natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On the basis of these elements, the Commission considers that the version of the compensation mechanism that was in place between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2008 constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty.
Na podlagi navedenega Komisija meni, da različica kompenzacijskega mehanizma, ki je veljala od 1. januarja 2001 do 31. decembra 2008, pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
Assessment of the compatibility of the aid under Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty
Preverjanje združljivosti pomoči v skladu s členom 87(3)(c) Pogodbe
For the reasons given in paragraphs 32, 33 and 34, the Commission decided to open a formal investigation procedure in this case as it had doubts about the compatibility of the measure with the common market — a compatibility which also implied its conformity with Articles 25 and 90 of the Treaty.
Zaradi razlogov iz uvodnih izjav 32, 33 in 34 se je Komisija odločila sprožiti formalni postopek preiskave v tem primeru, ker je dvomila v združljivost ukrepa s skupnim trgom, ki vključuje tudi skladnost s členoma 25 in 90 Pogodbe.
In view of the fact that the aid in the form of a compensation mechanism pursued an environmental protection objective, its compatibility must be assessed in the light of the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection.
Ker je cilj pomoči, ki jo pomeni kompenzacijski mehanizem, varstvo okolja, je treba njeno združljivost oceniti na podlagi smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja.
Between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2008, two sets of guidelines were applicable in succession, with the 2001 guidelines being replaced by new Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection [34] (the 2008 guidelines).
Od 1. januarja 2001 do 31. decembra 2008 sta se zaporedoma uporabljala dva sklopa smernic, ker so smernice Skupnosti o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja [34] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice iz leta 2008) nadomestile smernice iz leta 2001.
Inasmuch as the aid at issue was registered as non-notified aid, its compatibility must, in accordance with point 205 of the 2008 guidelines, be assessed in the light of the rules applicable when the aid was granted.
Ker je bila zadevna pomoč evidentirana kot nepriglašena pomoč, je treba v skladu s točko 205 smernic iz leta 2008 njeno združljivost preveriti na podlagi pravil, ki so se uporabljala ob njeni dodelitvi.
It is necessary therefore to assess, firstly, the measure’s compatibility in the light of the 2001 and 2008 guidelines and, secondly, its conformity with Articles 25 and 90 of the Treaty.
Zato je treba najprej preveriti združljivost ukrepa na podlagi smernic iz leta 2001 in 2008 ter nato njegovo skladnost s členoma 25 in 90 Pogodbe.
Compatibility of the aid in the light of the 2001 and 2008 guidelines
Združljivost pomoči na podlagi smernic iz leta 2001 in 2008
The Commission has assessed the compatibility of the aid, during the period from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2008, with respect to two types of beneficiary: on the one hand, green electricity producers, which benefited indirectly from contributions to the compensation fund, and, on the other, large electricity-consuming enterprises, which benefited first from exemption from, then — from 1 January 2006 onwards — from a reduction in, contributions to the compensation fund.
Komisija preverja združljivost pomoči za dve vrsti upravičencev v obdobju od 1. januarja 2001 do 31. decembra 2008, in sicer za proizvajalce okolju prijazne električne energije, ki imajo posredno koristi od prispevka v kompenzacijski sklad, in podjetja z visoko porabo električne energije, ki so bila oproščena prispevka v kompenzacijski sklad ali od 1. januarja 2006 upravičena do znižanja prispevka v kompenzacijski sklad.
Compatibility of the aid to green electricity producers in Luxembourg
Združljivost pomoči za proizvajalce okolju prijazne električne energije v Luksemburgu
The aid granted to green electricity producers through the compulsory contribution included in the compensation mechanism concerned certain renewable energy sources (hydro, solar and wind power, biomass and biogas) and cogeneration, covered by the 2001 and 2008 guidelines [35].
Pomoč, ki je proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije dodeljena prek obveznega prispevka, vključenega v kompenzacijski mehanizem, zadeva nekatere obnovljive vire energije (hidroenergija, sončna energija, vetrna energija, biomasa in bioplin) ter soproizvodnjo toplote in električne energije, ki jih zajemajo smernice iz leta 2001 in 2008 [35].
The Luxembourg authorities have submitted to the Commission two reports produced by the research institute […] [36] [37] analysing the levels of compensation granted to green electricity producers in Luxembourg.
Luksemburški organi so Komisiji predložili dve poročili raziskovalnega inštituta […] [36] [37], v katerih so analizirane višine nadomestil, dodeljenih proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije v Luksemburgu.
The first report covers the period to the end of 2005 [38] and the second the period from 2006 to 2008 [39].
Ti poročili zajemata obdobji do konca leta 2005 [38] in od leta 2006 do leta 2008 [39].
The calculations relate to all the renewable energy sources eligible under the compensation mechanism [40], and concern also cogeneration.
Opravljeni so izračuni za vse obnovljive vire energije, upravičene do kompenzacijskega mehanizma [40], pri čemer je vključena tudi soproizvodnja toplote in električne energije.
Besides feed-in tariffs, they take account of other support schemes, operating aid (notably the ecological premium [41]) and investment aid.
Poleg tarif za dovajanje upoštevajo druge sisteme podpore, pomoč za tekoče poslovanje (zlasti ekološki dodatek [41] ali pomoč za naložbe.
The calculations compare the cost of producing green electricity and the market price for such electricity.
Izračuni primerjajo stroške proizvodnje okolju prijazne električne energije in tržno ceno te električne energije.
The reports conclude that there was no over-compensation during the periods concerned, either in the case of renewables or in that of cogeneration.
V poročilih je ugotovljeno, da v zadevnih obdobjih za obnovljive vire energije ter soproizvodnjo toplote in električne energije niso bila izplačana previsoka nadomestila.
