natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
First, the exceptions to the general rule of incompatibility of the aid with the common market must be interpreted narrowly.
Prvič, izjeme od splošnega pravila nezdružljivosti pomoči s skupnim trgom je treba razlagati v ožjem smislu.
The same holds for the notion of aid of a social character, which must be interpreted as aid solely and directly for the disadvantaged sections of the population.
Isto velja za pojem pomoči socialnega značaja, ki jo je treba razlagati kot pomoč samo in neposredno za prikrajšane dele prebivalstva.
Although they had to provide part of their radiofrequencies to third parties, broadcasters were guaranteed 60 % of the transmission capacities.
Čeprav so izdajatelji televizijskega programa morali zagotoviti del svojih radijskih frekvenc tretjim strankam, se jim je zagotovilo 60 % prenosnih zmogljivosti.
Furthermore, the digital technology allows broadcasters greater transmission capacity at lower costs.
Poleg tega digitalna tehnologija izdajateljem televizijskega programa omogoča večjo prenosno zmogljivost ob nižjih stroških.
This is not the case only in Italy.
To ne drži v primeru Italije.
By analogy, in point 371 of its investigation on BSkyB (CA98/20/2002), the Office of Fair Trading describes the relevance of customer acquisition for BSkyB.
Po analogiji Urad za pošteno trgovino v točki 371 svoje preiskave o družbi BSkyB (CA98/20/2002) opisuje pomen pridobitve strank za družbo BSkyB.
OJ C 350 1994, p. 5.
UL C 350 1994, str. 5.
See Section III.3.
Glej oddelek III.3.
Many advanced graduate-level books on econometrics contain an introduction to these models.
Številne bolj specializirane znanstvene knjige o ekonometriji vključujejo uvod k tem modelom.
See for example W.
Glej na primer W.
Greene (2000), Econometric Analysis, fourth ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ or G.S.
Greene (2000), Econometric Analysis, fourth ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, ali G.S.
This is confirmed by developments in other Member States.
To potrjujejo dogodki v drugih državah članicah.
For example, in the UK, in the investigation into BskyB quoted above, the Office of Fair Trading came to the conclusion that live Football Association Premier League games were a single relevant market across television platforms.
V Združenem kraljestvu je na primer v zgoraj navedeni preiskavi družbe BSkyB Urad za pošteno trgovino (Office of Fair Trading) ugotovil, da je prenos nogometnih tekem Football Association Premier League v živo edini pomemben trg na vseh televizijskih platform.
The aid in question was granted without prior notification.
Zadevna pomoč je bila dodeljena brez predhodne priglasitve.
In addition, the existence of exceptional circumstances cannot be established in this case since there is no element that could lead the recipient company to believe that it was entitled to assume, on the basis of specific facts or Commission assurances, that a benefit accorded to it by the public authorities was not to be regarded as aid.
Poleg tega je v tem primeru nemogoče ugotoviti obstoj izjemnih okoliščin, saj ne obstaja noben element, ki bi lahko družbo prejemnico pripravil do tega, da bi verjela, da lahko na podlagi posebnih dejstev ali zagotovil Komisije upravičeno domneva, da ugodnosti, ki so ji jo podelili javni organi, ni treba šteti za pomoč.
In the present case, the State paid a subsidy to private individuals for the purchase of certain decoders.
V zadevnem primeru je država izplačala subvencijo fizičnim osebam za nakup določenih sprejemnikov.
However, neither the consumers nor the producers of decoders can be deemed to have benefited from State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Vendar pa ni mogoče šteti, da so uporabniki in proizvajalci sprejemnikov imeli korist od državne pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
The mere fact of a legal deadline is not enough to secure switch-off unless demand is stimulated.
Obstoj zakonskega roka še ne zadošča za zagotovitev izklopa, razen če se ne spodbudi povpraševanje.
Consumers would not be willing to make the change-over given that the incumbent terrestrial broadcasters have no interest in subsidising their purchase of a decoder in a situation where most consumers use analogical terrestrial TV.
