih z njimi, ki pa niso bili predloženi.
Reasons for the demonstration.
Razlogi za shod.
The report from the Office of the Prefect of Palermo indicated that the strike did not end until 8 October (at 3am), an agreement having been reached the day before between the representatives of the association of Sicilian road hauliers, the regional government and the then Minister of Transport.
Glede na poročilo prefekture v Palermu se je stavka končala šele 8. oktobra (ob 15. uri), po tem ko je bil prejšnjega dne sklenjen sporazum med predstavniki združenja avtoprevoznikov Sicilije, deželno upravo in tedanjim ministrom za promet.
In order better to understand the reasons for the strike and the roadblocks, the competent authorities were asked to indicate the content of the agreement and to state whether demonstrations by road hauliers had taken place for the same reasons in other regions, or at national level, or whether the demonstration concerned only Sicily.
Za boljše razumevanje razlogov za stavko in cestne zapore se je od pristojnih organov zahtevalo, da podrobno opredelijo vsebino tega sporazuma in navedejo, ali so bili zaradi istih razlogov shodi tudi v drugih deželah in na nacionalni ravni ali je shod zadeval le Sicilijo.
In the absence of a reply from the competent authorities the Commission expressed doubts regarding the reasons for the events concerned and whether the latter constituted an ‘exceptional occurrence’.
Ker pristojni organi niso odgovorili, je Komisija izrazila dvom o razlogih za zadevne dogodke in njihovi opredelitvi kot „izjemni pojavi“.
Size and extent of the demonstration, strike and roadblocks.
Obseg shoda, stavke in cestnih zapor.
From the information provided, it would appear that the demonstration also took place also in other Provinces.
Iz predloženih podatkov se zdi, da je bil shod tudi v drugih pokrajinah.
The competent authorities did not clarify in which other Provinces the demonstration, strike and roadblocks took place, did not indicate their extent and consequences, and, apart from some newspaper cuttings, did not provide any official documentary evidence of such events in other areas of Sicily (e.g. the report from the Office of the Prefect of Palermo).
Pristojni organi niso pojasnili, v katerih drugih pokrajinah so bili shodi, stavke in cestne zapore, razen tega niso natančno navedli obsega in posledic ter, razen nekaj časopisnih izrezkov, niso predložili nobene uradne dokumentacije v zvezi s temi dogodki za druga območja Sicilije (kot je na primer poročilo prefekture v Palermu).
The Commission therefore expressed doubts regarding the geographical spread and extent of the demonstrations, strike and roadblocks in the rest of Sicily.
Komisija je zato izrazila dvom o zemljepisni razširjenosti in obsegu shodov, stavke in cestnih zapor v drugih delih Sicilije.
Number of participants.
Število udeležencev.
The notice of the demonstration submitted by the association of road hauliers, a copy of which was annexed to the report of the Office of the Prefect of Palermo, appeared to indicate that around 50 hauliers would take part in the demonstration in Palermo.
Iz predhodnega obvestila o shodu, ki ga je predložilo združenje avtoprevoznikov in katerega izvod je priložen poročilu prefekture v Palermu, se lahko sklepa, da se je shoda v Palermu udeležilo okoli petdeset avtoprevoznikov.
In the absence of a reply from the competent authorities indicating, with supporting evidence, how many road hauliers were operating in Sicily and roughly how many of them actually took part in the demonstration in Palermo and in the rest of Sicily, the Commission has doubts regarding the number of people involved in the events concerned.
Ker pristojni organi niso predložili odgovora, ki bi na podlagi potrebne dokumentacije natančno določal skupno število avtoprevoznikov, delujočih na Siciliji, in približno število avtoprevoznikov, ki so se javno udeležili shodov v Palermu in drugih delih Sicilije, Komisija dvomi o številu udeležencev v zadevnih dogodkih.
In addition to the doubts as to whether the notified event qualified as an ‘exceptional occurrence’ the Commission also expressed, in its decision to initiate the procedure, its doubts regarding other aspects of the aid, namely: (a) the beneficiaries of the aid, (b) certain detailed rules for calculating the harm suffered, (c) the products covered by the aid and (d) the possibility that the measure might constitute indirect aid to the striking transporters.
Razen dvoma o upravičenosti opredelitve priglašenega dogodka kot „izjemnega pojava“ je Komisija v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka izrazila tudi dvome o drugih vidikih priglašene pomoči, in sicer: a) upravičencih do ukrepa pomoči, b) nekaterih vrstah izračuna škode, c) zadevnih proizvodih iz ukrepa pomoči in d) možnosti, da bi bil ukrep posredna pomoč v korist avtoprevoznikov, ki so bili udeleženi v stavki.
The reasons for these doubts are set out below.
Razlogi za takšne dvome so našteti v nadaljevanju.
The beneficiaries of the aid measure.
Upravičenci do ukrepa pomoči.
According to Article 1 of the notified Law and the standard form, the beneficiaries of the aid are: ‘individual or associated enterprises engaged in the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products’.
Člen 1 priglašenega zakona in opisni seznam kot upravičence do pomoči navajata „posamezna ali združena podjetja na področju proizvodnje, predelave in trženja kmetijskih izdelkov“.
However the explanations provided by the competent authorities regarding the detailed rules for calculating the harm suffered and the compensation appear to refer only to harm suffered by individual primary producers of agricultural products.
Vseeno se zdi, da veljajo predložene obrazložitve pristojnih organov v zvezi z vrstami izračuna škode in zadevnim nadomestilom le za škodo posameznih primarnih kmetijskih proizvajalcev.
In the absence of clarification from the competent authorities, the Commission has doubts as to who the beneficiaries of the aid measure are and, if the aid is granted also to operators engaged in processing and marketing, as to the type of harm suffered by each of these two categories of operators and the detailed rules for calculating and evaluating it.
