natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nevertheless, the information on the alumina markets provided to the Commission confirms that the authorization of a major part of the aid is appropriate and, as concluded above, can be justified under point 51(1)(b) of the Environmental aid guidelines by the overall positive results obtained in environmental terms through the adoption of taxes.
Kljub temu informacije o trgih aluminijevega oksida, ki jih je zagotovila Komisija, potrjujejo, da je odobritev večine pomoči primerna in da je lahko, kot je bilo sklenjeno zgoraj, v skladu s točko 51(1)(b) smernic za okoljsko pomoč upravičena s splošnimi pozitivnimi rezultati na okoljskem področju, ki so posledica sprejetja davkov.
This authorisation is, however, subject to the beneficiaries paying more than the Community minimum rates or a significant proportion of the domestic tax, which is considered necessary to provide firms with an incentive to improve environmental protection.
Vendar pa morajo upravičenci pri tej odobritvi plačati več od najnižjega zneska Skupnosti ali pomemben del državnega davka, kar velja za potrebno spodbudo podjetjem, da izboljšajo varstvo okolja.
There are no grounds for relying on other provisions in other communications of the Commission with respect to the part of the aid that cannot be found compatible on the basis of the Environmental aid guidelines.
Za tisti del pomoči, ki v skladu s smernicami za okoljsko pomoč ne more veljati za združljivega, ni nobenega razloga za opiranje na druge določbe v drugih sporočilih Komisije.
As there are no other grounds for finding the aid to be compatible with the common market, the only aid that can be found compatible is the part of the aid complying with the Environmental aid guidelines as specified in recital (50).
Ker ni drugih razlogov, na podlagi katerih bi ugotovili, da je pomoč združljiva s skupnim trgom, je mogoče združljivost s skupnim trgom ugotoviti samo za del pomoči, ki ustreza smernicam za okoljsko pomoč, kot je bilo opredeljeno v uvodni izjavi 50.
6 RECOVERY OF THE INCOMPATIBLE AID
VRAČILO NEZDRUŽLJIVE POMOČI
Under Article 14(1) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, where negative decisions are taken in cases of unlawful aid, the Commission must decide that the Member State concerned is to take all necessary measures to recover the aid from the beneficiary.
V skladu s členom 14(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 se Komisija v primerih nezakonite pomoči, za katere se sprejmejo negativne odločbe, odloči, da mora zadevna država članica sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe, da upravičenec vrne pomoč.
Recitals (95)-(100) of Decision 2006/323/EC explain why the principles of legitimate expectations and of legal certainty, or any other general principle of Community law, preclude recovery from the beneficiaries of the unlawful and incompatible aid granted until 2 February 2002.
Uvodne izjave 95 do 100 Odločbe 2006/323/ES razlagajo, zakaj načelo legitimnih pričakovanj in načelo pravne varnosti ali katero koli drugo od splošnih načel prava Skupnosti preprečujejo izterjavo nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči, dodeljene do 2. februarja 2002, od upravičencev.
However, recitals 101 and 102 of the decision explain why these principles do not preclude the recovery of the unlawful and incompatible aid granted from 3 February 2002 until 31 December 2003.
Vendar pa uvodni izjavi 101 in 102 razlagata, zakaj ta načela ne preprečujejo izterjave nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči, dodeljene med 3. februarjem 2002 in 31. decembrom 2003.
The arguments in these latter recitals are also equally applicable with respect to the aid granted as from 1 January 2004.
Utemeljitve iz zadnjih uvodnih izjav se prav tako uporabljajo za pomoč, dodeljeno od 1. januarja 2004.
In addition, the preparation and adoption of Directive 2003/96/EC cannot have given rise to legitimate expectations on the part of the beneficiaries, nor is recovery precluded by the principle of legal certainty.
Poleg tega priprava in sprejetje Direktive 2003/96/ES pri upravičencih ni mogla vzbuditi legitimnih pričakovanj, niti načelo pravne varnosti ne preprečuje izterjave.
