natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It was known that Poland's accession to the European Union would entail integration into the internal electricity market, liberalisation of which started with the adoption of Directive 96/92/EC.
Bilo je znano, da bo pristop Poljske k Evropski uniji sprožil vključevanje v notranji trg električne energije, katerega liberalizacija se je začela s sprejetjem Direktive 96/92/ES.
This meant the opening-up of the market to other suppliers competing with PSE, and, accordingly, that PSE might not need all the electricity provided for in the PPAs in the light of changes on the electricity market.
To je pomenilo odpiranje trga drugim dobaviteljem, konkurenčnim PSE, posledično pa, da PSE morda ne bo potreboval vse električne energije, predvidene v pogodbah PNE, glede na spremembe na trgu električne energije.
Further changes occurred when Directive 2003/54/EC was adopted on 26 June 2003.
Nadaljnje spremembe so se zgodile, ko je bila 26. junija 2003 sprejeta Direktiva 2003/54/ES.
This Directive provides for the liberalisation of the market for all professional consumers by 1 July 2004 and for all consumers by 1 July 2007, thus gradually reducing PSE's captive market share to zero.
Ta direktiva predvideva liberalizacijo trga za vse negospodinjske odjemalce 1. julija 2004 in za vse odjemalce 1. julija 2007, s čimer se monopolni tržni delež PSE postopno zmanjša na nič.
Second, even for the share of electricity which PSE actually needed, it made no sense for PSE, as the buyer, to undertake to pay the power plants the full costs of generating power, plus a profit margin established such a long time in advance even though it was already known that liberalisation would allow it to choose between different technologies and prices, including those offered by new market entrants using more efficient technologies.
Drugič, za PSE kot kupca – tudi za tisti del električne energije, ki jo je dejansko potreboval – ni bilo smiselno, da se zaveže, da bo elektrarnam plačal celotne stroške proizvodnje energije in že toliko časa prej določeno stopnjo dobička, čeprav je bilo že znano, da bi mu liberalizacija omogočila izbiro med različnimi tehnologijami in cenami, vključno s tistimi, ki bi jih ponujali novi udeleženci na trgu, ki uporabljajo učinkovitejše tehnologije.
Buyers have an interest in concluding long-term contracts only if these contracts provide them some hedging against fluctuations in the electricity market, and in particular against changes linked to fluctuations in fuel costs.
Kupci imajo korist od sklepanja dolgoročnih pogodb samo, če jim te pogodbe zagotavljajo varovanje pred tveganji zaradi nihanj na trgu električne energije, zlasti pred spremembami, povezanimi z nihanji stroškov goriva.
For this reason a buyer would have an economic interest in a long-term contract of this type only if the seller offered to take part of the risk associated with fluctuations in fuel costs or if the generating technology ensured stable fuel costs, as is the case with hydropower plants, and, in certain conditions, nuclear plants.
Zaradi tega bi imel kupec ekonomski interes za sklenitev dolgoročne pogodbe te vrste samo, če bi prodajalec ponudil, da bo prevzel del tveganja, povezanega z nihanji stroškov goriva, ali če bi proizvodna tehnologija zagotavljala stabilne stroške goriva kot pri hidroelektrarnah in, pod določenimi pogoji, pri jedrskih elektrarnah.
This economic logic is confirmed by the fact that there does not seem to be any example of private buyers taking long-term contracts without state intervention with plants using fossil fuel and covering all production costs for the same duration as the PPAs (more than 10 years).
To ekonomsko logiko potrjuje dejstvo, da se zdi, da ni nobenega primera zasebnih kupcev, ki bi sklenili dolgoročne pogodbe brez državne intervencije z elektrarnami, ki uporabljajo fosilna goriva, in krili vse proizvodne stroške za tako dolgo obdobje, kot trajajo pogodbe PNE (več kot 10 let).
The Commission found none in its energy sector enquiry, and, despite their claims to the contrary, none of the interested parties submitted an example of such a contract to the Commission, despite the fact that some of them belong to very large groups with activities in several countries.
Komisija pri preiskavi sektorja energije ni odkrila nobenega primera in nobena zainteresirana stranka, kljub nasprotnim trditvam, Komisiji ni predložila primera take pogodbe, kljub temu da nekatere pripadajo zelo velikim skupinam z dejavnostmi v več državah.
