natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Court of Justice has held that the obligation to inform the Commission of plans to grant or alter aid as provided for in the first sentence of Article 88(3) of the Treaty does not apply solely to the initial plan but also covers subsequent alterations to that plan; such information may be supplied to the Commission in the course of the consultations which take place following the initial notification.
Po mnenju Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti obveznost, da je treba Komisijo obvestiti o projektih, ki naj bi uvedli ali spremenili pomoči iz prvega stavka člena 88(3) Pogodbe, ne velja samo za prvotni projekt, ampak tudi za poznejše spremembe tega projekta, pri čemer se razume, da se take informacije lahko Komisiji pošljejo v okviru posvetovanj, ki so posledica prvotne priglasitve.
The notification obligation is established by Article 1(c) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Ta obveznost priglasitve je bila obravnavana v točki 1(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
It must be noted that inclusion of an information sheet in the list of aids drawn up by the French Ministry of Agriculture merely has an informative value and cannot be described as a notification for the purpose of the Treaty.
Poleg tega je treba poudariti, da ima vključitev podatkovnega lista v seznam pomoči, ki ga izdela francosko ministrstvo za kmetijstvo, zgolj informativno vrednost in se ne more obravnavati kot priglasitev v smislu Pogodbe.
Moreover, the information in it makes no reference to the involvement of the water supply agencies in the programme but states that the State’s contribution is 35 % of the cost of the investments.
Sicer se informacije, ki so v njem navedene, prav tako ne sklicujejo na udeležbo agencij za vodo v programu, pri čemer trdijo, da prispevek države znaša 35 % stroškov naložb.
The Commission has not been able to assess the involvement of the water supply agencies in the programme or the impact that their involvement could have had on public assistance to the investments concerned.
Komisija ni mogla oceniti udeležbe agencij za vodo pri programu in vplivov, ki bi jih stopnja njihovega prispevka lahko imela na javno pomoč na ravni zadevnih naložb.
More specifically, it was not able to examine the possible impact that the involvement of a public body in financing the aid was likely to have in terms of the aid rate.
Dejansko ni mogla preučiti možnih posledic, ki bi jih udeležba javne ustanove pri financiranju pomoči lahko imela z vidika intenzivnosti pomoči.
Consequently, the aids actually granted by the French authorities did not necessarily comply with the conditions authorised by the Commission for State aids N 136/91 and N 342/94.
Iz tega sledi, da pomoči, ki so jih francoski organi dejansko dodelili, niso nujno ustrezale sistemom, ki jih je Komisija odobrila v okviru državnih pomoči št. N 136/91 in N 342/94.
Variation of the aid rate constituted per se a factor altering the substance of the aid which made notification within the meaning of Article 88(2) of the Treaty obligatory.
Spreminjanje intenzivnosti pomoči pomeni že samo po sebi element, ki spreminja vsebino pomoči, zaradi česar postane priglasitev obvezna v smislu člena 88(2) Pogodbe.
With regard to the beef and veal sector, the French authorities had not notified the Commission of the investment aid.
Zlasti v sektorju govejega mesa francoski organi Komisiji niso priglasile predvidenih pomoči za naložbe.
They claimed, however, that once the Commission deemed the scheme eligible for a Community financial contribution they were justified in deducing that it was compatible with Community rules.
Francoski organi so kljub temu trdile, da so, čim je Komisija menila, da je sistem upravičen do finančne udeležbe Skupnosti, utemeljeno sklepale o njegovi združljivosti z zakonodajo Skupnosti.
Article 12(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, which applied at that time, stipulated that aid for investment in the protection and improvement of the environment was authorised provided that it did not entail an increase in production and that it complied with Articles 92 to 94 (now 87 to 89) of the Treaty.
Toda Uredba (EGS) št. 2328/91, ki je takrat veljala, je v svojem členu 12(5) določala, da so pomoči za naložbe v zvezi z varstvom in izboljšanjem okolja odobrene, če ne vodijo do povečanja proizvodnje in če so skladne s členi 92 do 94 Pogodbe (sedaj 87 do 89).
That included the obligation to notify all State aid schemes within the meaning of the former Article 93(3) of the Treaty, all the more so as the conditions applied to the aids in 1994 were not the same as those communicated to the Commission in 1991.