Recital 32 of the preamble to the Directive refers to the obligation laid down in Article 88(3) of the Treaty upon Member States to notify State aid and it explicitly stipulates that the Directive ‘does not prejudice the outcome of any future State aid procedure that may be undertaken in accordance with Article 87 and 88 of the Treaty’.
Uvodna izjava 32 preambule k direktivi se nanaša na obveznost iz člena 88(3) Pogodbe, po kateri morajo države članice priglasiti državno pomoč, in izrecno določa, da ta direktiva „ne vpliva na izid kakršnih koli prihodnjih postopkov glede državnih pomoči, ki bi bili lahko začeti v skladu s členoma 87 in 88 Pogodbe“.
The reference to any future State aid procedure in that recital cannot be understood as an authorisation of aid subject of a procedure that had already started when the Directive was adopted.
Sklicevanja na kakršne koli prihodnje postopke glede državnih pomoči v navedeni uvodni izjavi ni mogoče razumeti kot odobritve pomoči v skladu s postopkom, ki se je že začel, ko je bila direktiva sprejeta.
In fact, the same wording was already present in recital 6 of the preamble to Decision 2001/224/EC, which extended the derogations until the end of 2006.
Pravzaprav je bila enaka formulacija vključena že v uvodno izjavo 6 preambule k Odločbi 2001/224/ES, s katero so se odstopanja podaljšala do konca leta 2006.
The explanatory memorandum that accompanies the Commission's proposal for that decision reads ‘The Commission proposes to (…) extend for a two-year period the (…) derogations which require a detailed examination, in particular in the light of the State aid rules (…) Nevertheless, nothing in this Decision overrides the requirement for Member States to notify instances of potential State aid to the Commission under Article 88 of the Treaty.
Obrazložitveni memorandum, ki je priložen k predlogu Komisije za navedeno odločbo, se glasi: „Komisija predlaga, da […] se podaljša dveletno obdobje za […] odstopanja, ki zahtevajo podrobno preverjanje, zlasti glede na pravila o državni pomoči […] Kljub temu nič iz te odločbe ne razveljavlja zahteve, da države članice Komisijo v skladu s členom 88 Pogodbe obvestijo o primerih morebitne državne pomoči.
Recital 22 of the preamble to Directive 2003/96/EC states that: ‘energy products should essentially be subject to a Community framework when used as heating fuel or motor fuel.
Uvodna izjava 22 preambule k Direktivi 2003/96/ES navaja, da: „za energente praviloma velja pravni okvir Skupnosti, če se uporabljajo kot gorivo za ogrevanje ali pogonsko gorivo.
To that extent, it is in the nature and the logic of the tax system to exclude from the scope of the framework dual uses and non-fuel uses of energy products as well as mineralogical processes.
V tem pogledu narava in logika davčnega sistema narekujeta, da se iz obsega okvira izključi dvojno uporabo energentov in njihovo uporabo kot negoriv kakor tudi za mineraloške postopke.
(…)’ That recital, although not referring to Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty, cannot be understood to restrict the concept of State aid as laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty. The Commission explained the notion of general measures in a Staff Working Paper which explained: ‘In this matter, the situation in each individual Member State has to be analysed, to define the general excise duty system applicable at national level’.
[…]“ Navedena uvodna izjava se sicer ne sklicuje na člena 87 in 88 Pogodbe, vendar je vseeno ni mogoče razumeti, kot da omejuje koncept državne pomoči, kot je določen v členu 87(1) Pogodbe.
That paper was discussed in the meeting of the Council Working Party on 14 November 2002.
Komisija je razložila pojem splošnih ukrepov v delovnem dokumentu služb, v katerem je razloženo: „V tej zadevi je treba analizirati položaj v vsaki posamezni državi članici in opredeliti sistem splošnih trošarin, ki se uporablja na nacionalni ravni.“ Dokument je bil obravnavan na sestanku delovne skupine Sveta 14. novembra 2002.