The only examples quoted by the interested parties are not adequate for the reasons indicated below:
Tisti primeri, ki so jih zainteresirane stranke navedle, niso ustrezni zaradi naslednjih razlogov:
the contracts in Portugal between Redes Energéticas Nacionais on the one hand and Turbogás, Electricidade De Portugal and Pego on the other hand, were concluded by a publicly owned company (Redes Energéticas Nacionais).
dve pogodbi na Portugalskem med družbo Redes Energéticas Nacionais na eni strani ter družbami Turbogás, Electricidade De Portugal in Pego na drugi strani je sklenila družba v javni lasti (Redes Energéticas Nacionais).
It should be noted that the Commission did not regard these contracts as compatible with the state aid rules, despite attempts by the interested parties to prove that they were.
Treba je opozoriti, da Komisija teh pogodb ni obravnavala kot združljive s pravili o državni pomoči, kljub poskusom zainteresiranih strank, da bi dokazale, da so.
The Commission only issued a decision concerning their compatibility with Article 81 of the EC Treaty.
Komisija je sprejela samo odločitev o njihovi združljivosti s členom 81 Pogodbe ES.
In a state aid decision concerning the compulsory annulment by Portugal of these contracts and the awarding of compensation for annulment, the Commission noted that they constituted an advantage for the power generators;
V odločitvi o državni pomoči v zvezi z obvezno razveljavitvijo teh pogodb s strani Portugalske in dodelitvijo nadomestila za razveljavitev je Komisija ugotovila, da pomenijo prednost za proizvajalce energije;
the contracts concluded by Northern Ireland Electricity in the United Kingdom were awarded at a time when Northern Ireland Electricity was still a publicly owned company, at the request of the state.
pogodbe, ki jih je sklenila družba Northern Ireland Electricity v Združenem kraljestvu, so bile dodeljene v obdobju, ko je bila družba Northern Ireland Electricity še v javni lasti, na zahtevo države.
Northern Ireland Electricity was subsequently privatised and the UK Government had to put in place a support scheme to compensate Northern Ireland Electricity for the non-economic burden associated with these contracts;
Družba Northern Ireland Electricity je bila kasneje privatizirana in vlada Združenega kraljestva je morala vzpostaviti program podpore, da bi tej družbi nadomestila neekonomsko obremenitev, povezano s temi pogodbami;
the contract between Electricité de France and Péchiney in France covers only Electricité de France's variable nuclear plant costs.
pogodba med družbama Electricité de France in Péchiney v Franciji krije samo spremenljive stroške za jedrske elektrarne družbe Electricité de France.
Many other contracts of that type were concluded in France in the 1990s.
V Franciji je bilo v devetdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja sklenjenih veliko drugih pogodb te vrste.
They are all based on the principle that the generator undertakes to deliver electricity to the buyer over a long period at a price which only covers its marginal costs.
Vse temeljijo na načelu, da se proizvajalec zaveže, da bo kupcu v daljšem obdobju dobavljal električno energijo po ceni, ki krije samo njegove mejne stroške.
Lastly, the Commission notes that, despite the interested parties' claims to the contrary, it is not true that the fact that PPAs were concluded following a competitive procedure suffices for them to be deemed as not constituting aid.
Komisija nazadnje ugotavlja, da kljub nasprotnim trditvam zainteresiranih strank ni res, da je sklenitev pogodb PNE po odprtem razpisnem postopku zadostno dejstvo, da bi se te obravnavale, kot da niso pomoč.
This reasoning applies when a Member State purchases goods or services for its own use.
Ti argumenti veljajo, kadar države članica kupuje blago ali storitve za lastno rabo.
In the case at issue, the purpose of the competitive procedure was to serve policy objectives such as promotion of foreign investment in Poland, environmental protection and improvements in security of supply, rather than to purchase goods and services required by the state.
V zadevnem primeru je bil namen odprtega razpisnega postopka uresničiti cilje politik, kot so spodbujane tujih naložb na Poljskem, varstvo okolja in izboljšanje zanesljivosti oskrbe, ne pa nakup blaga ali storitev, ki jih potrebuje država.
In such cases, the fact that a competitive procedure was followed may lead only to the conclusion that the aid is limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the policy objectives; it does not suffice to rule out the presence of state aid.
V takih primerih je na podlagi tega, da je bil opravljen odprti razpisni postopek, mogoče ugotoviti samo, da je bila pomoč omejena na najmanjši obseg, potreben za doseganje ciljev politik; to dejstvo pa ne zadošča za izključitev obstoja državne pomoči.
Power generators belonging to privately owned groups have argued that any state aid under the PPAs would have been eliminated by the privatisation process because the price paid by the companies that purchased the power plants would have taken account of the value of the PPAs.
