natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The cost of the work on housing alone was indicatively estimated at that time at approximately EUR1 billion up to 2002.
Stroški del, ki bi jih bilo treba izvesti samo na gospodarskih poslopjih, so bili takrat okvirno ocenjeni na 1 milijardo eurov za obdobje do leta 2002.
An investment programme was launched; its overall financing plan was: livestock rearers: one-third of the cost; the State (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries) and local authorities, one-sixth each; water supply agencies: one-third.
Uveden je bil investicijski program, katerega skupni načrt financiranja je bil naslednji: rejci, ena tretjina; država (Ministrstvo za kmetijstvo in ribištvo) in teritorialne skupnosti skupaj, ena tretjina; agencije za vodo, ena tretjina.
In return, livestock farmers likely to qualify for aid had to pay the pollution charge levied by the water supply agencies.
Na drugi strani pa morajo rejci, ki bi lahko bili upravičeni do pomoči, plačati dajatev za onesnaževanje, ki jo zaračunajo agencije za vodo.
By memorandum of 24 February 1994 to the relevant administrative bodies the French ministries of agriculture and of the environment defined the procedures adopted by the national monitoring committee responsible for implementing the programme: timetable, financing keys, application by rearers.
Francosko ministrstvo za okolje in kmetijstvo je z obvestilom z dne 24. februarja 1994, ki ga je poslalo zadevnim upravnim organom, opredelilo elemente postopka, ki jih je sprejel nacionalni nadzorni odbor, pristojen za izvajanje programa: časovni razpored, ključe financiranja, uporabo pri rejcih.
As regards the programme’s link to the classified installations, the French authorities stated in the memorandum that it was in the interests of the rearers to comply with the provisions relating to protection of water resources in the ministerial decrees of 29 February 1992 on livestock farms when work under pollution control contracts was being carried out.
Francoski organi so glede povezave programa z obrati na seznamu v tem obvestilu navedli, da je v interesu rejca, ko se izvedejo dela, predvidena s pogodbo ali pogodbami za nadzor nad onesnaževanjem da pri določbah, povezanih z varstvom voda, ravna v skladu z ministrskimi odloki z dne 29. februarja 1992 v zvezi z živinorejskimi farmami.
Implementation of the PMPOA followed a sectoral approach and was by means of circulars containing the aid rules from the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries to the regional and departmental prefects.
Program PMPOA se je izvajal po sektorjih in z okrožnicami o podrobnih pogojih pomoči, ki jih je Ministrstvo za kmetijstvo in ribištvo poslalo prefektom regij in departmajev.
At the request of the Commission the French authorities sent copies of the following circulars:DEPSE/SDEEA circular No 7016 of 22 April 1994, ‘Aides à la mise en conformité des élevages bovins et porcins’ [aid for standardising cattle and pig farms];
Francoski organi so Komisiji na njeno zahtevo poslali izvode naslednjih okrožnic:Okrožnico DEPSE/SDEEA št. 7016 z dne 22. aprila 1994, „Pomoči za uskladitev govedorejskih in prašičerejskih farm s standardi“;
DEPSE/SDEEA circular No 7021 of 18 April 1995, ‘Aides à la mise en conformité des élevages avicoles’ [aid for standardising poultry farms];
Okrožnico DEPSE/SDEEA št. 7021 z dne 18. aprila 1995, „Pomoči za uskladitev perutninskih farm s standardi“;
DEPSE/SDEEA circular No 7028 of 19 June 1995, ‘Aides à la mise en conformité des élevages’ [aid for standardising livestock farms];
Okrožnico DEPSE/SDEEA št. 7028 z dne 19. junija 1995, „Pomoči za uskladitev živinorejskih farm s standardi“;
Aid beneficiaries were managers or owners of property for farming use in the beef and veal, pig and poultry sectors.
Upravičenci do teh pomoči so bili kmetje ali lastniki kmetijskih zemljišč, zlasti v sektorjih govejega, prašičjega in perutninskega mesa.
The aim of the investments was to redevelop existing housing so as to increase storage capacity for animal waste and improve storage equipment to bring it in line with the requirements of the nitrates Directive.
Namen samih naložb je bila ureditev obstoječih poslopij, da bi se tako povečale skladiščne zmogljivosti za živalske iztrebke in izboljšala oprema za skladiščenje ter dosegla raven, ki jo zahtevajo standardi „nitratne“ direktive.
