natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission, in its decision of 19 November 2004, noted the argument of the Portuguese authorities that, for CORDEX, an investment in Brazil may involve higher risks than an investment in the European Union owing to the unpredictability of the Brazilian currency, especially since this is the first internationalisation experience of CORDEX and the company had no experience of the Brazilian market [12].
V svoji odločitvi z dne 19. novembra 2004 je Komisija upoštevala utemeljitev portugalskih organov, da lahko za CORDEX investicija v Braziliji pomeni večja tveganja kot investicija v Evropski uniji zaradi nepredvidljivosti brazilske valute. Poleg tega je to prva izkušnja podjetja CORDEX na področju internacionalizacije in ni imelo izkušenj na brazilskem trgu [12].
However, the information submitted to the Commission following the initiation of the procedure indicates that other producers who are competitors of CORDEX had invested in Brazil (despite the apparent unpredictability of the Brazilian currency).
Vendar pa podatki, predloženi Komisiji po sprožitvi postopka, kažejo, da so drugi proizvajalci, ki so konkurenti podjetja CORDEX, vlagali v Braziliji (kljub očitni nepredvidljivosti brazilske valute).
In particular, Quintas & Quintas S.A., a Portuguese company competing with CORDEX, had, according to the information provided by the Portuguese authorities, installed a production unit in Brazil (Brascorda) without requesting any aid from the Portuguese authorities.
Zlasti Quintas & Quintas S.A., portugalsko podjetje, ki konkurira podjetju CORDEX, je po podatkih portugalskih organov postavil proizvodno enoto v Braziliji (Brascorda), ne da bi zaprosil portugalske organe za kakršno koli pomoč.
There is thus no evidence of any general market deficiency associated with this type of project that would prevent CORDEX or its competitors from investing in Brazil without state support.
Tako torej ni nobenih dokazov o kakršni koli tržni pomanjkljivosti, povezani s to vrsto projekta, ki bi podjetju CORDEX ali njegovim konkurentom preprečevala investiranje v Braziliji brez državne pomoči.
Although this was the first internationalisation experience of CORDEX, the Portuguese authorities were also unable to demonstrate any particular difficulties faced by CORDEX in carrying out the investment concerned.
Čeprav je to bila prva internacionalizacijska izkušnja podjetja CORDEX, portugalski organi prav tako niso mogli dokazati kakršnih koli posebnih težav, s katerimi bi se CORDEX spopadal pri izvajanju zadevne investicije.
For example, despite the relative small size of CORDEX in terms of turnover (below the SME threshold), there was no indication from the Portuguese authorities of any deficiencies with regard to the possibility of CORDEX obtaining financing from commercial banks; on the contrary, it appears that the company was able to finance the investment out of own resources and by recourse to commercial loans.
Na primer, kljub relativno majhni velikosti podjetja CORDEX v smislu prometa (pod pragom MSP) portugalski organi niso navedli nobenih pomanjkljivosti glede možnosti, da CORDEX pridobi finančna sredstva pri poslovnih bankah; nasprotno, zdi se, da je bilo podjetje sposobno financirati investicijo iz lastnih sredstev in z najetjem komercialnih posojil.
The Commission therefore considers on the basis of the above information that Portugal has not managed to demonstrate that, without the aid, CORDEX would not have carried out the investment concerned in Brazil and that the aid was necessary in view of the risks involved with its project in Brazil.
Komisija zato na podlagi zgoraj navedenih podatkov meni, da Portugalski ni uspelo dokazati, da brez pomoči CORDEX ne bi izvedel zadevne investicije v Braziliji in da je bila pomoč potrebna zaradi tveganj, povezanih z njegovim projektom v Braziliji.
The Commission notes that the fact that CORDEX has so far conducted all these activities without receiving state aid appears to show that the aid was not necessary.
Komisija ugotavlja, da dejstvo, da je CORDEX do zdaj izvedel vse te dejavnosti, ne da bi prejel državno pomoč, jasno dokazuje, da pomoč ni bila potrebna.