The paper continues with an explanation of the conditions under which aid in the form of tax measures can be found compatible with the common market.
Dokument v nadaljevanju podaja razlago pogojev, v skladu s katerimi je pomoč v obliki davčnih ukrepov lahko združljiva s skupnim trgom.
The minutes of the Council meeting of 27 October 2003, when Directive 2003/96/EC was adopted, expressly refer to the explanations given during the meeting of the Council Working Party on 14 November 2002.
Zapisnik zasedanja Sveta z dne 27. oktobra 2003, ko je bila sprejeta Direktiva 2003/96/ES, se izrecno sklicuje na razlage, ki so bile podane na sestanku delovne skupine Sveta 14. novembra 2002.
Although ‘dual use of energy’ does not fall within the scope of Directive 2003/96/EC, Article 18 of the Directive authorises the Member States to continue to apply the exemptions listed in Annex II thereto.
Čeprav „dvojna uporaba energentov“ ne sodi v področje uporabe Direktive 2003/96/ES, člen 18 Direktive pooblašča države članice, da še naprej uporabljajo oprostitve, kakor so določene v Prilogi II.
That Annex includes the three exemptions to which this Decision relates, for the period foreseen in the last extension in 2001, that is to say, until 31 December 2006.
Navedena priloga vključuje vse tri oprostitve, na katere se nanaša odločba, za obdobje, predvideno pri zadnjem podaljšanju leta 2001, torej do 31. decembra 2006.
The authorisation is, however, not an authorisation under the State aid rules which the Commission is competent to enforce.
Vendar pa to ni odobritev v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči, za uveljavljanje katerih je pristojna Komisija.
To the contrary, this precisely demonstrates the potential relevance of recital 32.
Nasprotno, ravno to kaže na morebitno relevantnost uvodne izjave 32.
The argument put forward by the Member States and beneficiaries that the authorisation by the Council overrides the State aid procedures is incorrect.
Utemeljitev držav članic in upravičencev, da odobritev Sveta razveljavlja postopke državne pomoči, ni pravilna.
When Directive 2003/96/EC was adopted, the Commission and the Council jointly declared that ‘the Commission should go to the greatest possible length to ensure that measures taken by Member States in accordance with the exemptions and tax reductions laid down in the Directive will be considered compatible with state aid rules’.
Ko je bila sprejeta Direktiva 2003/96/ES, sta Komisija in Svet skupaj razglasila, da „bi morala Komisija storiti vse, kar je v njeni moči, za zagotovitev, da bi ukrepi, ki jih države članice sprejmejo v skladu z oprostitvami in znižanji davkov iz direktive, veljali za združljive s pravili o državni pomoči“.
Of course, the Commission must act within the framework of applicable State aid rules, in this case in particular the Environmental aid guidelines.
Komisija mora seveda delovati v okviru veljavnih pravil o državni pomoči, v tem primeru zlasti v skladu s smernicami za okoljsko pomoč.
In any event, that statement does not apply to the exemptions to which this decision relates, since they do not fall within the scope of the Directive.
Navedena izjava pa se vsekakor ne uporablja za oprostitve, na katere se nanaša ta odločba, saj ne sodijo v področje uporabe Direktive.
Directive 2003/96/EC, the Staff Working Paper and the joint Commission and Council statement referred to above have never confirmed the absence of incompatible State aid.
Direktiva 2003/96/ES, delovni dokument služb ter zgornja skupna izjava Komisije in Sveta niso nikoli potrdili, da nezdružljiva državna pomoč ne bi obstajala.
It should be recalled that the Commission had initiated the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) and any interested party could have asked the Commission to adopt a final decision.
Treba je spomniti, da je Komisija sprožila postopek iz člena 88(2) in da bi lahko katera koli zainteresirana stranka zaprosila Komisijo, naj sprejme dokončno odločitev.
The initiation of a procedure under Article 88(2) vitiated the further existence of legitimate expectations (if any) as to the absence of incompatible aid.
