natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The competent authorities, while taking into account the specific features of each case, shall normally designate as coordinating authority the authority where the trader has its headquarters or main centre of activities, or where the greater number of consumers affected are located.
Pristojni organi ob upoštevanju posebnosti vsakega primera običajno imenujejo kot usklajevalni organ tisti organ, na območju katerega ima trgovec sedež ali glavno območje dejavnosti ali na območju katerega se nahaja večje število zadevnih potrošnikov.
The Commission shall facilitate the coordination if invited to do so.’
Komisija olajša usklajevanje, če je k temu povabljena.“
after Chapter 5, the following Chapter is added: ‘6.
Za poglavjem 5 se doda naslednje poglavje:
amending Decision 2003/757/EC on the aid scheme implemented by Belgium for coordination centres established in Belgium
o shemi pomoči, ki jo je Belgija namenila centrom za usklajevanje s sedežem v Belgiji, in o spremembi Odločbe 2003/757/ES
(notified under document number C(2007) 5416)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 5416)
I. PROCEDURE [2]
I. POSTOPEK [2]
The legal basis for the scheme for coordination centres is Royal Decree No 187 of 30 December 1982.
Pravna podlaga sheme centrov za usklajevanje je kraljeva uredba št. 187 z dne 30. decembra 1982.
By Decisions of 2 May 1984 and 9 March 1987, the Commission had authorised the scheme since, in its view, it did not give rise to any objections as regards the applicable State aid rules of the Treaty.
Komisija je z odločbama z dne 2. maja 1984 in 9. marca 1987 odobrila to shemo, ker ni bilo nobenih ugovorov v zvezi s pravili iz Pogodbe ES, ki veljajo na področju državnih pomoči.
As it had undertaken to do so under the code of conduct for business taxation (hereinafter the code of conduct), adopted by resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Member States' Governments meeting within the Council of 1 December 1997 [3], the Commission re-examined the scheme in the light of the applicable state aid rules of the Treaty and its notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation [4].
Komisija je v skladu s svojimi obveznostmi iz kodeksa ravnanja na področju obdavčenja podjetij (v nadaljevanju „kodeks ravnanja“), ki je bil sprejet z resolucijo Sveta in predstavnikov vlad držav članic na zasedanju Sveta 1. decembra 1997 [3], ponovno pregledala to shemo ob upoštevanju pravil iz Pogodbe ES, ki veljajo na področju državnih pomoči, in sporočila Komisije o uporabi pravil v zvezi z državnimi pomočmi za ukrepe o neposrednem obdavčenju podjetij [4].
On 11 July 2001 the Commission proposed appropriate measures designed to remove the effects of the scheme for all the undertakings concerned by 31 December 2005 at the latest.
Komisija je 11. julija 2001 predlagala ustrezne ukrepe za odpravo učinkov sheme centrov za usklajevanje za vsa zadevna podjetja najpozneje do 31. decembra 2005.
Belgium did not accept these appropriate measures since, in its view, it was required by law to comply until their expiry with the ten-year authorisations, some of which ceased to apply after 31 December 2005.
Belgija ni sprejela teh ukrepov, ker je menila, da bi morala v skladu z zakonom spoštovati potrditve, odobrene za 10 let, do njihovega izteka, pri čemer so se nekatere iztekle 31. decembra 2005.
On 27 February 2002, in the absence of any acceptance of the appropriate measures, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure [5] provided for in Article 88(2) of the Treaty in accordance with Article 19(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 (now Article 88) of the EC Treaty [6].
Ker ukrepi niso bili sprejeti, je Komisija 27. februarja 2002 sprožila formalni postopek preiskave [5] iz člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES v skladu s členom 19(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 (zdaj člena 88) Pogodbe ES [6].
On that occasion, the Commission called on interested third parties to submit their comments, notably on the circumstances making it possible to establish the existence of a legitimate expectations on the part of the interested parties.