To vključuje obveznost priglasitve vsake sheme državnih pomoči v smislu prejšnjega člena 93(3) Pogodbe, toliko bolj, ker pogoji, ki so veljali za pomoči leta 1994, niso bili enaki pogojem, o katerih je bila Komisija obveščena leta 1991.
It is clear from the above that the State aids put into effect by France were new aids not notified to the Commission and hence unlawful within the meaning of the Treaty.
Iz zgoraj navedenega izhaja, da so se državne pomoči, ki jih je izvajala Francija, štele med nove pomoči, ki niso bile priglašene Komisiji, ter so bile zaradi tega nezakonite v smislu Pogodbe.
Examination of the compatibility of the aid
Preučitev združljivosti pomoči
Article 87 of the Treaty does, however, provide for exceptions, even though some of them are clearly not applicable, particularly those provided for in paragraph 2 of the Article.
Člen 87 Pogodbe vseeno pozna izjeme, čeprav se nekatere med njimi očitno ne uporabljajo, zlasti tiste iz odstavka 2.
They were not invoked by the French authorities.
Francoski organi se na njih niso sklicevali.
With regard to the derogations provided for in Article 87(3) of the Treaty, these must be interpreted strictly during the examination of any regional or sectoral aid programme or of any individual case of the application of general aid schemes.
Kar zadeva izjeme iz člena 87(3) Pogodbe, jih je treba med preučitvijo vsake sheme pomoči za regionalni ali sektorski namen ali vsakega posameznega primera uporabe splošnih shem pomoči natančno razlagati.
They may be granted only if the Commission can establish that the aid is necessary for the realisation of one of the objectives in question.
Dodelijo se lahko samo, če bi Komisija lahko ugotovila, da je pomoč nujna za dosego enega od zadevnih ciljev.
Allowing such derogations to apply to aids which do not involve such a quid pro quo would be tantamount to permitting interference with trade between Member States and distortion of competition that has no justification in the light of Community interest and, by the same token, undue advantages to operators in certain Member States.
Dodelitev pravice do teh izjem za pomoči, ki na drugi strani ne prinašajo ničesar, bi omogočila škodljive učinke na trgovino med državami članicami in izkrivljanje konkurence, kar ne bi imelo nobenega opravičila z vidika interesa Skupnosti, ter vzporedno neupravičene prednosti za gospodarske subjekte iz določenih držav članic.
The Commission is of the opinion that the aids in question are not intended to promote the economic development of a region in which the standard of living is abnormally low or in which where there is serious underemployment within the meaning of Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty.
Komisija meni, da namen zadevnih pomoči ni bil pospeševanje gospodarskega razvoja določenega območja, kjer je življenjska raven izredno nizka ali kjer je podzaposlenost velika, v skladu s členom 87(3)(a) Pogodbe.
Nor are they intended to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State within the meaning of Article 87(3)(b), or to promote either culture or heritage conservation within the meaning of Article 87(3)(d).
Prav tako niso namenjene pospeševanju izvedbe pomembnega projekta skupnega evropskega interesa ali za odpravljanje resne motnje v gospodarstvu države članice v skladu s členom 87(3)(b) Pogodbe.
Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty stipulates that aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas may be considered to be compatible with the common market, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
Prav tako niso pomoči namenjene pospeševanju kulture in ohranjanja kulturne dediščine v skladu s členom 87(3)(d) Pogodbe. (75) Člen 87(3)(c) Pogodbe določa, da se kot združljivo s skupnim trgom lahko štejejo pomoči za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
To be entitled to that derogation, the aid must contribute to the development of the sector in question.
Da se lahko uporabi ta izjema, morajo pomoči prispevati k razvoju zadevnega sektorja.
Turning to the investments subsidised and the form of the aid, the Commission concluded when initiating the procedure that the aid, while tainted with illegality, had been put into effect in compliance with the Community competition rules applicable at the time.
Tako je Komisija glede subvencioniranih naložb in obliko pomoči na začetku postopka ugotovila, da so se pomoči, čeprav so bile v njih sledi nezakonitosti, izvajale v skladu s takrat veljavnimi pravili Skupnosti o konkurenci.
The Commission has no cause to call into question that part of the aid as applied.
Komisija nima razloga, da bi nasprotovala temu delu izvajanja pomoči.
Therefore, the resultant examination of the compatibility of the aid only concerned the aid rates applied by the French authorities.