Sprožitev postopka iz člena 88(2) je ogrozila nadaljnji obstoj upravičenih izjem (če so sploh obstajale) zaradi odsotnosti nezdružljive pomoči.
Decision 2001/224/EC and earlier Council decisions on the exemptions were not State aid decisions.
Odločba 2001/224/ES in predhodne odločbe Sveta o oprostitvah niso bile odločbe o državni pomoči.
In fact, the Commission has long expressed doubts about the compatibility of the exemptions with the State aid rules.
Pravzaprav je Komisija že dolgo izražala dvome o združljivosti oprostitev s pravili o državni pomoči.
As regards the duration of the investigation in this case, the Commission considered it necessary to await the adoption of Directive 2003/96/EC and to extend the procedure by Decision 2006/323/EC, in order to seek the views of the Member States on the situation in each Member State resulting from the transposition of Directive 2003/96/EC which permitted a number of possible outcomes.
Kar zadeva trajanje preiskave v tem primeru, se je Komisiji zdelo potrebno počakati na sprejetje Direktive 2003/96/ES in podaljšati postopek z Odločbo 2006/323/ES, tako da bi lahko pridobila stališča držav članic na položaj v vsaki državi članici, ki bi nastal zaradi prenosa Direktive 2003/96/ES, ki omogoča vrsto možnih izidov.
In any event, a ‘prudent businessman’ should be aware that once an investigation starts into unlawful aid, then should the investigation find that aid to be incompatible with the Treaty, the almost inevitable consequence is that the Commission will order the recovery of the aid.
Kakor koli, „preudaren poslovnež“ bi se moral zavedati naslednjega: ko se enkrat začne preiskava o nezakoniti pomoči, obstaja možnost, da se izkaže, da je ta pomoč nezdružljiva s Pogodbo, in iz tega skoraj neizogibno izhaja, da bo Komisija odredila vračilo pomoči.
The Member States and the beneficiaries could have urged the Commission to conclude the procedure sooner, had they wished to consider alternative investments or alternative measures to comply with the Environmental aid guidelines.
Države članice in upravičenci bi lahko od Komisije zahtevali, da prej zaključi postopek, če bi želeli razmisliti o alternativnih naložbah ali alternativnih ukrepih, ki bi bili skladni s smernicami za okoljsko pomoč.
For these reasons, the beneficiaries cannot hold any legitimate expectations precluding the recovery of the incompatible State aid after 31 December 2003, nor is recovery precluded on the basis of the principle of legal certainty.
Zaradi vsega navedenega upravičenci ne morejo imeti pravno utemeljenih pričakovanj, ki bi preprečevala vračilo nezdružljive državne pomoči po 31. decembru 2003, poleg tega vračila ni mogoče preprečiti niti na podlagi načela pravne varnosti.
7 SUSPENSION OF PAYMENT OF COMPATIBLE AID
ODLOG PLAČILA ZDRUŽLJIVE POMOČI
In its judgement in Case C-355/95P, Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH (TWD) v. Commission, the Court of Justice stated that ‘when the Commission examines the compatibility of a State aid with the common market it must take all the relevant factors into account, including, where appropriate, the circumstances already considered in a prior decision and the obligations which that decision may have imposed on a Member State’.
Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti je v svoji sodbi v zadevi C-355/95P, Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH (TWD) proti Komisiji, navedlo, da „mora Komisija pri preiskovanju združljivosti državne pomoči s skupnim trgom upoštevati vse pomembne dejavnike, kar po potrebi zajema tudi okoliščine, ki so bile že raziskane v predhodni odločbi, in obveznosti, ki so bile z navedeno odločbo mogoče naložene državi članici“.
According to the Court of Justice, the compatibility of a new aid could depend on the existence of a previous unlawful aid that has not been repaid, since the cumulative effect of the aids could distort competition in the common market to a significant extent.