Financing consisted of a State contribution of 35 % of the costs in the form of a capital subsidy covering 30 % of the costs to which could be added a low-interest loan, the subsidy equivalent of which corresponded to 5 % of the costs.
Financiranje je zajemalo državno pomoč v višini 35 % stroškov v obliki finančne subvencije, ki je krila 30 % stroškov, h kateri se lahko doda ugodnost subvencioniranega posojila, katerega ekvivalent dotacije je znašal 5 % stroškov.
Participation by the water supply agencies to the extent of one-third of the costs was not mentioned in the circulars referred to in recital 15.
Udeležba agencij za vodo v višini ene tretjine stroškov ni bila navedena v okrožnicah iz točke 15 preambule.
With regard to the beef and veal and pig sectors, aid was also planned for farmers implementing their projects under a material improvement plan (MIP) in less-favoured areas in the form of capital aid of 30 % and a loan with a subsidy equivalent of 15 %.
V zvezi s sektorjema govejega in prašičjega mesa so bile pomoči predvidene tudi za kmete, ki so svoj projekt izvedli v okviru načrta za izboljšanje materialnih razmer na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi, v obliki finančne pomoči v višini 30 % in posojila z ekvivalentom dotacije v višini 15 %.
The rates were increased in the case of young farmers (43,75 % in lowland areas and 56,25 % in less-favoured areas).
Stopnje se povišajo, kadar gre poleg tega še za mlade kmete (43,75 % na ravninskem območju in 56,25 % na območju z omejenimi možnostmi).
For young farmers in the poultry sector an increase of 5 % via a soft loan was provided for.
V sektorju perutninskega mesa je za mlade kmete določeno 5-odstotno povečanje subvencioniranega posojila.
No soft loan was provided for.
Predvideno ni nobeno subvencionirano posojilo.
In other areas the capital subsidy rate was increased from 30 % to 32,5 %.
Na drugih območjih se stopnja finančne pomoči poviša s 30 na 32,5 %.
A supplementary loan having a subsidy-equivalent effect of 2,5 % was permitted.
Dovoljeno je dodatno posojilo z ekvivalentom dotacije v višini 2,5 %.
To qualify for the aid, farmers had to submit a preliminary study performed on their behalf by approved experts and resulting in the drawing up of the farmer’s investment project.
Da so proizvajalci izpolnili pogoje za pridobitev pomoči, so morali predložiti predhodno študijo, ki so jo v njihovem imenu izvedli pooblaščeni tehniki. Na njeni podlagi se je izdelal investicijski načrt proizvajalca.
Analyses were used as the basis for the pollution control contract (see recital 21) and, therefore, for the definition of the eligible amount for each of the parties participating in the public financing of the work.
Ugotovitev stanja se je uporabila kot podlaga za pogodbo o nadzoru onesnaževanja (glej točko 21 preambule), in s tem za določitev osnove, na podlagi katere je bila vsaka udeležena stran upravičena do javnega financiranja del.
The studies amounted to 2 % of the cost of the investments and were subsidised at the rate of 50 % by the State and 50 % by the water supply agencies up to a ceiling of FRF 6000 before taxes (equivalent to EUR 914).
Te študije so znašale 2 % stroškov naložb, pri čemer je 50 % financirala država in 50 % agencije za vodo do največ 6000 francoskih frankov (FRF) brez davkov (ali 914 eurov).
The pollution control contract was the factor which guaranteed the farmer that the aid provided for in the PMPOA would be applied and that any charge by the water supply agencies would dbe offset.
Pogodba o nadzoru onesnaževanja je bila element, ki je rejcu zagotavljal uporabo sistema pomoči, predvidenega v programu PMPOA, ter povračilo morebitne dajatve agenciji za vodo.
It was a contract of confidence which of necessity highlighted the existence of environmental problems on a farm but the purpose of which was to help resolve them.
Gre za pogodbo na podlagi zaupanja, ki neizogibno razkriva obstoj okoljskih težav na živinorejskem gospodarstvu, vendar je njen namen pomagati pri njihovem reševanju.
It was signed by all the financial partners, including the farmer.
Podpišejo jo vsi finančni partnerji, med njimi tudi rejec.
The reasons given by the Commission for initiating the examination procedure
Argumenti, na katere se je Komisija oprla ob uvedbi preiskovalnega postopka
Firstly, the Commission felt that the involvement of the water supply agencies in the PMPOA was a State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Komisija je najprej menila, da je šlo pri udeležbi agencij za vodo v programu PMPOA za državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The water supply agencies were responsible for one-third of the funding of the PMPOA’s investment costs.