Pri preučitvi združljivosti pomoči v nadaljevanju se bodo tako obravnavale samo stopnje pomoči, ki so jih uporabili francoski organi.
The Commission noted when initiating the examination procedure that under the rules applicable at the time the programme entered into force the ceiling for aid for environmental protection investments was 35 % of costs incurred (45 % in less-favoured areas).
Komisija je ob začetku preiskovalnega postopka 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 % kritih stroškov (45 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi).
The Commission initially noted that the fifth indent of Article 12(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, which provides for national aid to be examined for compliance with Articles 92 and 93 (now 87 and 88) of the Treaty, and with Article 6 of the same Regulation, authorised aid for investments intended to protect the environment provided they did not result in an increase in production.
Komisija najprej ugotavlja, da je 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, dovoljeval pomoči za naložbe za varstvo okolja, če se ni zaradi njih povečala proizvodnja.
The Commission believes it is proven that the investments targeted by the aid in question did not bring about an increase in production since they were exclusively intended for the protection of the rural environment (in particular, the storage and treatment of waste).
Komisija ima za dokazano, da naložbe, ki so bile cilj danih pomoči, dejansko niso povzročile povečanja proizvodnje, saj so bile namenjene izključno varstvu okolja na podeželju (zlasti skladiščenju in čiščenju odplak).
With regard more specifically to the permitted aid rate, the Commission, in its decision addressed to France on State aid N 136/91, noted that it normally considered as compatible with the common market a rate of 35 % of eligible costs for that type of aid (45 % in less-favoured areas).
Kar konkretneje zadeva dovoljeno stopnjo pomoči, je Komisija v svoji odločbi o državni pomoči št. N 136/91, naslovljeni na Francijo, spomnila, da je za to vrsto pomoči ponavadi kot združljivo s skupnim trgom obravnavala 35-odstotno stopnjo upravičenih stroškov (45-odstotno na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi).
Those aid rates were confirmed by the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection shortly after the PMPOA was put into effect.
Te stopnje pomoči so bile potrjene z okvirnimi omejitvami Skupnosti o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja, kmalu po začetku izvajanja programa PMPOA.
Paragraph 3.2.3 of those Guidelines stated that as a general rule aid for environmental investment could be authorised up to specific levels.
Tako je točka 3.2.3 navedenih okvirnih omejitev določala, da se na splošno pomoči za naložbe za okoljske namene lahko odobrijo, če ne presegajo določenih stopenj.
The second paragraph of footnote 14 explained that ‘for investments covered by Article 12(1) and (5) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 […] the maximum aid level is 35 %, or 45 % in […] less-favoured areas […].
Sprotna opomba št. 14 je v svojem drugem pododstavku določala, da „je za naložbe, ki izhajajo iz člena 12(1) in (5) Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 2328/91 (…), najvišji obseg pomoči 35 % ali 45 % na območjih (…) z omejenimi možnostmi.
These maximum aid levels apply irrespective of the size of the enterprise.
Te najvišje stopnje pomoči veljajo ne glede na velikost podjetja.
Consequently, the maxima may not be increased for SMEs as provided for below in this section.
Zato se ne morejo zvišati za mala in srednje velika podjetja, kot je določeno v nadaljevanju tega oddelka.
For investments in Objectives 1 and 5(b) regions, the Commission reserves the right, on a case-by-case basis, to accept higher aid levels than the above, where the Member State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Commission that this is justified.’
Za naložbe, izvedene na območjih ciljev št. 1 in 5b, si Komisija pridržuje pravico, da jih po preučitvi primera stopenj pomoči, višjih od zgoraj navedenih, sprejme, če jih država članica lahko upraviči.“
Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 was repealed by Regulation (EC) No 950/97.
Uredba (ES) št. 2328/91 je bila razveljavljena z Uredbo (ES) št. 950/97.
Article 12(2)(e) of the latter stipulated that Member States could grant aid to investments intended for ‘the protection and improvement of the environment, provided that such investments do not entail an increase in production capacity’.
Člen 12(2)(e) Uredbe (ES) št. 950/97 je določil, da lahko države članice odobrijo pomoči za naložbe za „varstvo in izboljšanje okolja, če naložbe ne povzročijo povečanja proizvodne zmogljivosti“.
Article 12(3) stipulated that ‘in the case of individual or associated holdings which satisfy the conditions of eligibility laid down in Articles 5 and 9, aids for investments which exceed the amounts laid down in Article 7(2) and (3) and 11, are prohibited’.