The impact of the aid on the Community market
Vpliv pomoči na trg Skupnosti
According to the information available, there are about a dozen EU producers of sisal on the Community market.
V skladu z razpoložljivimi podatki je na trgu Skupnosti približno dvanajst proizvajalcev sisala iz EU.
Five of them are located in Portugal and account for some 81 % of EU production [13].
Pet od njih se nahaja na Portugalskem in zagotavljajo približno 81 % proizvodnje EU [13].
All these companies produce synthetic products and sisal ropes and twine.
Vsa ta podjetja proizvajajo sintetične izdelke ter vrvi in dvonitne vrvi iz sisala.
The synthetic fibre production appears to be the core business for most of them.
Za večino od njih je proizvodnja sintetičnih vlaken očitno osnovna poslovna dejavnost.
This is also the case with CORDEX (sisal accounts for only about 20 % of its capacity).
Tako je tudi s podjetjem CORDEX (sisal prispeva samo okoli 20 % k njegovi proizvodni zmogljivosti).
Sisal and synthetic fibres have a certain degree of substitutability for uses in agriculture.
Sisal in sintetična vlakna imajo določeno stopnjo zamenljivosti za namene uporabe v kmetijstvu.
In 2003 the market share of CORDEX for sisal products in the EU was about 6,6 %.
Leta 2003 je tržni delež podjetja CORDEX za izdelke iz sisala v EU znašal približno 6,6 %.
However, if sales of products from Cordebrás Lda are also taken into account, the market share of CORDEX in the EU rises to 17,7 % [14].
Če pa upoštevamo tudi izdelke Cordebras Lda, se tržni delež podjetja CORDEX v EU zviša na 17,7 % [14].
The Portuguese authorities indicated in this connection that about 47 % of Cordebrás exports (some 2210 tonnes in 2003) were directed to the EU market.
Portugalski organi so v tej zvezi navedli, da je bilo 47 % izvoza Cordebrasa (okoli 2210 ton leta 2003) namenjeno za trg EU.
Given the significant percentage of sisal produced by Codebras Lda and imported (via CORDEX) into the EU, the Commission concludes that the aid appears to have a significant impact on competition in the EU market.
Ob upoštevanju pomembnega odstotnega deleža sisala, ki ga proizvede Codebras Lda in se uvozi (preko podjetja CORDEX) v EU, Komisija ugotavlja, da pomoč očitno pomembno vpliva na konkurenco na trgu EU.
In addition, the aid also appears to strengthen the overall position of CORDEX in the EU, thereby potentially affecting other market segments where CORDEX and its competitors operate.
Poleg tega se prav tako zdi, da pomoč krepi splošni položaj podjetja CORDEX v EU, s čimer potencialno vpliva na druge tržne segmente, na katerih CORDEX in njegovi konkurenti poslujejo.
This finding is corroborated by the comments submitted by competitors, pointing to serious distortions of competition created by the aid on the markets for sisal ropes and twine as well as for synthetic fibre.
To ugotovitev potrjujejo pripombe, ki so jih predložili konkurenti, v katerih so opozorili na resno izkrivljanje konkurence, ki ga pomoč povzroča na trgih za vrvi in dvonitne vrvi iz sisala, kakor tudi za sintetična vlakna.
When assessing the compatibility of the aid, the Commission must assess carefully the balance between the negative and positive effects of the measure inside the EU and determine whether its beneficial effects for the Community outweigh its negative effects on competition and trade on the Community market.
Pri ocenjevanju združljivosti pomoči mora Komisija natančno oceniti ravnovesje med negativnimi in pozitivnimi učinki ukrepa v EU in ugotoviti, ali koristni učinki ukrepa na Skupnost prevladajo nad njegovimi negativnimi učinki na konkurenco in trgovino na trgu Skupnosti.