Proizvajalci energije, ki pripadajo skupinam v zasebni lasti, trdijo, da bi bila vsakršna državna pomoč v skladu s pogodbami PNE odpravljena pri privatizacijskem procesu, ker bi bila v ceni, ki bi jo plačale družbe, ki bi kupile elektrarne, upoštevana vrednost pogodb PNE.
The Commission considers that this reasoning does not apply in the present case.
Komisija meni, da v tem primeru ni mogoče uporabiti teh argumentov.
In the case at issue, privatisation of the power plants took the form of share deals.
V zadevnem primeru je privatizacija elektrarn potekala v obliki delniških poslov.
The Court of Justice has analysed how a change in the ownership of a company during a share deal affects the existence of aid and the recipient of unlawful aid granted to the company.
Sodišče je proučilo, kako sprememba lastništva družbe pri delniškem poslu vpliva na obstoj pomoči in prejemnika nezakonite pomoči, dodeljene družbi.
It ruled that the unlawful aid remains and stays with the company that benefited from the aid, despite the change in its ownership.
Odločilo je, da se nezakonita pomoč ohrani in ostane s podjetjem, ki je izkoristilo pomoč, kljub zamenjavi njegovega lastništva.
The transfer of shares at the market price merely ensures that the buyer did not benefit from state aid either.
Prenos delnic po tržni ceni zagotavlja samo, da državne pomoči ni izkoristil tudi kupec.
In the case at issue, this means that the change in the ownership of the power plants that benefited from the PPAs did not alter the fact that the PPAs constitute state aid to these power plants.
V zadevnem primeru to pomeni, da sprememba lastništva elektrarn, ki so izkoristile pogodbe PNE, ni spremenila dejstva, da pogodbe PNE pomenijo državno pomoč za te elektrarne.
In reality, the power plants benefited from the advantages contained in the PPAs, irrespective of their ownership structure.
Elektrarne so dejansko imele koristi od prednosti v okviru pogodb PNE ne glede na njihovo lastniško strukturo.
All the above-mentioned elements of the economic advantage and the arguments developed above concern the time of accession of Poland to the EU and remain applicable as at the date of this Decision (in the case of PPAs which terminated before the date of this Decision, until the date on which they terminated).
Vsi navedeni elementi gospodarske prednosti in oblikovani argumenti se nanašajo na čas pristopa Poljske k EU in so še vedno veljavni ob datumu te odločbe (v primeru pogodb PNE, ki so prenehale pred datumom te odločbe, pa do datuma, ko so prenehale).
In view of the above, the Commission concludes that the PPAs provide an advantage to the beneficiaries.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega ugotavlja, da pogodbe PNE upravičencem zagotavljajo prednost.
The interested parties have argued that the PPAs should be regarded as implementing SGEIs for the purpose of securing electricity supplies and environmental protection.
Zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da je treba pogodbe PNE obravnavati kot izvajanje storitev SSGP, da se zagotovita oskrba z električno energijo in varstvo okolja.
They are said to fulfil the criteria laid down in the Altmark judgment, which means that they do not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Izpolnjevale naj bi merila, določena v sodbi Altmark, kar pomeni, da ne pomenijo državne pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
The Commission has analysed these arguments and cannot agree with them for the following reasons:
Komisija je proučila te argumente in se z njimi ne more strinjati zaradi naslednjih razlogov:
Member States have a wide margin of discretion to define the scope of SGEIs.
Države članice imajo široko diskrecijsko pravico pri opredelitvi obsega storitev SSGP.
However, the existence of this wide margin of discretion does not mean that just any state intervention with a policy motivation can be characterised as an SGEI.
Vendar pa ta široka diskrecijska pravica ne pomeni, da je mogoče kar vsako državno intervencijo, katere namen je uresničevanje politik, opredeliti kot storitve SSGP.
The interested parties have invoked environmental protection as one of the SGEIs to be implemented by the PPAs.
Zainteresirane stranke se sklicujejo na varstvo okolja kot eno od storitev SSGP, ki naj bi jih zagotavljale pogodbe PNE.
More precisely, the PPAs were supposed to support investment designed to allow Polish plants to adapt to EU environmental standards.
Natančneje, pogodbe PNE naj bi podprle naložbe, katerih namen je bil omogočiti poljskim elektrarnam, da se prilagodijo okoljskim standardom EU.
The Commission considers that the requirement to fulfil environmental standards does not exhibit any special characteristics as compared with the constraints imposed on all companies active in an industrial sector.
Komisija meni, da zahteva po izpolnjevanju okoljskih standardov ne kaže nikakršnih posebnih značilnosti v primerjavi z omejitvami, naloženimi vsem družbam, ki delujejo v industrijskem sektorju.