Komisija je hkrati pozvala tretje zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe, zlasti v zvezi z okoliščinami, ki omogočajo ugotovitev obstoja njihovega upravičenega pričakovanja.
The Commission terminated the formal investigation procedure by a negative final decision, Commission Decision 2003/757/EC of 17 February 2003 on the aid scheme implemented by Belgium for coordination centres established in Belgium [7], which was notified to Belgium on 18 February 2003.
Komisija je zaključila ta formalni postopek preiskave s končno negativno odločbo, tj. Odločbo Komisije 2003/757/ES z dne 17. februarja 2003 o shemi pomoči Belgije za centre za usklajevanje s sedežem v Belgiji [7], ki je bila vročena Belgiji 18. februarja 2003.
Since existing aid was involved, the Commission did not seek recovery of aid already granted.
Ker je bila to obstoječa pomoč, Komisija ni zahtevala povračila dodeljene pomoči za nazaj.
However, as a transitional measure, Decision 2003/757/EC allowed the coordination centres to enjoy the benefits of the scheme until expiry of their current authorisation and until 31 December 2010 at the latest.
Vendar Odločba 2003/757/ES v obliki prehodnih ukrepov omogoča centrom za usklajevanje, da so upravičeni do prednosti sheme do izteka njihove veljavne potrditve in najpozneje do 31. decembra 2010.
Belgium and the association Forum 187, which represents the coordination centres, appealed to the Court of Justice of the European Communities with a view to having all or part of that Decision suspended or annulled (Cases C-182/03 and T-140/03, which became C-217/03).
Belgija in združenje Forum 187, ki povezuje centre za usklajevanje, sta pri Sodišču Evropskih skupnosti vložila tožbo v zvezi s prekinitvijo izvajanja in popolno ali delno razveljavitvijo zadevne odločbe (zadevi C-182/03 in T-140/03, zdaj C-217/03).
By order of 26 June 2003 [8], the President of the Court suspended the operation of Decision 2003/757/EC ‘inasmuch as it prohibits the Kingdom of Belgium from renewing coordination centre authorisations effective at the date of notification of the decision.’
Predsednik Sodišča je s sklepom z dne 26. junija 2003 [8] zahteval prekinitev izvajanja Odločbe 2003/757/ES, „ker ta Kraljevini Belgiji na dan vročitve navedene odločbe prepoveduje obnovitev obstoječe potrditve centrov za usklajevanje“.
He went on to state that ‘the effects of renewals made pursuant to this order shall not extend beyond the day on which judgment is given in the main action.’
Natančno je tudi navedel, da „učinki morebitne obnovitve, ki nastanejo na podlagi tega sklepa, ne smejo trajati dlje od datuma sodbe, izrečene v postopku v glavni zadevi.“
At Belgium's request, Council Decision 2003/531/EC of 16 July 2003 on the granting of aid by the Belgian Government to certain coordination centres established in Belgium [9] stated, in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 88(2) of the Treaty that ‘the aid which Belgium plans to grant in the period up to 31 December 2005 to undertakings authorised as at 31 December 2000 to act as coordination centres under Royal Decree No 187 of 30 December 1982, and whose authorisations expire between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005, shall be considered compatible with the common market’.
Na zahtevo Belgije se je z Odločbo Sveta 2003/531/ES z dne 16. julija 2003 o dodelitvi pomoči belgijske vlade nekaterim centrom za usklajevanje s sedežem v Belgiji [9] in v skladu s tretjim pododstavkom člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES „pomoč, ki jo je Belgija do 31. decembra 2005 dodelila podjetjem, ki so bila do 31. decembra 2000 potrjena kot centri za usklajevanje na podlagi kraljeve uredbe št. 187 z dne 30. decembra 1982 in katerih potrditev naj bi se iztekla med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005, obravnavala za združljivo s skupnim trgom“.