Uporabniki ne bodo pripravljeni narediti prehoda, saj prvotni prizemni izdajatelji televizijskega programa niso zainteresirani za subvencioniranje nakupa sprejemnika uporabnikom v razmerah, kjer večina uporabnikov uporablja analogno prizemno televizijo.
Furthermore, they do not contest the preliminary conclusion that the measure does not constitute aid for producers of decoders.
Poleg tega ne spodbijajo predhodnega sklepa, da ukrep ni pomoč za proizvajalce sprejemnikov.
See footnote 14.
Nav. (glej sprotno opombo 14).
See recital 18.
Glej uvodno izjavo 18.
As a result of the commitments given, Sky Italia was requested to give up its terrestrial activities.
Zaradi danih zavez se je od družbe Sky Italia zahtevalo, naj opusti izvajanje svojih prizemnih dejavnosti.
It cannot operate in Italy as a terrestrial network operator or terrestrial pay-TV operator.
Družba v Italiji ne more delovati kot prizemni omrežni operater ali operater prizemne plačljive televizije.
Mediaset maintains that there have been no unnecessary distortions of competition because (i) discrimination is simply the result of Sky's business choices; (ii) terrestrial television carries local channels, whereas 80 % of local programmes are not carried by satellite TV because local channels' revenue is not sufficient to support the cost of transmission (satellite is not comparable to free-to-air broadcasting); and (iii) there is only market failure as regards DTT decoders and not satellite decoders.
Družba Mediaset trdi, da ni bilo nobenega nepotrebnega izkrivljanja konkurence, ker (i) je diskriminacija preprosto rezultat poslovnih izbir družbe Sky; (ii) prizemna televizija prenaša lokalne kanale, medtem ko 80 % lokalnih programov ne prenaša satelitska televizija, ker prihodki lokalnih kanalov ne zadostujejo za kritje stroškov prenosa (satelitska radiodifuzija ni primerljiva z brezplačno radiodifuzijo), in (iii) obstaja tržna nepopolnost samo glede sprejemnikov DTT in ne satelitskih sprejemnikov.
This is because satellite is based on a subscription fee system and can recoup the costs of providing decoders to its own customers and because Sky, as a monopolist, is not subject to the free riding problem.
To je zato, ker satelitska radiodifuzija temelji na sistemu naročnin in lahko nadomesti stroške zagotavljanja sprejemnikov lastnim strankam in ker se družba Sky kot monopolist ne spopada s problemom parazitiranja.
Second, Sky Italia launched its conversion to a technology with closed standards during 2004 and up to the beginning of 2005.
Drugič, družba Sky Italia je začela svoj prehod na tehnologijo z zaprtimi standardi v letu 2004 in do začetka leta 2005.
It cannot be ruled out that Sky Italia would have made a different choice if the aid measure had also included satellite.
Ni možno izključiti, da bi bila izbira družbe Sky Italia drugačna, če bi ukrep pomoči vključeval tudi satelitsko platformo.
Moreover, as stated in the decision to initiate the procedure, the fact that satellite operators are explicitly excluded from the aid measure is unnecessary.
Kot je bilo poleg tega navedeno v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, je dejstvo, da so satelitski operaterji izrecno izključeni iz ukrepa pomoči, nepotrebno.
It also has the effect of distorting competition on the pay-TV market where some of the beneficiaries are incumbent operators on the very concentrated market of terrestrial analogue TV and can rely on very large audiences.
Ukrep prav tako vpliva na izkrivljanje konkurence na trgu plačljive televizije, kjer so nekateri izmed upravičencev prvotni operaterji na zelo koncentriranem trgu prizemne analogne televizije in se lahko zanašajo na zelo veliko gledalstvo.
Article 4(1) of the 2004 Finance Act provides for a public grant of EUR 150 for users who purchase or rent a set up box or decoder (hereinafter referred to as decoder) capable of receiving TV signals transmitted using digital terrestrial technology and the associated interactive services, and allocates a total budget of EUR 110 million for the purpose. It should be noted that decoders which do not receive digital terrestrial signals are not entitled to the grant even if they allow the reception and utilisation of the interactive services.