Člen 12(3) navedene uredbe je navedel, da „so na samostojnih ali povezanih gospodarstvih, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje za upravičenost iz členov 5 in 9, prepovedane pomoči za naložbe, ki presegajo vrednosti in zneske, navedene v členih 7(2) in (3) ter 11“.
However, pursuant to point (d) of the second subparagraph of Article 12(3) that prohibition applied only to aid intended for ‘the protection and improvement of this environment’.
Vendar v skladu s točko d) drugega pododstavka člena 12(3) navedene uredbe ta prepoved ni veljala za pomoči, namenjene za „naložbe za varstvo in izboljšanje okolja“.
Article 12(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 950/97 stipulated that Articles 92 to 94 (now 87 to 89) of the Treaty applied to those aids.
Člen 12(2) in (3) Uredbe (ES) št. 950/97 pa je določal, da se členi 92–94 Pogodbe (sedaj členi 87–89) uporabljajo za te pomoči.
That is tantamount to a reversion to the competition rules applicable at the time, i.e. Community practice as already cited in the decision on State aid N 137/91, and to the conditions contained in the Community guidelines for environmental protection.
To je ustrezalo napotilu na pravila o konkurenci, ki so takrat veljala, torej na že navedeno prakso Skupnosti v odločbi o državni pomoči št. N 136/91, in na pogoje, povzete v okvirnih omejitvah Skupnosti za varstvo okolja.
The Commission, on the basis of the provisions applicable in 1994-1999 as described in this Decision, can only conclude that the maximum aid intensity applicable to the aid in question was 35 % of costs incurred (45 % in less-favoured areas) and that, therefore, aid granted in excess of those intensities was not in compliance with those provisions.
Komisija na podlagi določb, ki so veljale v obdobju med letoma 1994 in 1999, kot so opisane v tej odločbi, lahko samo ugotovi, da je najvišja stopnja pomoči, ki je veljala za dane pomoči, znašala 35 % kritih stroškov (45 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi) in da zaradi tega dodeljene pomoči nad temi stopnjami, niso bile skladne z navedenimi določbami.
However, where the year 2000 and aid for investments in agricultural holdings are concerned, paragraph 4.1.1.2 of the agriculture Guidelines, which applied from 1 January 2000, stipulated that the maximum rate of public support, expressed as a volume of eligible investment, was limited to a maximum of 40 %, or 50 % in less-favoured areas.
Vendar kar zadeva leto 2000 v zvezi s pomočmi za naložbe v kmetijska gospodarstva, točka 4.1.1.2 kmetijskih smernic, ki veljajo od 1. januarja 2000, določa, da znaša zgornja meja stopnje javne pomoči za upravičeno naložbo 40 oziroma 50 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi.
However, in the case of investments made by young farmers within five years after setting-up, the maximum rate of aid was increased to 45 %, or 55 % in less-favoured areas.
Kadar pa gre za naložbe, ki jih opravijo mladi kmetje v petih letih od vzpostavitve kmetijskega gospodarstva, se največja stopnja pomoči poveča na 45 oziroma 55 % na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi.
Paragraph 4.1.2.4 of the agriculture Guidelines stipulated, as an exception, that where investments resulted in extra costs relating to the protection and improvement of the environment, the improvement of hygiene conditions of livestock enterprises or the welfare of farm animals, the maximum aid rates of 40 % and 50 % referred to in point 4.1.1.2 could be increased by 20 or 25 percentage points respectively.
Točka 4.1.2.4 kmetijskih smernic izjemoma določa, da če zaradi naložb pride do izrednih stroškov, povezanih zlasti z varstvom in izboljšanjem stanja okolja, se lahko najvišje stopnje pomoči v vrednosti 40 in 50 % iz točke 4.1.1.2 navedenih smernic povečajo za 20 oziroma 25 odstotnih točk.
Thus, the increase could be granted for investments aimed at ensuring compliance with the recently introduced minimum standards, subject to the conditions in Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1750/1999 of 23 July 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF).
Tako povečanje se lahko dodeli za naložbe, katerih namen je zagotoviti izpolnjevanje novo uvedenih minimalnih standardov, ob upoštevanju pogojev, določenih v členu 2 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1750/1999 z dne 23. julija 1999 o podrobnih pravilih za izvajanje Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1257/1999 o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada (EKUJS).