The effect of the aid in question was to maintain the effects of the coordination centre scheme for the above mentioned undertakings.
Namen zadevne pomoči je ohraniti učinke sheme centrov za usklajevanje za navedena podjetja.
The Commission brought an action against Decision 2003/531/EC before the Court (Case C-399/03).
Komisija je pri Sodišču vložila tožbo zoper Odločbo 2003/531/ES (zadeva C-399/03).
By its judgment of 22 June 2006 [10], the Court annulled in part the Commission decision ‘insofar as it does not lay down transitional measures for those coordination centres with an application for renewal of their authorisation pending on the date on which the contested decision was notified or with an authorisation which expired at the same time or shortly after the notification of the decision.’
Sodišče je s sodbo z dne 22. junija 2006 [10] delno razveljavilo odločbo Komisije, „ker ni predvidela prehodnih ukrepov glede centrov za usklajevanje, katerih prošnja za obnovitev potrditve je bila na dan vročitve izpodbijane odločbe nerešena ali katerih potrditev se je iztekla sočasno ali malo po vročitvi navedene odločbe“.
That same day it also annulled Decision 2003/531/EC [11].
Istega dne je razveljavilo tudi Odločbo 2003/531/ES. [11].
By letter of 4 July 2006 [12], the Commission asked Belgium to provide it with certain information so that it could decide on the proper follow-up action to be taken following the judgment by the Court of 22 June 2006 in Cases C-182/03 and C-217/03.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 4. julija 2006 [12] zahtevala, da ji Belgija predloži nekatere informacije za določitev ustreznega nadaljnjega ukrepanja po sodbi Sodišča z dne 22. junija 2006 v zadevah C-182/03 in C-217/03.
This information concerned the way in which Belgium had implemented Decision 2003/757/EC, as suspended in part by the order of 26 June 2003.
Te informacije so bile povezane z načinom izvajanja Odločbe 2003/757/ES v Belgiji, ki je bilo delno ustavljeno s sklepom z dne 26. junija 2003.
Belgium was given 20 working days, i.e. in principle until 2 August 2006, to provide the information requested.
Določen je bil rok 20 delovnih dni, tj. načeloma do 2. avgusta 2006, v katerem bi morala Belgija predložiti zahtevane informacije.
On 23 August 2006 as it had not received a reply, the Commission sent Belgium a reminder [13].
Ker Komisija ni prejela odgovora, je 23. avgusta 2006 Belgiji poslala opomin [13].
Belgium was given a further period of 10 working days, i.e. in principle until 7 September 2006, to provide the information requested.
Določen je bil nov rok 10 delovnih dni, tj. načeloma do 7. septembra 2006, v katerem bi morala Belgija predložiti zahtevane informacije.
On 13 September 2006 an informal e-mail including copies of the two aforementioned letters was sent to Belgium.
Belgiji je bilo 13. septembra 2006 poslano neuradno elektronsko sporočilo, ki je vključevalo izvod obeh navedenih dopisov.
By letter of 14 September 2006, which mentioned the said e-mail and the attached letters, Belgium stated that it had never received the letters.
Belgija je v dopisu z dne 14. septembra 2006 v zvezi z navedenim elektronskim sporočilom in priloženimi dopisi navedla, da teh dopisov ni nikoli prejela.
By letter of 29 September 2006, the Commission called on Belgium to provide the information initially requested on 4 July and to inform it of its intentions regarding the coordination centres.
Z dopisom z dne 29. septembra 2006 je Komisija pozvala Belgijo, naj predloži informacije, ki jih je prvotno zahtevala 4. julija, in jo natančno obvesti o svojih namerah v zvezi s centri za usklajevanje.
A technical meeting was also proposed.
Predlagano je bilo tudi tehnično srečanje.
Since Belgium's reply, dated 12 October 2006, did not contain any of the information requested, the Commission, by letter of 10 November 2006, once again recalled the importance of the information requested and insisted that Belgium provide the desired replies by 22 November 2006 at the latest.