On the basis of the above information, the Commission concludes that there is no evidence to suggest that the granting of aid to CORDEX in respect of its investment in Brazil may help to improve the competitiveness of the European industry concerned.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenih podatkov Komisija ugotavlja, da ni nobenih dokazov, da bi dodelitev pomoči podjetju CORDEX za njegovo investicijo v Braziliji lahko pripomogla k izboljšanju konkurenčnosti zadevne evropske industrije.
The aid would probably strengthen the position of the recipient but to the detriment of its competitors not receiving state aid.
Pomoč bi verjetno okrepila položaj prejemnika, vendar na škodo njegovih konkurentov, ki državne pomoči ne prejemajo.
It is thus not demonstrated that the aid has any positive effects for the Community that would outweigh its negative impact on competition and trade in the Community market.
Tako torej ni dokazano, da ima pomoč kakršne koli pozitivne učinke za Skupnost, ki bi prevladali nad negativnim vplivom na konkurenco in trgovino na trgu Skupnosti.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there is no evidence that the aid is necessary for CORDEX to carry out the investment concerned in Brazil.
Zaradi tega Komisija ugotavlja, da ni dokazov, da je pomoč potrebna za izvedbo zadevne investicije podjetja CORDEX v Braziliji.
The aid is also likely to have a significant distorting effect on competition in the Community market.
Pomoč bo prav tako verjetno občutno vplivala na izkrivljanje konkurence na trgu Skupnosti.
The Commission thus concludes that the planned state aid for CORDEX in connection with its foreign direct investment in Brazil does not contribute to the development of certain economic activities within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) without adversely affecting trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest and is therefore incompatible with the common market,
Tako Komisija sklepa, da načrtovana državna pomoč za CORDEX v zvezi z njegovo neposredno tujo investicijo v Braziliji ne prispeva k razvoju določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti v smislu člena 87(3)(c), ne da bi vplivala negativno na trgovinske pogoje v obsegu, ki je v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi, in je zato nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom –
The notified tax incentive of EUR 401795 that Portugal is preparing to grant to CORDEX, Companhia Industrial Têxtil S.A., for the purpose of financing its foreign direct investment in Brazil is incompatible with the common market since it does not fulfil the criteria laid down in Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.
Priglašena davčna spodbuda v višini 401795 EUR, ki jo Portugalska namerava dodeliti podjetju CORDEX, Companhia Industrial Têxtil S.A., za namene financiranja njegove neposredne investicije v Braziliji, je nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, ker ne izpolnjuje meril iz člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES.
OJ C 35, 10.2.2005, p. 2.
UL C 35, 10.2.2005, str. 2.
Figure for 2005.
Podatek za leto 2005.
Portugal explained that the baler twine produced in Brazil can be used either as a finished or semi-finished product for further processing into other products such as carpets or decorative objects or in the traditional packaging sector.
Portugalska je pojasnila, da se lahko dvonitne vrvi za strojno pakirane, izdelane v Braziliji, uporabijo kot končni izdelki ali kot polizdelki za nadaljnjo predelavo v druge izdelke, kot so preproge ali dekorativni predmeti, ali na področju običajne embalaže.
N 96/99 (OJ C 375, 24.12.1999, p. 4).
N 96/99 (UL C 375, 24.12.1999, str. 4).
See Case C 77/97, Austrian LiftGmbH — Doppelmayr, Austria, (OJ L 142, 5.6.1999, p. 32) and Case C 47/02, Vila Galé-Cintra (OJ L 61, 27.2.2004, p. 76).
Glej zadevo C 77/97, avstrijski LiftGmbH – Doppelmayr, Avstrija (UL L 142, 5.6.1999, str. 32) in zadevo C 47/02, Vila Galé-Cintra (UL L 61, 27.2.2004, str. 76).
See point 4.2 of the Guidelines in force at the time the measure was notified: ‘an application for aid must be submitted before work is started on the projects’; OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, p. 13.