Furthermore, considering the fulfilment of environmental standards as an SGEI would go directly against the polluter pays principle which is one of the core principles of Community environmental law, enshrined in primary legislation by Article 174(2) of the EC Treaty.
Poleg tega bi bilo to, da izpolnjevanje okoljskih standardov šteje za storitev SSGP, v neposrednem nasprotju z načelom „onesnaževalec plača“, ki je eno bistvenih načel okoljske zakonodaje Skupnosti, vključeno v primarno zakonodajo s členom 174(2) Pogodbe ES.
The Commission notes the interested parties' argument that environmental protection is quoted as one of the possible areas for public service obligations in Article 3 of Directive 96/92/EC.
Komisija upošteva argument zainteresiranih strank, da je varstvo okolja navedeno kot eno možnih področjih za obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev v členu 3 Direktive 96/92/ES.
However, the Commission takes the view that this does not undermine the position set out above.
Vendar pa Komisija meni, da to ne izpodbija navedenega stališča.
The fact that the Directive states that there may be public service obligations in the field of environmental protection does not mean that there are no requirements as to the actual content of these public service obligations.
To, da je v tej direktivi navedeno, da so na področju varstva okolja lahko obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev, ne pomeni, da ni nobenih zahtev, kar zadeva dejansko vsebino teh obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev.
In particular, these obligations must exhibit special characteristics as compared with the normal business environment of companies in the sector, and may not be incompatible with the principles on which Community environmental protection policy is based (e.g. the polluter pays principle).
Te obveznosti morajo imeti predvsem posebne značilnosti v primerjavi z običajnim poslovnim okoljem družb v tem sektorju in ne smejo biti nezdružljive z načeli, na katerih temelji politika Skupnosti na področju varstva okolja (npr. načelo „onesnaževalec plača“).
The Commission also notes that four of the power plants concerned by the PPAs (in Turów, Pątnów, Bełchatów and Jaworzno) feature on the WWF's list of Europe's thirty most polluting power stations, which further relativises the claims that they fulfil an SGEI in terms of environmental protection.
Komisija ugotavlja tudi, da so štiri elektrarne, ki jih zadevajo pogodbe PNE (v krajih Turów, Pątnów, Bełchatów in Jaworzno), navedene na seznamu Svetovnega sklada za naravo, na katerem je tridesetih evropskih elektrarn, ki so največje onesnaževalke, zaradi česar so trditve, da opravljajo SSPG v smislu varstva okolja, še bolj relativizirane.
The interested parties also invoke security of supply as one of the SGEIs that the PPAs implement.
Zainteresirane stranke se sklicujejo tudi na zanesljivost oskrbe kot eno od SSPG, ki jo uresničujejo pogodbe PNE.
In its decision practice, the Commission has taken the view that security of supply could be an SGEI, subject to the restrictions provided for in Article 8(4) of Directive 96/92/EC (which corresponds to Article 11(4) of Directive 2003/54/EC), that is, provided that the generators concerned use indigenous primary energy fuel sources, and that the total volume of energy does not exceed in any calendar year 15 % of the total primary energy necessary to produce the electricity consumed in the Member State concerned.
Komisija v svojih odločitvah zagovarja mnenje, da je zanesljivost oskrbe lahko SSPG ob upoštevanju omejitev, določenih v členu 8(4) Direktive 96/92/ES (ki ustreza členu 11(4) Direktive 2003/54/ES), če zadevni proizvajalci uporabljajo kot gorivo domače vire primarne energije in če celotna količina energije v nobenem koledarskem letu ne preseže 15 % celotne primarne energije, potrebne za proizvodnjo energije, ki se porabi v zadevni državni članici.
In the case at issue, the PPAs concern quantities of energy that are largely in excess of the 15 % referred to in recital 234.
V zadevnem primeru se pogodbe PNE nanašajo na količine energije, ki so precej večje od 15 % iz uvodne izjave 234.
Furthermore, they do not solely concern generators using indigenous primary energy fuel sources.
Poleg tega se ne nanašajo le na proizvajalce, ki uporabljajo kot gorivo domače vire primarne energije.
The Commission notes that the power plants concerned by the PPAs do not exhibit any special characteristics that would make them particularly well adapted to meet security of supply objectives.
Komisija ugotavlja, da elektrarne, ki jih zadevajo pogodbe PNE, nimajo nobenih posebnih značilnosti, zaradi katerih bi bile posebno dobro prilagojene za izpolnjevanje ciljev zanesljivosti oskrbe.