Člen 4(1) finančnega zakona za leto 2004 predvideva javna nepovratna sredstva v višini 150 EUR za uporabnike, ki kupijo ali najamejo TV-komunikator ali sprejemnik (v nadaljevanju „sprejemnik“), ki lahko sprejema televizijske signale, ki se prenašajo z digitalno prizemno tehnologijo, in povezane interaktivne storitve, in v ta namen dodeljuje skupna proračunska sredstva v višini 110 milijonov EUR. Treba je opozoriti, da sprejemniki, ki ne sprejemajo digitalnih prizemnih signalov, niso upravičeni do nepovratnih sredstev, tudi če omogočajo sprejem in uporabo interaktivnih storitev.
‘for 2004, each user of the broadcasting service who has fulfilled his obligations regarding payment of the relevant subscription fee for the year in progress and who purchases or rents a device allowing the reception, free-to-air and at no cost to the user or to the content provider, of television signals transmitted using digital terrestrial technology (T-DVB/C-DVB) and the resulting interactivity shall be entitled to a public grant of EUR 150. Award of the grant shall be made within the spending limit of EUR 110 million’.
„je v letu 2004 vsak uporabnik radiodifuzijske storitve, ki je izpolnil svoje obveznosti glede plačila ustrezne naročnine za tekoče leto in ki kupi ali najame napravo, ki omogoča sprejem, brezplačen in brez stroškov za uporabnika ali ponudnika vsebine, televizijskih signalov, ki se prenašajo z uporabo digitalne prizemne tehnologije (T-DVB/C-DVB), in povezanih interaktivnih vsebin, upravičen do javnih nepovratnih sredstev v višini 150 EUR. Nepovratna sredstva se dodelijo v okviru omejene porabe v višini 110 milijonov EUR.“
A diligent operator should normally be able to determine whether that procedure has been followed’. It is only in cases where the recipient can rely ‘on exceptional circumstances on the basis of which it had legitimately assumed the aid to be lawful’ that it can decline to refund that aid.
Skrben operater mora biti običajno sposoben ugotoviti, ali se je postopek upošteval.“ Samo v primerih, kjer se prejemnik lahko sklicuje „na izjemne okoliščine, na podlagi katerih je legitimno domneval, da je pomoč zakonita“, lahko zavrne vračilo pomoči.
of 7 February 2007
z dne 7. februarja 2007
concerning the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Gardanne, in the Shannon region and in Sardinia implemented by France, Ireland and Italy respectively (C 78/2001 (ex NN 22/01), C 79/2001 (ex NN 23/01), C 80/2001 (ex NN 26/01))
o oprostitvi plačila trošarine za mineralna olja, ki se uporabljajo kot gorivo pri proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida v regiji Gardanne, v regiji Shannon in na Sardiniji, ki se izvaja v Franciji, na Irskem in v Italiji (C 78/2001 (ex NN 22/01), C 79/2001 (ex NN 23/01), C 80/2001 (ex NN 26/01))
(notified under document number C(2007) 286)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 286)
(Only the English, French and Italian versions are authentic)
(Besedila v angleškem, francoskem in italijanskem jeziku so edina verodostojna)
1 PROCEDURE
POSTOPEK
Taxation of mineral oils has been subject to harmonisation at Community level since the entry into force of Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils.
Obdavčitev mineralnih olj se usklajuje na ravni Skupnosti vse od začetka veljavnosti Direktive Sveta 92/81/EGS z dne 19. oktobra 1992 o uskladitvi trošarinskih struktur za mineralna olja.
The use of mineral oils for alumina production was not excluded from the scope of Directive 92/81/EEC, nor was it the object of a compulsory or optional exemption under Article 8 of that Directive.
Uporaba mineralnih olj pri proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida ni bila izključena iz področja uporabe Direktive 92/81/EGS, niti ni bila predmet obvezne ali neobvezne oprostitve plačila trošarine v skladu s členom 8 navedene direktive.