Glej točko 4.2 Smernic, veljavnih ob času priglasitve ukrepa: „vloga za pomoč mora biti predložena pred začetkom izvajanja projektov“; UL C 74, 10.3.1998, str. 13.
According to the Portuguese authorities, sales of Portuguese sisal in the EU decreased by 12,3 % between 1999 and 2004 mainly because of an increase in imports.
Po mnenju portugalskih organov se je prodaja portugalskega sisala v EU med letoma 1999 in 2004 zmanjšala za 12,3 % predvsem zaradi povečanja uvoza.
Case C-142/87 Tubermeuse [1990] ECR I-959, at 35.
Zadeva C-142/87 Tubermeuse [1990] ECR I-959, at 35.
See in this connection case C 47/02, Vila Galé Cintra.
V tej zvezi glej zadevo C 47/02, Vila Galé Cintra.
Figures for 2003.
Podatki za leto 2003.
Figures provided by Portugal and based on apparent consumption in the EU 15 in 2003.
Podatki, ki jih je predložila Portugaska in temeljijo na resnični porabi leta 2003 v EU 15.
It forwarded them to Portugal, which was given the opportunity to react; its comments were received by letter of 20 May 2005 (registered as received on 25 May).
Komisija jih je posredovala Portugalski in ji dala možnost odgovora; Portugalska je poslala svoje pripombe z dopisom z dne 20. maja 2005 (evidentiranim 25. maja).
It noted that some of the products produced in Brazil would be likely to compete with products on the EU market and that it had no information on the relative size of the recipient or the market.
Navedla je, da bi nekateri izdelki, proizvedeni v Braziliji, verjetno konkurirali izdelkom na trgu EU in da ni imela podatkov o relativni velikosti prejemnika na trgu.
Nor did it have any information on the impact of the measure in the region where CORDEX is located.
Prav tako ni imela podatkov o vplivu ukrepa na regijo, v kateri se CORDEX nahaja.
of 13 June 2007
z dne 13. junija 2007
concerning the non-inclusion of carbosulfan in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance
o nevključitvi karbosulfana v Prilogo I k Direktivi Sveta 91/414/EGS in o preklicu registracij fitofarmacevtskih sredstev, ki vsebujejo navedeno snov
(notified under document number C(2007) 2463)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 2463)
That list includes carbosulfan.
Navedeni seznam vključuje karbosulfan.
For carbosulfan the effects on human health and the environment have been assessed in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulations (EC) No 451/2000 and (EC) No 703/2001 for a range of uses proposed by the notifier.
Vplivi karbosulfana na zdravje ljudi in okolje so bili ocenjeni v skladu z določbami uredb (ES) št. 451/2000 in (ES) št. 703/2001 za vrste uporab, ki jih je predlagal prijavitelj.
For carbosulfan the Rapporteur Member State was Belgium and all relevant information was submitted on 11 August 2004.
Država članica poročevalka za karbosulfan je bila Belgija, vse ustrezne informacije pa so bile predložene 11. avgusta 2004.
The assessment report has been peer reviewed by the Member States and the EFSA within its Working Group Evaluation and presented to the Commission on 28 July 2006 in the format of the EFSA conclusion regarding the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance carbosulfan [4].
Poročilo o oceni so v okviru delovne skupine za ocenjevanje pregledali strokovnjaki držav članic in EFSA ter ga 28. julija 2006 predložili Komisiji v obliki sklepa EFSA o strokovnem pregledu ocene nevarnosti pesticidov z aktivno snovjo karbosulfan [4].
This report has been reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and finalised on 24 November 2006 in the format of the Commission review report for carbosulfan.
To poročilo so države članice in Komisija pregledale v okviru Stalnega odbora za prehranjevalno verigo in zdravje živali ter končno različico pripravile 24. novembra 2006 v obliki poročila Komisije o pregledu glede karbosulfana.