Agencije za vodo so namreč k financiranju stroškov naložb programa PMPOA prispevale eno tretjino teh stroškov.
The Commission only became aware of their involvement after dissemination of a report evaluating the management and progress of the PMPOA drawn up by the Inspectorate-General of Finances, the standing committee for the coordination of inspections of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Conseil Général for agricultural engineering, water resources and forests.
Službe Komisije so o njihovi udeležbi izvedele šele po objavi ocenjevalnega poročila o vodenju in rezultatu programa PMPOA, ki so ga pripravili Generalni inšpektorat za finance, Stalni odbor za usklajevanje inšpekcijskih pregledov Ministrstva za kmetijstvo in ribištvo ter Generalni svet za agrotehniko voda in gozdov.
The Commission noted the fact that Article 2 of French decree No 66-700 of 14 September 1966 on water supply agencies stipulated that the agencies were public State bodies enjoying legal personality and financial independence and that French legislation made it clear that the agencies were public in nature.
Komisija je upoštevala dejstvo, da člen 2 francoskega odloka št. 66-700 z dne 14. septembra 1996 o finančnih agencijah za porečja določa, da so agencije za vodo javne državne ustanove, ki so pravne osebe in finančno neodvisne, ter da francoska zakonodaja ne dvomi o javni naravi agencij.
In its decision to initiate the procedure the Commission concluded that, in the light of the legalislation adopted in France on the water supply agencies and their operating methods, and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Communities and the Court of First Instance, the water supply agencies were to be regarded as extensions of the State and that their funding of investments on agricultural holdings therefore constituted State aid.
Komisija je v odločbi o začetku postopka ugotovila, da je treba ob upoštevanju zakonodajnih določb, sprejetih v Franciji, o agencijah za vodo in njihovih načinih delovanja ter sodne prakse Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti in Sodišča prve stopnje agencije za vodo obravnavati kot veje državne oblasti in da je treba njihovo financiranje naložb v kmetijska gospodarstva imeti za državno pomoč.
The Commission considered that the amounts allocated to cattle, pig and poultry farmers, including those provided by the water supply agencies, conferred on those farmers an advantage from which other forms of production could not benefit.
Komisija je menila, da se je z zneski, dodeljenimi govedorejcem, prašičerejcem in perutninarjem, vključno z zneski od agencij za vodo, tem proizvajalcem dala prednost, ki je druge proizvodnje niso mogle imeti.
This was therefore State aid granted by France which, by distorting or being likely to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or production sectors, was likely to affect trade between the Member States.
Šlo je za pomoč, ki jo je dodelila Francija, ki je izkrivljala ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem in proizvodnji posameznega blaga, zaradi česar je bilo verjetno, da bo prizadela trgovino med državami članicami.
Consequently the measure fell under Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Zaradi tega spada ukrep v okvir člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The Commission also concluded that the State aid put into effect by France constituted new aid not notified to the Commission which could by dint of that be considered unlawful aid within the meaning of the Treaty.
Komisija je prav tako ugotovila, da je šlo pri državnih pomočeh, ki jih je izvajala Francija, za nove pomoči, ki Komisiji niso bile prijavljene in bi se lahko zaradi tega obravnavale kot nezakonite pomoči v smislu Pogodbe.
The Commission based its arguments on Article 1(f) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty, which defines unlawful aid as new aid put into effect in contravention of the former Article 93(3) (now Article 88(3)) of the Treaty.
Komisija se je oprla zlasti na člen 1(f) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES, ki nezakonito pomoč opredeljuje kot novo pomoč, ki se izvaja v nasprotju s prejšnjim členom 93(3) (sedaj členom 88) Pogodbe.
The term new aid covers all aid, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid, which is not existing aid, including alterations to existing aid.
Pojem nove pomoči pomeni vsako pomoč, to je sheme pomoči ali individualno pomoč, ki ni veljavna pomoč, vključno s spremembami veljavne pomoči.
The Commission noted that any aid scheme authorised by the Commission into which major changes were later introduced — in this case, relating to the participation of a public body in the financing of an aid notified to the Commission, thus significantly altering the financing key and, consequently, the aid rate — constituted a new aid which had to be notified to the Commission within the meaning of Article 88 of the Treaty and authorised by it.