Po mnenju Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti bi bila združljivost nove pomoči lahko odvisna od predhodnega obstoja nezakonite pomoči, ki ni bila povrnjena, saj bi lahko kumulativni učinek pomoči pomembno izkrivljal konkurenco na skupnem trgu.
Therefore the Commission, when it examines the compatibility of a State aid with the common market, has the power to take into consideration both the cumulative effect of this aid with an old one and the fact that such old aid has not been repaid.
Zato Komisija pri preiskovanju združljivosti državne pomoči s skupnim trgom lahko upošteva tako kumulativni učinek te pomoči s staro kot dejstvo, da takšna pomoč ni bila povrnjena.
Therefore, in application of this case-law, when the Commission assesses a new aid measure it takes into account the fact that the beneficiaries may not have complied with earlier Commission decisions ordering them to reimburse previous unlawful and incompatible aid.
Zato Komisija pri presojanju ukrepa nove pomoči v skladu s to sodno prakso upošteva dejstvo, da upravičenci mogoče niso ravnali v skladu s predhodnimi odločbami Komisije, s katerimi jim je odredila, naj povrnejo prej nezakonito in nezdružljivo pomoč.
In such cases, the Commission examines the effects on the beneficiaries of the combination of the new aid with the old incompatible aid which has not yet been reimbursed.
Komisija v takih primerih preveri učinke kombinacije nove pomoči in stare nezdružljive pomoči, ki še ni bila povrnjena, na upravičence.
France, Ireland and Italy have not yet effectively recovered the aid that the Commission found incompatible in Decision 2006/323/EC.
Francija, Irska in Italija niso še dejansko povrnile pomoči, za katero je Komisija v Odločbi 2006/323/ES ugotovila, da je nezdružljiva.
The cumulation of these aid amounts with otherwise compatible aid would continue to distort competition to an extent contrary to the common interest and no arguments were found to justify such a distortion.
Kumulacija teh zneskov pomoči s sicer združljivo pomočjo bo še naprej izkrivljala konkurenco v obsegu, ki je v nasprotju s skupnim interesom, poleg tega ni bilo razlogov, ki bi upravičili takšno izkrivljanje.
Therefore, any payment of compatible aid as described in point 50 above should be suspended until all incompatible aid has been recovered from the beneficiaries.
Zato je treba opustiti vsa plačila nezdružljive pomoči, kot je bila opisana v točki 50 zgoraj, dokler ne bodo upravičenci vrnili vse nezdružljive pomoči.
8 CONCLUSION
SKLEP
It is concluded that the exemptions from excise duty on heavy fuel oils used in the production of alumina granted by France, Ireland and Italy as from 1 January 2004 constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Sklepa se, da so oprostitve trošarine za težka kurilna olja, ki se uporabljajo v proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida in ki so jih Francija, Irska in Italija dodelile od 1. januarja 2004, državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The aid is partially incompatible with the common market as the beneficiaries did not pay a significant part of the tax.
Pomoč je delno nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, ker upravičenci niso plačali pomembnega deleža davka.
The part of the exemption which exceeds the rate of 20 % of the tax level which would otherwise have been payable or EUR 15,00 per 1000 kg, whichever is the lowest, can be found compatible with the common market on the condition that it is granted for a maximum of 10 years, after which the compatibility of the aid must be reviewed.
Del oprostitve, ki presega stopnjo 20 % ravni davka, ki bi ga sicer bilo treba plačati, ali 15,00 EUR na 1000 kg, kar koli je nižje, je lahko združljiv s skupnim trgom, če je bil dodeljen za največ 10 let, nakar je treba pomoč pregledati.
The remaining aid should be declared incompatible with the common market.
Preostalo pomoč je treba razglasiti za nezdružljivo s skupnim trgom.
France, Ireland and Italy should be required to take all necessary measures to recover the incompatible aid granted from 1 January 2004 onward from the recipients.