Odgovor Belgije z dne 12. oktobra 2006 ni vključeval nobene od zahtevanih informacij, zato je Komisija v dopisu z dne 10. novembra 2006 še enkrat izpostavila pomen zahtevanih informacij in vztrajala, da Belgija predloži zahtevane odgovore najpozneje do 22. novembra 2006.
A letter from Belgium dated 17 November 2006 still did not provide any answer as to substance.
Zadnji dopis Belgije z dne 17. novembra 2006 prav tako ni vključeval nobenih odgovorov glede vsebine zadeve.
On 16 January 2007 Belgium sent the information requested by the Commission.
Belgija je 16. januarja 2007 predložila informacije, ki jih je zahtevala Komisija.
It provided further details by letters of 8 and 16 February 2007.
Dodatna pojasnila je predložila v dopisih z dne 8. in 16. februarja 2007.
Three meetings also took place on 5 and 15 February and 5 March 2007 between the Commission and Belgium.
Razen tega so bila organizirana tri srečanja med Komisijo in Belgijo, in sicer 5. in 15. februarja ter 5. marca 2007.
By letter of 21 March 2007, the Commission informed Belgium of its decision to extend the procedure initiated on 27 February 2002 in respect of this aid, in accordance with Article 88(2) of the Treaty.
Z dopisom z dne 21. marca 2007 je Komisija obvestila Belgijo o svoji odločitvi, da v zvezi z zadevno pomočjo na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES podaljša postopek, ki ga je sprožila 27. februarja 2002.
The Commission decision to extend the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [14].
Odločitev Komisije, da podaljša postopek, je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [14].
The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments on the appropriate transitional measures that it should have envisaged pursuant to the Court's judgment.
Komisija je pozvala vse zainteresirane stranke, naj predložijo svoje pripombe glede ustreznih prehodnih ukrepov, ki bi jih morala določiti v skladu s sodbo Sodišča.
The Commission received comments in this connection from Forum 187 [15] and three coordination centres.
Komisija je prejela pripombe o tem vprašanju od Foruma 187 [15] in treh centrov za usklajevanje.
It forwarded them to Belgium, giving it the possibility to comment on them, and received its comments by letters dated 19 and 30 July 2007.
Posredovala jih je Belgiji in ji dala možnost, da predloži svoje pripombe, ki jih je nato prejela v dopisih z dne 19. in 30. julija 2007.
The main legal basis for the scheme for coordination centres is Royal Decree No 187 of 30 December 1982.
Glavna pravna podlaga sheme centrov za usklajevanje je kraljeva uredba št. 187 z dne 30. decembra 1982.
A coordination centre is an undertaking that is part of a multinational group and supplies certain ancillary services (financing, cash management, research and development, etc.) solely for other undertakings in the same group.
Center za usklajevanje je podjetje, ki je del večnacionalne skupine in izvaja nekatere pomožne storitve (financiranje, upravljanje zakladnice, raziskave in razvoj itd.) izključno v korist drugih podjetij v isti skupini.
Since 1983, under a special scheme approved by the Commission, these undertakings qualified in Belgium for a substantially reduced corporate tax base and for various exemptions (registration duty on capital injections, property tax, withholding tax).
Od leta 1983 so bila na podlagi posebne sheme pomoči, ki jo je odobrila Komisija, ta podjetja v Belgiji upravičena do veliko nižje davčne osnove za davek od dobička pravnih oseb in do različnih oprostitev (davek na kapital, nepremičninski davek, pri viru odtegnjeni davek).
Eligibility for the scheme was conditional on receiving a 10-year authorisation once it had been ascertained that the coordination centre met the conditions laid down by Royal Decree No 187.
Upravičenost do te sheme je temeljila na potrditvi, odobreni za 10 let, ki potrjuje, da center za usklajevanje izpolnjuje pogoje iz kraljeve uredbe št. 187.