Article 6 of Council Directive 92/82/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the approximation of the rates of excise duties on mineral oils established a minimum rate of excise duty on heavy fuel oil, which Member States had to apply from 1 January 1993.
Člen 6 Direktive Sveta 92/82/EGS z dne 19. oktobra 1992 o približevanju trošarinskih stopenj za mineralna olja je določil najnižjo trošarinsko stopnjo za težko kurilno olje, ki jo morajo države članice uporabljati od 1. januarja 1993.
By various decisions, however, the Council authorised France, Ireland and Italy to exempt mineral oils used for alumina production in, respectively, the Gardanne, in the Shannon region and on Sardinia, from the excise duty which would otherwise have been imposed.
Vendar pa je Svet z različnimi odločbami Franciji, Irski in Italiji za mineralna olja, uporabljena pri proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida v regiji Gardanne, regiji Shannon oziroma na Sardiniji, dovolil oprostitev plačila trošarine, ki bi jo bilo sicer treba plačati.
The most recent decision is Council Decision 2001/224/EC of 12 March 2001 concerning reduced rates of excise duty and exemptions from such duty on certain mineral oils when used for specific purposes, which authorises the exemptions until 31 December 2006.
Zadnja odločba je Odločba Sveta 2001/224/ES z dne 12. marca 2001 o nižjih trošarinskih stopnjah in oprostitvah plačila trošarine za nekatera mineralna olja, če so uporabljena v posebne namene, ki dovoljuje oprostitve plačila trošarin do 31. decembra 2006.
Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity repealed Directive 92/82/EEC as from 31 December 2003.
Direktiva Sveta 2003/96/ES z dne 27. oktobra 2003 o prestrukturiranju okvira Skupnosti za obdavčitev energentov in električne energije je z 31. decembrom 2003 razveljavila Direktivo 92/82/EGS.
Article 2(4)(b) of Directive 2003/96/EC, states that the Directive does not apply to a number of uses of energy, including dual use of energy products.
Člen 2(4)(b) Direktive 2003/96/ES navaja, da se Direktiva ne uporablja za vrsto načinov uporabe energentov, vključno za dvojno uporabo energentov.
The second indent of Article 2(4)(b) states that the use of energy products for chemical reduction and in electrolytic and metallurgical processes is to be regarded as dual use.
Druga alinea člena 2(4)(b) navaja, da uporaba energentov za kemijsko redukcijo in elektrolitične in metalurške procese šteje za dvojno uporabo.
The use of heavy fuel for alumina production falls within this category.
Uporaba težkega goriva pri proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida se uvršča v to kategorijo.
Therefore, as from 31 December 2003, the minimum excise duty for heavy fuel no longer applies to fuel used in the production of alumina.
Zato se od 31. decembra 2003 za gorivo, uporabljeno v proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida, ne uporablja več najnižja trošarinska stopnja za težko gorivo.
The derogations in Decision 2001/224/EC and other similar derogations were incorporated into Annex II of Directive 2003/96/EC.
Odstopanja iz Odločbe 2001/224/ES in druga podobna odstopanja so bila vključena v Prilogo II k Direktivi 2003/96/ES.
By Decisions C(2001)3296, C(2001)3300 and C(2001)3295 of 30 October 2001 the Commission initiated the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the Treaty with respect to the exemptions.
Komisija je z odločitvami C(2001) 3296, C(2001) 3300 in C(2001) 3295 z dne 30. oktobra 2001 glede oprostitev sprožila postopek na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe.
By Commission Decision 2006/323/EC of 7 December 2005 (notified under document number C(2005)4436), the Commission closed that procedure in respect of the aid granted during the period to 31 December 2003, declaring part of the aid to be incompatible with the common market.
Komisija je z Odločbo Komisije 2006/323/ES z dne 7. decembra 2005 (notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2005) 4436) zaključila navedeni postopek v zvezi s pomočjo, dodeljeno v obdobju do 31. decembra 2003, in razglasila, da je del pomoči nezdružljiv s skupnim trgom.