Ker pristojni organi niso predložili pojasnila, Komisija dvomi o identiteti upravičencev do pomoči in, če je bila pomoč odobrena tudi proizvajalcem, dejavnim na področju predelave in trženja, o vrsti škode pri vsaki od teh skupin ter o vrstah izračuna in ocene te škode.
Certain detailed rules for calculating harm suffered.
Nekatere vrste izračuna škode.
The competent authorities provided examples of how the harm suffered by farmers would be calculated where products were delivered which were inferior, in quality or quantity, to those originally agreed in the contract.
Pristojni organi so predložili primere izračuna škode kmetov, če je bila kakovost ali količina dostavljenih proizvodov nižja od tiste v pogodbi.
In these cases the harm suffered is the difference between the agreed price for the agreed merchandise, as established in the contract, and the price actually paid to the farmer after goods were delivered which were of lower quantity and/or quality (owing to overripeness).
V takšnih primerih je škoda enaka razliki med ceno blaga, dogovorjeno v pogodbi, in dejansko ceno, ki jo plača kmet zaradi dostave blaga z nižjo kakovostjo ali količino (zaradi prevelike zrelosti).
The competent authorities intend, however, to compensate also farmers who, as a result of the strike and the roadblocks, could not collect/harvest their produce and whose production was therefore lost.
Vseeno pristojni organi določajo tudi plačilo nadomestila kmetom, ki zaradi stavke in cestnih zapor niso mogli nadaljevati pobiranja in so zato izgubili svojo proizvodnjo.
In this case the harm suffered by the farmers will be calculated on the basis of ‘expert reports by qualified agronomists concerning the value of the production on the plants/trees’ which were to accompany the contracts.
V tem primeru se škoda kmetov izračuna na podlagi „izvedenskega mnenja usposobljenih kmetijskih tehnikov (agronomov) v zvezi z vrednostjo proizvodnje rastlin“, ki se predloži skupaj z ustreznimi pogodbami.
In the absence of clarification from the competent authorities, the Commission expressed doubts regarding the detailed rules for calculating the harm suffered and the aid applicable in this specific case, and why the detailed rules applicable to this case would differ from those applicable in other cases mentioned above.
Ker pristojni organi niso predložili pojasnil, je Komisija izrazila dvom o vrstah izračuna škode in ustreznih nadomestil v zadevnem primeru ter razlogu za uporabo drugačnih vrst v primerjavi z zgoraj navedenimi primeri.
Moreover the Commission expressed doubts regarding the nature and purpose of the expert reports, when and how they would be drafted, and the type of products in respect of which the said expert reports would be used to evaluate the harm suffered.
Razen tega je Komisija izrazila dvom tudi o vrsti in namenu navedenega izvedenskega mnenja, predvsem o tem, kdaj in na kakšen način se bo sestavilo, in o vrstah proizvodov, ki so utrpeli škodo, določeno na podlagi zgoraj navedenega izvedenskega mnenja.
The products covered by the aid measure.
Zadevni proizvodi iz ukrepa pomoči.
The competent authorities had indicated that the aid would concern products that, because of their nature (perishability, harvesting period, etc), needed to be delivered or collected/harvested rapidly over the period concerned (30 September to 8 October 2000) and for which no alternative form of storage (freezing for example) could be envisaged.
Pristojni organi menijo, da velja pomoč za proizvode, ki bi morali biti v zadevnem obdobju (od 30. septembra do 8. oktobra 2000) zaradi svojih lastnosti (pokvarljivost, obdobje pobiranja itd.) hitro dostavljeni ali pobrani in za katere nadomestne oblike skladiščenja (na primer zamrznitev) niso bile na voljo.
In order to evaluate this aspect the Commission departments concerned asked the competent authorities to provide a list of the products.
Službe Komisije so za ocenitev tega vidika od pristojnih organov zahtevale predložitev seznama zadevnih proizvodov.
The competent authorities did not provide such a list, but undertook to supply one at a later stage, before the payment of the aid.
Pristojni organi zgoraj navedenega seznama niso predložili in so se zavezali, da bodo to storili v naslednji fazi, pred odobritvijo pomoči.
Since such a list was deemed necessary for the possible purpose of authorising the aid measure, the Commission expressed doubts regarding the nature of the products for which the competent authorities intend to grant aid.
Ker je bil takšen seznam potreben, da bi se omogočila odobritev ukrepa pomoči, je Komisija izrazila dvom o vrsti proizvodov, za katere pristojni organi nameravajo izplačati pomoč.
The possibility that the measure might constitute indirect aid to the striking transporters.
Možnosti, da bi bil ukrep posredna pomoč v korist avtoprevoznikov, ki so bili udeleženi v stavki.
Since the aid measure aims to make good the harm suffered by agricultural undertakings because of the road hauliers’ demonstration, strike and roadblocks, the Commission could not exclude that, should the road hauliers be required under national law to pay compensation to agricultural undertakings for (contractual and non contractual) harm caused by their demonstration, the aid measure could be regarded as an indirect operating aid to the striking road hauliers.
Ker je namen zadevnega ukrepa pomoči kmetijskim podjetjem povrniti nadomestilo za škodo zaradi shoda, stavke in cestnih zapor avtoprevoznikov, Komisija ni mogla izključiti, da bi se lahko, če bi bili avtoprevozniki v skladu z nacionalnim zakonom odgovorni za povračilo škode (pogodbene in nepogodbene), ki so jo zaradi njihovega shoda utrpela kmetijska podjetja, zadevni ukrep pomoči štel za posredno pomoč pri delovanju v korist stavkajočih avtoprevoznikov.