Authorisations were renewable on expiry of the 10-year period under the same conditions [16].
To potrditev je bilo mogoče pod enakimi pogoji obnoviti po izteku 10 let [16].
On 27 December 2006 Belgium adopted a law [17] under which the authorisation for any coordination centre that so requested could be extended until 31 December 2010, where necessary with retroactive effect.
Belgija je 27. decembra 2006 sprejela zakon [17], ki je omogočil, da se na zahtevo podaljšajo potrditve vseh centrov za usklajevanje do 31. decembra 2010, po potrebi z učinkom za nazaj.
In addition to the centres whose authorisation was renewed between 17 February 2003 and 31 December 2005, the possibility of extension would also be available to centres whose authorisation expires between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2010 and to an unspecified number of centres whose authorisation would have expired by 31 December 2005 at the latest but which had not submitted any renewal request by that date.
Razen centrov, ki so obnovili svojo potrditev med 17. februarjem 2003 in 31. decembrom 2005, je bila ta možnost podaljšanja na voljo tudi centrom, katerih potrditev bi se iztekla med 1. januarjem 2006 in 31. decembrom 2010, ter neopredeljenemu številu centrov, katerih potrditev bi se iztekla najpozneje 31. decembra 2005, vendar do zdaj niso vložili prošnje za obnovitev.
The Law has not been notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty but its entry into force has been suspended and is conditional on confirmation by the Commission that it has no objections.
Ta zakon ni bil priglašen Komisiji v skladu s členom 88(3) Pogodbe ES, vendar je bil začetek njegove veljavnosti odložen in pogojen s potrditvijo Komisije, da nima pripomb.
Of the 243 coordination centres that existed in 2002, 173 are still operational in 2007.
Od 243 centrov za usklajevanje, ki so delovali leta 2002, jih leta 2007 deluje še 173.
Of these, 27 have been granted an authorisation that is valid until 31 December 2010 in accordance with Decision 2003/757/EC.
Med njimi jih je imelo 27 veljavno potrditev do 31. decembra 2010 v skladu z Odločbo 2003/757/ES.
The authorisations for the other 136 coordination centres expire before 31 December 2010 and it is these centres, therefore, that are concerned by the possibility of extension afforded by the Law.
Potrditev ostalih 136 centrov bo potekla pred 31. decembrom 2010, zato je za te centre na voljo možnost podaljšanja na podlagi zakona.
It would seem that an unspecified number of coordination centres that have since ceased operations could also benefit from the extension provided for by the Law of 27 December 2006.
Zdi se, da bi lahko bilo do podaljšanja na podlagi zakona z dne 27. decembra 2006 upravičeno tudi neopredeljeno število centrov za usklajevanje, ki so medtem že prenehali z opravljanjem dejavnosti.
PURPOSE OF EXTENDING THE FORMAL PROCEDURE
CILJ PODALJŠANJA FORMALNEGA POSTOPKA
Following the order of 26 June 2003 suspending the effects of the prohibition on the renewal of coordination centre authorisations that had expired, Belgium was able to renew the authorisations.
Belgija je po sprejetju sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003, ki odpravlja učinke prepovedi obnovitve potrditev centrov za usklajevanje, ki so se že iztekle, imela možnost obnovitve teh potrditev.
The effects of such renewal could not, however, extend beyond the date of the judgment as to substance.
Učinki teh obnovitev se ne morejo nadaljevati po datumu izdaje sodbe o vsebini zadeve.
The Court of Justice delivered its judgment on 22 June 2006.
Sodba Sodišča je bila sprejeta 22. junija 2006.
On the basis of the information available, the Commission expected that Belgium would simply extend the coordination centre authorisations until the end of 2005, as had been decided pursuant to the code of conduct and as requested by Belgium on several occasions.