The use of carbosulfan leads to the appearance of metabolites which have a hazardous profile.
Uporaba karbosulfana vodi do pojava nevarnih metabolitov.
This leads to concerns about the exposure of consumers and the possible risk of ground water contamination.
To zbuja pomisleke o izpostavljenosti potrošnikov in možnem tveganju za onesnaženje podtalnice.
However, the data lodged by the notifier within the legal deadlines did not allow these concerns to be resolved.
Vendar podatki, ki jih je prijavitelj predložil v predpisanih rokih, niso omogočali odprave teh pomislekov.
Furthermore, technical material (that is, the active substance as sold in the market) contains relevant impurities, of which at least one (N-nitrosodibutylamine) is carcinogenic.
Poleg tega tehnični material (tj. aktivna snov, kot se prodaja na trgu) vsebuje veliko nečistot, od katerih je vsaj ena (N-nitrosodibutilamin) rakotvorna.
This impurity is found in the technical material at levels which raise concerns.
Ta nečistota je bila v tehničnem materialu odkrita v zaskrbljujočih količinah.
The data lodged by the notifier within the legal deadlines did not provide sufficient information to resolve these concerns.
Podatki, ki jih je prijavitelj predložil v predpisanih rokih, niso zadoščali za odpravo teh pomislekov.
As a result, the risk to operators could not be assessed adequately.
Zato ni bilo mogoče zadostno oceniti tveganja za izvajalce tretiranja.
Finally, the data lodged by the notifier within the legal deadlines did not adequately address the risks to birds and mammals, aquatic organisms, bees, non-target arthropods, earthworms, and non-target soil micro-organisms and plants.
Nenazadnje podatki, ki jih je prijavitelj predložil v predpisanih rokih, niso ustrezno prikazovali tveganj za ptice in sesalce, vodne organizme, čebele, neciljne členonožce, deževnike ter neciljne mikroorganizme v tleh in rastline.
Therefore, concerns remain as regards the risk assessment for these species.
Pomisleki glede ocene tveganja za te vrste torej še vedno ostajajo.
Consequently, it was not possible to conclude on the basis of the information available that carbosulfan met the criteria for inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC.
Na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij zato ni bilo mogoče skleniti, da karbosulfan izpolnjuje pogoje za vključitev v Prilogo I k Direktivi 91/414/EGS.
However, despite the arguments put forwards by the notifier, the concerns identified could not be eliminated, and assessments made on the basis of the information submitted and evaluated during the EFSA expert meetings have not demonstrated that it may be expected that, under the proposed conditions of use, plant protection products containing carbosulfan satisfy in general the requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 91/414/EEC.
Toda kljub predloženim argumentom se navedenih pomislekov ni dalo odpraviti, po ocenah na podlagi predloženih informacij, preučenih na srečanjih strokovnjakov EFSA, pa ne kaže pričakovati, da bi lahko fitofarmacevtska sredstva, ki vsebujejo karbosulfan pod predvidenimi pogoji uporabe na splošno izpolnjevala zahteve iz člena 5(1)(a) in (b) Direktive 91/414/EGS.
Carbosulfan should therefore not be included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC.
Karbosulfan se zato ne sme vključiti v Prilogo I k Direktivi 91/414/EGS.
Measures should be taken to ensure that authorisations granted for plant protection products containing carbosulfan are withdrawn within a fixed period of time and are not renewed and that no new authorisations for such products are granted.
Sprejeti je treba ukrepe za zagotovitev, da se registracije za fitofarmacevtska sredstva, ki vsebujejo karbosulfan, prekličejo v predpisanem roku in se ne podaljšajo ali izdajo nove registracije za taka sredstva.
Any period of grace granted by a Member State for the disposal, storage, placing on the market and use of existing stocks of plant protection products containing carbosulfan should be limited to 12 months in order to allow existing stocks to be used in one further growing season.