As regards the period from 1 January 2004, the procedure was extended.
Za obdobje po 1. januarju 2004 pa je bil postopek podaljšan.
Recitals 6 to 15 of Decision 2006/323/EC provide a detailed description of the correspondence between the Commission, the Member States concerned, the beneficiaries of the aid and the European Aluminium Association (hereinafter ‘EAA’) prior to December 2005.
Uvodne izjave 6 do 15 Odločbe 2006/323/ES podajajo podroben opis korespondence med Komisijo, zadevnimi državami članicami, prejemniki pomoči in Evropskim združenjem za aluminij (v nadaljnjem besedilu „EAA“) pred decembrom 2005.
Decision 2006/323/EC was sent to France, Ireland and Italy by letters of 8 December 2005 (D/206670, D/206671, D/206673).
Odločba 2006/323/ES je bila poslana Franciji, Irski in Italiji z dopisi z dne 8. decembra 2005 (D/206670, D/206671, D/206673).
It was sent to the beneficiaries concerned and the EAA by letters of 23 January 2006 (D/50525, D/50526, D/50527 and D/50528).
Zadevnim upravičencem in EAA je bila poslana z dopisi z dne 23. januarja 2006 (D/50525, D/50526, D/50527 in D/50528).
The three Member States and two beneficiaries appealed the decision.
Tri države članice in dva upravičenca so se na odločbo pritožili.
The Irish beneficiary, Aughinish Alumina Ltd (hereinafter ‘Aughinish’) also applied for the suspension of operation of the decision.
Irski upravičenec, Aughinish Alumina Ltd (v nadaljnjem besedilu „Aughinish“), je vložil tudi predlog za odlog izvršbe odločbe.
That application was registered as Case T-69/06R.
Prošnja je bila evidentirana kot zadeva T-69/06R.
By order of 2 August 2006 the Court of First Instance dismissed the application for interim measures.
Sodišče prve stopnje je z odredbo z dne 2. avgusta 2006 zavrnilo predlog za izdajo začasne odredbe.
Decision 2006/323/EC was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 4 May 2006 and third parties were invited to submit comments by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 9 May 2006.
Odločba 2006/323/ES je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije4. maja 2006 in tretje stranke so bile z obvestilom, ki je bilo objavljeno v Uradnem listu Evropske unije9. maja 2006, pozvane, naj predložijo svoje pripombe.
The Commission received comments from Aughinish in a letter dated 9 June 2006 (registered the same day under A/34490) and from Eurallumina SpA (hereinafter ‘Eurallumina’), the Italian beneficiary, in a letter dated 24 dated 2006 (registered on 25 July 2006 under A/35967).
Komisija je prejela pripombe Aughinisha z dopisom z dne 9. junija 2006 (evidentiranim istega dne pod številko A/34490) in Eurallumina SpA (v nadaljnjem besedilu „Eurallumina“), italijanskega upravičenca, z dopisom z dne 24. julija 2006 (evidentiranim 25. julija 2006 pod številko A/35967).
The latter was sent and received only after the delay of one month set out in the invitation for comments published in the Official Journal of the European Union and therefore the Commission is in principle not obliged to take the comments into account in the framework of this procedure.
Slednji dopis je bil poslan in prejet šele po enomesečnem odlogu, določenem v pozivu za predložitev pripomb, objavljenem v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, tako da Komisiji v okviru tega postopka načeloma ni treba upoštevati teh pripomb.
The Commission informed Eurallumina to that effect by letter dated 2 August 2006 (D/56648).
Komisija je o tem obvestila Eurallumina z dopisom z dne 2. avgusta 2006 (D/56648).
Eurallumina replied by letter dated 3 August 2006 (registered on 4 August 2006 under A/36269).
Eurallumina je odgovoril z dopisom z dne 3. avgusta 2006 (evidentiranim 4. avgusta 2006 pod številko A/36269).