It had to be strictly contained within the limits of the additional eligible expenditure needed to realise the aim in question and must not concern investments having the effect of increasing production capacity.
Povečanje mora biti strogo omejeno na izredne upravičene stroške, ki so potrebni za uresničitev zastavljenega cilja, in ni mogoče pri naložbah, ki povzročajo povečanje proizvodne zmogljivosti.
The entry into force on 23 January 2004 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products changed the legal situation on the case in question.
Začetek veljavnosti, 23. januar 2004, Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1/2004 z dne 23. decembra 2003 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES za državno pomoč malim in srednje velikim podjetjem, ki se ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo, predelavo in trženjem kmetijskih proizvodov, je spremenil pravni položaj v zvezi z danim primerom.
The Regulation authorises, under certain conditions, aid to small and medium-sized agricultural holdings while exempting them from the notification obligation under Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Ta uredba pod določenimi pogoji dovoljuje pomoči malim in srednje velikim kmetijskim podjetjem ter jih izvzema iz obveznosti priglasitve iz člena 88(3) Pogodbe.
The French authorities explained that the beneficiaries of the investment aid under the PMPOA during the period 1994-2000 were small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2004.
Francoski organi so navedli, da so bili upravičenci do pomoči za naložbe, financirane v okviru programa PMPOA, v obdobju 1994–2000 mala in srednje velika podjetja v smislu člena 2(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2004.
Article 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 stipulates that individual aid and aid schemes implemented before the date of entry into force of this Regulation and aid granted under those schemes in the absence of a Commission authorisation and in breach of the notification requirement of Article 88(3) of the Treaty are to be compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty and be exempt if they fulfil the conditions laid down in Article 3 of that Regulation, except the requirements in paragraph 1 and paragraph 2(b) and (c) of that Article.
Uredba (ES) št. 1/2004 v svojem členu 20(2) določa, da so posamične pomoči in programi pomoči, ki so se začeli uporabljati pred začetkom veljavnosti te uredbe, ter pomoči, odobrene po teh programih brez dovoljenja Komisije in v nasprotju z zahtevo obvezne priglasitve iz člena 88(3) Pogodbe, združljivi s skupnim trgom po členu 87(3)(c) Pogodbe in so izvzeti iz obveznosti priglasitve, če izpolnjujejo pogoje iz člena 3 te uredbe, razen zahtev iz odstavkov 1 in 2(b) ter (c) navedenega člena.
Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 stipulates that aid granted under the schemes referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article is to be compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty and exempt from the notification requirement of Article 88(3) of the Treaty provided that the aid fulfils all the conditions of the Regulation.
Člen 3(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2004 določa, da so pomoči, odobrene v skladu s programom iz odstavka 2, združljive s skupnim trgom po členu 87(3)(c) Pogodbe in so izvzete iz obveznosti priglasitve iz člena 88(3) Pogodbe, če neposredno izpolnjujejo vse pogoje te uredbe.
Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 contains the conditions which have to be respected in the case in question, i.e. in the case of an unnotified investment aid scheme in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises.
Člen 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2004 vsebuje pogoje, ki jih je treba izpolniti v danem primeru, torej v primeru programa pomoči za neprijavljene naložbe za mala in srednje velika podjetja.
Thus, under Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2004, aid for investments in agricultural holdings in favour of the production of agricultural products is compatible with the common market and exempt from the notification obligation if the gross aid intensity does not exceed 50 % of eligible investments in less-favoured areas and 40 % in other areas.
Tako je v skladu s členom 4(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 41/2004 pomoč za naložbe v kmetijska gospodarstva za proizvodnjo kmetijskih proizvodov združljiva s skupnim trgom in izvzeta iz obveznosti priglasitve, zlasti če bruto intenzivnost pomoči ne presega 50 % upravičenih naložb na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi in 40 % na drugih območjih.
However, if the investments result in extra costs linked to the protection and improvement of the environment the maximum aid intensities of 50 % and 40 % may be increased by 25 and 20 percentage points respectively.
Vendar če zaradi naložb pride do izrednih stroškov za varstvo in izboljšanje stanja okolja, se lahko najvišje stopnje pomoči v vrednosti 50 % in 40 % povečajo za 25 oziroma 20 odstotnih točk.