Komisija je na podlagi razpoložljivih informacij pričakovala, da se bo Belgija omejila na podaljšanje potrditev centrov za usklajevanje do konca leta 2005, kot je bilo sklenjeno v kodeksu ravnanja in kar je večkrat zahtevala Belgija.
The Commission sought confirmation from Belgium by letter of 4 July 2006.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 4. julija 2006 od Belgije zahtevala potrditev te zadeve.
Belgium confirmed that it had restricted to 31 December 2005 the renewals granted pursuant to the order of 26 June 2003, except for four centres whose authorisation had been extended indefinitely.
Belgija je potrdila, da je obnovitve, odobrene na podlagi sklepa z dne 26. junija 2003, omejila do 31. decembra 2005, razen za štiri centre, katerih potrditev je bila podaljšana za nedoločeno obdobje.
It also informed the Commission that, on the basis of its interpretation of the Court's judgment, it intended to extend the authorisations for all the coordination centres up to the end of 2010 and to adopt in December 2006 a law permitting such a general extension beyond 2005, where necessary with retroactive effect.
Belgija je prav tako obvestila Komisijo, da namerava na podlagi svoje razlage sodbe Sodišča podaljšati potrditve vseh centrov za usklajevanje do konca leta 2010 in da bo decembra 2006 sprejela zakon o odobritvi splošne veljavnosti teh potrditev tudi po letu 2005, po potrebi z učinkom za nazaj.
On 21 March 2007, for want of an agreement on the interpretation placed on the Court's judgment, the Commission took the view that it would have to extend the formal investigation procedure so as to give its own interpretation of the judgment and to make public the particulars on which, in its view, it would have to base itself in order to determine the ‘new’ transitional period requested by the Court.
Ker ni bilo doseženo soglasje o razlagi sodbe Sodišča, je Komisija 21. marca 2007 presodila, da mora podaljšati formalni postopek preiskave, da bi predstavila svojo razlago sodbe in objavila elemente, za katere meni, da bi se morali uporabiti kot podlaga za določitev „novega“ prehodnega obdobja, ki ga je zahtevalo Sodišče.
It also expressed doubts as to the interpretation of the Court's judgment as presented by Belgium and as to the latter's intention of renewing the authorisations for all the coordination centres until the end of 2010.
Komisija je dvomila tudi v razlago sodbe Sodišča, ki jo je predlagala Belgija, in njene navedbe, da namerava obnoviti potrditve vseh centrov za usklajevanje do konca leta 2010.
COMMENT BY BELGIUM AND INTERESTED THIRD PARTIES
PRIPOMBE BELGIJE IN ZAINTERESIRANIH TRETJIH STRANK
Following the extension of the procedure, comments were submitted by Belgium, by Forum 187 and by three coordination centres whose authorisations expired on 31 December 2003 or 31 December 2004 and were renewed until 31 December 2005.
Po podaljšanju postopka so pripombe predložili Belgija, Forum 187 in trije centri za usklajevanje, katerih potrditve so se iztekle 31. decembra 2003 ali 31. decembra 2004 in so bile obnovljene do 31. decembra 2005.
It transpires from these comments that Belgium and the coordination centres defend the granting of a transitional period ending on 31 December 2010 for the following reasons:
Iz teh pripomb je razvidno, da Belgija in centri za usklajevanje zagovarjajo odobritev prehodnega obdobja, ki bi se končalo 31. decembra 2010, pri čemer so njihovi razlogi naslednji:
the Court's judgment must be taken to mean that the general principle of equality, invoked by it, means that all the coordination centres must qualify for the longest transitional period granted to one of them, i.e. until 31 December 2010.
Sodbo Sodišča je treba razlagati v smislu, da splošno načelo enakosti, na katerega se sklicuje Sodišče, pomeni, da morajo biti vsi centri za usklajevanje upravičeni do najdaljšega prehodnega obdobja, dodeljenega nekemu centru za usklajevanje, tj. do 31. decembra 2010.