In fact, they are just normal plants connected to the network, and therefore contribute to overall security of supply in Poland just like any other power plant in the sector.
Dejansko so popolnoma običajne elektrarne, ki so priključene v omrežje in torej prispevajo k splošni zanesljivosti oskrbe na Poljskem tako kot vse druge elektrarne v tem sektorju.
In view of the above, the Commission takes the view that there is no reason to deviate from its usual practice in this field.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega meni, da ni nobenega razloga, da bi se odmaknila od svoje običajne prakse na tem področju.
It must therefore reject the claim that the PPAs implement an SGEI in the field of security of supply In any event, no SGEI has been defined by Poland in this context to date.
Zato mora zavrniti trditev, da pogodbe PNE zagotavljajo storitve SSGP na področju zanesljivosti oskrbe. Vsekakor Poljska do zdaj ni opredelila nobene storitve SSGP.
In view of the above, the Commission concludes that the EC Treaty provisions on SGEIs do not apply to PPAs.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega ugotavlja, da se določbe Pogodbe ES o storitvah SSGP ne uporabljajo za pogodbe PNE.
The Commission also notes that the PPAs would not fulfil all the criteria laid down in the Altmark judgment.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da pogodbe PNE ne bi izpolnile vseh meril, določenih v sodbi Altmark.
First, under the Altmark judgment, the recipient undertaking is actually required to discharge public service obligations and those obligations must have been clearly defined.
Prvič, v skladu s sodbo Altmark mora upravičeno podjetje dejansko opravljati obveznosti javnih storitev in te obveznosti morajo biti jasno opredeljene.
In the case at issue, the alleged public service obligations have not been clearly defined.
V zadevnem primeru domnevne obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev niso jasno opredeljene.
The interested parties mention environmental protection and security of supply, but these objectives are of a very general nature.
Zainteresirane stranke navajajo varstvo okolja in zanesljivost oskrbe, vendar pa sta ta cilja zelo splošna.
In addition, the view could be taken that, to some extent, any generator in the electricity sector contributes to the realisation of these objectives.
Poleg tega je mogoče zagovarjati mnenje, da v določenem obsegu vsak proizvajalec v sektorju električne energije prispeva k uresničitvi teh ciljev.
The interested parties failed to submit any document providing a more tangible definition of the type of SGEI entrusted to individual generators, let alone a legal document laying down their obligations.
Zainteresirane stranke niso predložile nobenega dokumenta, ki bi zagotovil oprijemljivejšo opredelitev vrste storitev SSGP, za katero so bili zadolženi posamezni proizvajalci, prav tako pa tudi nobenega pravnega dokumenta, v katerem bi bile določene njihove obveznosti.
Article 1(2) of the Polish Energy Act was also invoked.
Sklicevale so se tudi na člen 1(2) poljskega energetskega zakona.
This Article indicates that the state must secure a continuous and uninterrupted supply of energy to end-users in a manner that is technically and economically viable and takes due account of environmental protection requirements.
Ta člen določa, da mora država zagotoviti stalno in neprekinjeno oskrbo z energijo končnim uporabnikom tako, da je to tehnično in ekonomsko upravičeno, ob ustreznem upoštevanju zahtev po varstvu okolja.
But this Article of the Act does not entrust any specific company with public service obligations.
Vendar pa ta člen Zakona ne pooblašča nobene družbe za obveznosti iz opravljanja javnih storitev.
It entrusts duties to the state alone.
Za naloge pooblašča samo državo.
Lastly, the interested parties argue that PPAs are documents that entrust generators with SGEIs.
Nazadnje zainteresirane stranke trdijo, da so pogodbe PNE dokumenti, ki proizvajalce pooblaščajo za storitve SSGP.
But PPAs do not contain any tangible definition of SGEIs either, nor do they even refer to these obligations or to legal provisions that could be a basis for the state to entrust SGEIs to other entities.
Vendar pa pogodbe PNE ne vsebujejo niti oprijemljive opredelitve storitev SSGP niti se ne sklicujejo na te obveznosti ali predpise, na podlagi katerih bi država za storitve SSGP lahko pooblastila druge subjekte.
Second, the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated must have been established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner, and the compensation should not exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations, taking into account the relevant revenue and a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations.
Drugič, parametri, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo, morajo biti določeni vnaprej na objektiven in pregleden način, nadomestilo pa ne sme preseči zneska, ki je potreben za pokritje vseh stroškov ali dela stroškov, nastalih pri opravljanju obveznosti javnih storitev, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prihodkov in primernega dobička za opravljanje teh obveznosti.