Komisija je opozorila, da je vsaka shema pomoči, ki jo Komisija odobri in v katero se naknadno vnesejo večje spremembe – v danem primeru v zvezi z udeležbo javnega organa pri financiranju pomoči, prijavljene Komisiji, s čimer se precej spremeni ključ financiranja in posledično intenzivnost pomoči –, nova pomoč, ki jo je treba Komisiji priglasiti v skladu s členom 88 Pogodbe in jo mora ta odobriti.
The notification obligation was established by Article 1(c) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Ta obveznost priglasitve je bila obravnavana v členu 1(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
The Commission stated that varying the aid rate appeared per se to constitute an element modifying the substance of the aid which made notification within the meaning of Article 88(2) of the Treaty obligatory.
Komisija je menila, da je spreminjanje intenzivnosti pomoči že samo po sebi element, ki spreminja vsebino pomoči, zaradi česar je priglasitev obvezna v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe.
The Commission then carried out an assessment of the aids in question in the light of paragraph 23.3 of the Community guidelines on State aid in the agriculture sector (hereafter ‘the agriculture guidelines’), which states that any unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 is to be assessed in accordance with the rules and guidelines in force at the time the aid is granted.
Komisija je nato ocenila zadevne pomoči ob upoštevanju točke 23.3 Smernic Komisije o državni pomoči v kmetijskem sektorju (v nadaljevanju: „kmetijske smernice“), v skladu s katerimi je treba vsako nezakonito pomoč v skladu s členom 1(f) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 oceniti po pravilih in smernicah, ki veljajo v trenutku dodelitve pomoči.
With regard to the subsidised investments and the form of aid, the Commission considered that, where the pigmeat sector was concerned, the type of investment had actually been continued in the PMPOA and that the investments corresponded in the main to those notified to and authorised by the Commission.
V zvezi s subvencioniranimi naložbami in obliko pomoči je Komisija menila, da se je za sektor prašičjega mesa s programom PMPOA dejansko nadaljevala vrsta naložb in da so te naložbe večinoma ustrezale naložbam, ki so bile prijavljene Komisiji in jih je le-ta odobrila.
With regard to the beef and veal sector, the Commission, even though it had not examined the aid from the point of view of the Community’s competition rules at the time, noted its compatibility with those rules when it initiated the procedure.
Čeprav Komisija pomoči takrat ni preučila z vidika pravil Skupnosti o konkurenci, je za sektor govejega mesa lahko ob začetku postopka ugotovila, da je združljiv s temi pravili.
With regard to the poultry sector the Commission noted that the PMPOA included exactly what it had previously authorised.
V zvezi s sektorjem perutninskega mesa je Komisija ugotovila, da PMPOA vsebuje natančno tak sistem, kot ga je pred tem odobrila.
Lastly, with regard to the scheme in favour of young farmers setting up from 1 January 1996, the Commission concluded that the scheme did not engender any changes in the scheme as regards the section on eligible investments, but was restricted to a change in the form of that part of the aid financed by the State.
Končno je Komisija v zvezi s programom pomoči za mlade kmete, ki so kmetijsko gospodarstvo vzpostavili po 1. januarju 1996, ugotovila, da program pomoči ni spremenil nobenega dela, ki velja za upravičene naložbe, ampak se je omejil na spremembo oblike pomoči v tistem delu, ki ga financira država.
The Commission was therefore able to conclude on the nature of the investments and the forms of aid provided for by the French authorities that the aids, while tainted with illegality, had been put into effect in compliance with the Community competition rules applicable at the time.
Tako je lahko Komisija glede narave naložb in oblikami pomoči, ki so jih predvideli francoski organi, ugotovila, da so se pomoči, čeprav so imele sledi nezakonitosti, izvajale v skladu s takrat veljavnimi pravili Skupnosti o konkurenci.
The Commission did not therefore object to that aspect of the aid as applied.
Komisija tako ni nasprotovala temu delu izvajanja pomoči.
Where the financing key for the aid was concerned, the Commission noted that, according to the rules applicable at the time the programme was launched, the ceiling for investment aid to protect the environment was 35 % of the eligible costs (45 % in less-favoured areas).
Glede ključa financiranja pomoči je Komisija opozorila, da je v skladu z zakonodajnim okvirom, ki je veljal ob začetku veljavnosti programa, zgornja meja pomoči za naložbe za varstvo okolja znašala 35 % nastalih stroškov (45 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi).
The fifth indent of Article 12(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, which provides for scrutiny of national aids in the light of former Articles 92 and 93 (now Articles 87 and 88) of the Treaty and Article 6 of that Regulation, authorised investment aid to protect the environment provided it did not give rise to an increase in production.