Nevertheless, the Commission notes that the comments raised by Eurallumina repeat many of the comments the Commission had already received in the context of the previous decision and is similar to the comments received in due time, which are addressed in this decision.
Komisija kljub temu meni, da pripombe Eurallumine vsebujejo veliko pripomb, ki jih je Komisija že prejela v okviru predhodne odločbe, in da so podobne pravočasno prejetim pripombam, ki so obravnavane v tej odločbi.
The comments from Aughinish were forwarded to France, Ireland and Italy by letters dated 20 June 2006 (D/55106, D/55107 and D/55109).
Pripombe Aughinisha so bile poslane Franciji, Irski in Italiji z dopisi z dne 20. junija 2006 (D/55106, D/55107 in D/55109).
France and Ireland requested an extension of the time limit for responding to Decision 2006/323/EC, which was granted by the Commission.
Francija in Irska sta zaprosili za podaljšanje roka za odgovor na Odločbo 2006/323/ES in Komisija je njuni prošnji ugodila.
The Commission reminded Ireland and Italy of its invitation for comments by letters dated 9 March 2006 (D/52054 and D/52055).
Komisija je opomnila Irsko in Italijo na svoj poziv k predložitvi pripomb z dopisoma z dne 9. marca 2006 (D/52054 in D/52055).
France, Ireland and Italy commented on the Commission's decision by letters dated 14 February 2006 (registered on 15 February 2006 under A/31248), 12 April 2006 (registered on 18 April 2006 under A/32940) and 17 May 2006 (registered on 18 May 2006 under A/33852), respectively.
Francija, Irska in Italija so poslale pripombe na odločbo Komisije z dopisi z dne 14. februarja 2006 (evidentiranim 15. februarja 2006 pod številko A/31248), 12. aprila 2006 (evidentiranim 18. aprila 2006 pod številko A/32940) in 17. maja 2006 (evidentiranim 18. maja 2006 pod številko A/33852), v tem zaporedju.
France commented on Aughinish' comments by letter dated 27 July 2006 (registered on 28 July 2006 under A/35952).
Francija je poslala pripombe na pripombe Aughinisha z dopisom z dne 27. julija 2006 (evidentiranim 28. julija 2006 pod številko A/35952).
By e-mail of 24 July 2006, Italy informed the Commission that it did not have any further observations to make.
Italija je z elektronskim sporočilom z dne 24. julija 2006 obvestila Komisijo, da nima več nobenih dodatnih pripomb.
2 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURES CONCERNED
PODROBEN OPIS ZADEVNIH UKREPOV
The measures consist of full exemptions from the excise duty on industrial heavy oil when used for alumina production.
Ukrepi sestojijo iz popolne oprostitve plačila trošarine za industrijska težka olja, kadar se uporabljajo pri proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida.
The beneficiaries of the French, Irish and Italian exemption are, respectively, Alcan, Aughinish and Eurallumina.
Upravičenci oprostitve v Franciji, na Irskem in v Italiji so Alcan, Aughinish in Eurallumina, v tem zaporedju.
The Irish exemption is contained in Section 100(1)(e) of the Irish Finance Act 1999, which grants relief from mineral oil tax on ‘fuel oil intended for use in, or in connection with, the manufacture of alumina, or for the maintenance of the manufactory in which the said manufacture is carried on’.
Irska oprostitev je vsebovana v oddelku 100(1)(e) irskega Finančnega zakona iz leta 1999, ki odobrava oprostitev plačila davka na mineralno olje za „kurilno olje, ki je namenjeno proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida, ali je povezano z njo, ali ohranitvi proizvodnega obrata, v katerem poteka navedena proizvodnja“.
The explanatory memorandum of the Finance Act explains that ‘section 100 provides for relief from mineral oil tax in respect of oil used for particular purposes or in other particular situations.
Obrazložitveni memorandum Finančnega zakona navaja, da „oddelek 100 zagotavlja oprostitev plačila davka na mineralno olje za olje, ki se uporablja za posebne namene ali v drugih posebnih okoliščinah.