Če države članice odobrijo podaljšanje roka za odstranjevanje, skladiščenje, dajanje v promet in uporabo obstoječih zalog fitofarmacevtskih sredstev, ki vsebujejo karbosulfan, ga je treba omejiti na obdobje dvanajstih mesecev, da se omogoči uporaba obstoječih zalog v naslednji rastni sezoni.
This decision does not prejudice the submission of an application for carbosulfan according to the provisions of Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC in view of a possible inclusion in its Annex I.
Ta odločba ne vpliva na predložitev zahtevka za karbosulfan v skladu z določbami člena 6(2) Direktive 91/414/EGS zaradi morebitne vključitve v Prilogo I k navedeni direktivi.
Carbosulfan shall not be included as active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC.
Karbosulfan se ne vključi kot aktivna snov v Prilogo I k Direktivi 91/414/EGS.
authorisations for plant protection products containing carbosulfan are withdrawn by 13 December 2007;
se registracije za fitofarmacevtska sredstva, ki vsebujejo karbosulfan, prekličejo do 13. decembra 2007;
no authorisations for plant protection products containing carbosulfan are granted or renewed from the date of publication of this Decision.
se od datuma objave te odločbe nobene registracije fitofarmacevtskih sredstev, ki vsebujejo karbosulfan, ne odobrijo ali podaljšajo.
Any period of grace granted by Member States in accordance with the provisions of Article 4(6) of Directive 91/414/EEC, shall be as short as possible and shall expire on 13 December 2008 at the latest.
Morebitno podaljšanje roka, ki ga odobrijo države članice v skladu z določbami člena 4(6) Direktive 91/414/EGS, je čim krajše in traja največ do 13. decembra 2008.
Done at Brussels, 13 June 2007.
V Bruslju, 13. junija 2007
EFSA Scientific Report (2006) 91, 1-84, Conclusion on the peer review of carbosulfan.
Znanstveno poročilo EFSA (2006) 91, 1-84, Sklep o strokovnem pregledu karbosulfana.
concerning the non-inclusion of carbofuran in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance
o nevključitvi karbofurana v Prilogo I k Direktivi Sveta 91/414/EGS in o preklicu registracij fitofarmacevtskih sredstev, ki vsebujejo navedeno snov
(notified under document number C(2007) 2467)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 2467)
That list includes carbofuran.
Navedeni seznam vključuje karbofuran.
For carbofuran the effects on human health and the environment have been assessed in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulations (EC) No 451/2000 and (EC) No 703/2001 for a range of uses proposed by the notifier.
Vplivi karbofurana na zdravje ljudi in okolje so bili ocenjeni v skladu z določbami uredb (ES) št. 451/2000 in (ES) št. 703/2001 za vrste uporab, ki jih je predlagal prijavitelj.
For carbofuran the Rapporteur Member State was Belgium and all relevant information was submitted on 2 August 2004.
Država članica poročevalka za karbofuran je bila Belgija, vse ustrezne informacije pa so bile predložene 2. avgusta 2004.
The assessment report has been peer reviewed by the Member States and the EFSA within its Working Group Evaluation and presented to the Commission on 28 July 2006 in the format of the EFSA conclusion regarding the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance carbofuran [4].
Poročilo o oceni so v okviru delovne skupine za ovrednotenje pregledali strokovnjaki držav članic in EFSA ter ga 28. julija 2006 predložili Komisiji v obliki sklepa EFSA o strokovnem pregledu ocene nevarnosti pesticidov z aktivno snovjo karbofuran [4].
This report has been reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and finalised on 24 November 2006 in the format of the Commission review report for carbofuran.
To poročilo so države članice in Komisija pregledale v okviru Stalnega odbora za prehranjevalno verigo in zdravje živali ter končno različico pripravile 24. novembra 2006 v obliki poročila Komisije o pregledu glede karbofurana.
During the evaluation of this active substance, a number of concerns have been identified.
Med ocenjevanjem te aktivne snovi so se pokazali številni pomisleki.