Peti pododstavek člena 12(5) Uredbe (EGS) št. 2328/91, ki je določal preučitev nacionalnih pomoči v primerjavi s prejšnjima členoma 92 in 93 (sedaj člena 87 in 88) Pogodbe ter členom 6 navedene uredbe, je namreč dovoljeval pomoči za naložbe za varstvo okolja, če niso povečale proizvodnje.
In its decision on State aid N 136/91, the Commission took account of the fact that it normally considered as compatible with the common market an aid rate of 35 % of eligible costs for that type of aid (45 % in less-favoured areas within the meaning of Council Directive 75/268/EEC of 28 April 1975 on mountain and hill farming and farming in certain less-favoured areas.
Komisija je v svoji odločbi o državni pomoči št. N 136/91 upoštevala dejstvo, da je morala ponavadi kot združljivo s skupnim trgom obravnavati 35-odstotno stopnjo upravičenih stroškov za to vrsto pomoči (45 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi v skladu z Direktivo Sveta 75/268/EGS z dne 28. aprila 1975 o gorskem in hribovskem kmetijstvu na nekaterih območjih z omejenimi možnostmi.
Those aid rates were confirmed in paragraph 3.2.3 of the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection shortly after entry into force of the programme.
Te stopnje pomoči so bile potrjene v točki 3.2.3 okvira Skupnosti o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja, kmalu po začetku veljavnosti programa.
Given that the programme’s financing key provided for a contribution to investment costs of one-third by the State and local authorities (equal shares, i.e. one-sixth each), one-third by the water supply agencies and one-third by the farmers, and that the contribution by the water supply agencies constituted a State aid, the Commission concluded in its decision to initiate the procedure that the aid ceilings authorised for that type of investment appeared not to have been respected, for the result of the funding of the PMPOA by the water supply agencies would have been to increase the rate of public financing to two-thirds of the investment costs, i.e. some 66,6 % of the costs incurred.
Ker ključ financiranja predvideva, da k stroškom naložb eno tretjino prispevajo država in teritorialne skupnosti (skupaj, torej vsaka stran po eno šestino), eno tretjino agencije za vodo in eno tretjino kmetje, in ker se zlasti udeležba agencij za vodo šteje med državno pomoč, je Komisija v svoji odločbi o začetku postopka ugotovila, da se zdi, da zgornje meje pomoči, odobrene za to vrsto naložb, niso bile upoštevane. Prispevek agencij za vodo k financiranju programa PMPOA bi namreč stopnjo javnega financiranja povišal na dve tretjini stroškov naložb, to je okoli 66,6 % kritih stroškov.
However, the Commission also considered the fact since 1 January 2000, the date of application of the agriculture guidelines, it had been authorising, on the basis of paragraph 4.1.1.2 of those guidelines, aid rates for that type of investment of 40 % of costs incurred (50 % in less-favoured areas).
Enako preseganje bi nastalo pri programu pomoči za mlade kmete, ki so kmetijsko gospodarstvo vzpostavili po 1. januarju 1996, ker so spremembe v programu povezane samo z obliko pomoči v tistem delu, ki ga financira država, in tako ne povzročajo splošnega povišanja stopenj pomoči za te mlade kmete. (34) Komisija je prav tako upoštevala, da od 1. januarja 2000 naprej, tj. datuma začetka veljavnosti kmetijskih smernic, Komisija na podlagi točke 4.1.1.2 navedenih smernic vseeno dovoljuje stopnje pomoči za to vrsto naložb v višini 40 % kritih stroškov (50 % za območja z omejenimi možnostmi).
For young farmers the accepted rate was 45 % (55 % in less-favoured areas).
Za mlade kmete je sprejemljiva stopnja 45 % (55 % na območju z omejenimi možnostmi).
That meant that, applying these favourable conditions, the excess aid rates granted in 2000 would have been only 26,6 % (16,6 % in less-favoured areas) and, for young farmers, 21,6 % (11,6 % in less-favoured areas), for investments implemented from 1 January 2000 and meeting the conditions set out in the agriculture guidelines.
To pomeni, da bi se z uporabo teh ugodnejših pogojev stopnje pomoči, dodeljenih leta 2000, prekoračile za samo 26,6 % (16,6 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi) in v zvezi z mladimi kmeti za 21,6 % (11,6 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi) pri naložbah, ki so bile opravljene po 1. januarju 2000 in izpolnjujejo vse pogoje iz kmetijskih smernic.