Od Francije, Irske in Italije je treba zahtevati, da sprejmejo vse potrebne ukrepe, da bodo od prejemnikov dobile vrnjeno nezdružljivo pomoč, ki je bila dodeljena od 1. januarja 2004 naprej.
France, Ireland and Italy should be required to suspend the application of the exemptions until they have recovered from the respective beneficiaries the aid held to be incompatible with the common market in Decision 2006/323/EC and in this Decision.
Od Francije, Irske in Italije je treba zahtevati, da opustijo uporabo oprostitev, dokler ne dobijo od svojih upravičencev povrnjene pomoči, ki je v skladu z Odločbo 2006/323/ES in to odločbo nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom.
The French, Irish and Italian authorities should forward a copy of this decision to the beneficiaries of the measures immediately,
Francoski, irski in italijanski organi morajo upravičencem ukrepov nemudoma poslati izvod te odločbe –
The exemptions from excise duty granted by France, Ireland and Italy in respect of heavy fuel oils used in the production of alumina as from 1 January 2004 constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Oprostitve plačila trošarin za težka kurilna olja, ki se uporabljajo v proizvodnji aluminijevega oksida in ki so jih Francija, Irska in Italija dodelile od 1. januarja 2004, so državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The aid referred to in Article 1 is compatible with the common market insofar as the beneficiaries pay at least a rate of 20 % of the excise tax which would otherwise have been payable or the minimum level of taxation as determined by Directive 2003/96 (EUR 15,00 per 1000 Kg), whichever is the lowest, subject to the condition that the aid is limited to a maximum duration of 10 years.
Pomoč iz člena 1 je združljiva s skupnim trgom, če upravičenci plačajo vsaj 20 % trošarine, ki bi jo morali plačati sicer, ali najnižjo raven obdavčitve, kot je določena v Direktivi 2003/96/ES (15,00 EUR na 1000 kg), kar koli je nižje, pod pogojem, da pomoč traja največ 10 let.
The aid referred to in Article 1 is incompatible with the common market insofar as the beneficiaries do not pay at least a rate of 20 % of the excise tax otherwise payable or the Community minimum (EUR 15,00 per 1000 Kg), whichever is the lowest.
Pomoč iz člena 1 ni združljiva s skupnim trgom, če upravičenci ne plačajo vsaj 20 % trošarine, ki bi jo morali plačati sicer, ali najnižji znesek Skupnosti (15,00 EUR na 1000 kg), kar koli je nižje.
France, Ireland and Italy shall take all necessary measures to recover from the beneficiaries the aid referred to in Article 3 and unlawfully made available to the beneficiaries.
Francija, Irska in Italija sprejmejo vse potrebne ukrepe, da od upravičencev izterjajo pomoč iz člena 3, ki je bila nezakonito dana na voljo upravičencem.
Recovery shall be effected without delay and in accordance with the procedures of national law provided that they allow the immediate and effective execution of the decision.
Vračilo se izvede nemudoma in v skladu s postopki nacionalne zakonodaje, če omogočajo takojšnje in učinkovito izvajanje odločbe.
The sums to be recovered shall include interest from the date on which it was at the disposal of the beneficiaries until the date of its recovery.
Pomoč, ki jo je treba povrniti, vključuje obresti od dneva, ko je bila dana na razpolago upravičencem, do dneva njenega vračila.
The interest shall be calculated in compound basis in conformity with the provisions laid down in Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
Obrestna mera se izračuna na podlagi obrestnoobrestnega računa v skladu z določbami poglavja V Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004.
France, Ireland and Italy shall cancel all payment of outstanding aid referred to in Article 3 with effect from the date of notification of this decision.
Francija, Irska in Italija prekličejo vsa izplačila neporavnane pomoči iz člena 3, z začetkom veljavnosti na datum obvestila o tej odločbi.
France, Ireland and Italy shall ensure that this decision is implemented within four months of the date of its notification.
Francija, Irska in Italija zagotovijo, da se ta odločba izvede v štirih mesecih od datuma obvestila o njej.