On the basis of these elements, the Commission considers that the aid was limited to the difference between the cost of producing green electricity and the electricity market price.
Komisija na podlagi navedenega ocenjuje, da je pomoč omejena na razliko med stroški proizvodnje okolju prijazne električne energije in tržno ceno električne energije.
For the period from 1 January 2001 to 1 April 2008, during which the 2001 guidelines were applicable, the Commission considers therefore that the aid granted to green electricity producers was in keeping with the 2001 guidelines, and in particular points 58 to 60 thereof concerning operating aid, and that it was accordingly compatible within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Zato Komisija za obdobje od 1. januarja 2001 do 1. aprila 2008, v katerem so se uporabljale smernice iz leta 2001, ocenjuje, da je pomoč, dodeljena proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije, v skladu s smernicami iz leta 2001, zlasti s točkami 58 do 60 v zvezi s pomočjo za tekoče poslovanje, in je zato združljiva v smislu člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
For the period from 2 April 2008 to 31 December 2008, during which the 2008 guidelines were applicable, the Commission considers that the aid granted to green electricity producers was in keeping with the 2008 guidelines, and in particular points 109 and 119 thereof concerning operating aid for renewable energy sources and cogeneration [42], and that this aid was accordingly compatible within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Komisija za obdobje od 2. aprila 2008 do 31. decembra 2008, v katerem so se uporabljale smernice iz leta 2008, ocenjuje, da je pomoč, dodeljena proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije, v skladu s smernicami iz leta 2008, zlasti s točkama 109 in 119 v zvezi s pomočjo za tekoče poslovanje za obnovljive vire energije ter soproizvodnjo toplote in električne energije [42], in je zato združljiva v smislu člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
Compatibility of the aid to large electricity-consuming enterprises
Združljivost pomoči za podjetja z visoko porabo električne energije
enterprises which did not meet their commitments had to purchase a certain quantity of green electricity on the market or produce it for their own consumption [43],enterprises which did not meet their commitments to have the improvement in their energy efficiency certified by auditors at the beginning and end of the period had to purchase or produce themselves volumes of green electricity representing 1 % of their consumption.
podjetja, ki ne bodo izpolnila svojih zavez, bodo morala kupiti nekaj okolju prijazne električne energije na trgu ali jo za svojo porabo proizvesti [43],podjetja, ki ne bodo spoštovala svojih zavez glede potrditve povečanja energetske učinkovitosti s strani revizorjev na začetku in na koncu obdobja, bodo morala kupiti ali proizvesti količino okolju prijazne električne energije, ki predstavlja 1 % njihove porabe.
Moreover, the exemption from contribution payments was created at the same time as the contribution to the compensation fund itself, on 1 January 2001.
Poleg tega je bila oprostitev plačila prispevka uvedena hkrati z uvedbo prispevka v kompenzacijski sklad, tj. 1. januarja 2001.
For the period from January 2001 to December 2005, the Commission notes that the exemption from contribution payments was also obtained in exchange for energy efficiency improvement commitments by large electricity-consuming enterprises.
Komisija za obdobje od januarja 2001 do decembra 2005 ugotavlja, da je bila oprostitev plačila prispevka pridobljena na podlagi zavez podjetij z visoko porabo električne energije k večji energetski učinkovitosti.
Conformity of the aid with Articles 25 and 90 of the Treaty
Združljivost pomoči s členoma 25 in 90 Pogodbe
For the period from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2008, the additional costs associated with the green electricity purchasing obligation were ultimately borne by consumers on the basis of their consumption.
V obdobju od 1. januarja 2001 do 31. decembra 2008 so dodatne stroške, povezane z obveznostjo odkupa okolju prijazne električne energije, na koncu dejansko krili odjemalci na podlagi svoje porabe.
According to the settled case-law of the Court of Justice, recently confirmed by the judgment in Essent [44], such a compulsory contribution imposed on final consumers constitutes a parafiscal levy, and the conformity of its financing mechanism with the Treaty falls to be examined by the Commission [45].
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča, ki je bila nedavno potrjena s sodbo v zadevi Essent [44], tak obvezni prispevek, ki ga morajo plačati končni odjemalci, pomeni davku podobno dajatev, pri čemer mora skladnost njegovega mehanizma financiranja s Pogodbo preučiti Komisija [45].
The Commission also adopted a similar approach in the decisions cited in paragraph 53.
Komisija je podoben pristop sprejela tudi v odločbah iz uvodne izjave 53.
On the basis of these elements, the system in place in Luxembourg appears very similar to the reimbursement procedures in place in Austria, which have been declared compatible by the Commission [47].
Poleg tega se na podlagi navedenega sistem v Luksemburgu zdi zelo podoben postopkom povračila v Avstriji, za katere je Komisija ugotovila, da so združljivi [47].
The Commission finds that Luxembourg unlawfully implemented the measure of creating a compensation fund for the organisation of the electricity market, in infringement of Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je Luksemburg nezakonito ustanovil kompenzacijski sklad za organizacijo trga z električno energijo, s čimer je kršil člen 88(3) Pogodbe.
However, in the light of all the above elements, the Commission concludes that, for the period from January 2001 to December 2008, the aid granted to green electricity producers in Luxembourg and the exemption from, then — from 1 January 2006 — the reduction in, contributions for large electricity-consuming enterprises, constitute aid compatible under Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty, as stated in the 2001 and 2008 guidelines,
Komisija na podlagi navedenega kljub temu ugotavlja, da v obdobju od januarja 2001 do decembra 2008 pomoč, dodeljena proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije v Luksemburgu, ter nato oprostitev in od 1. januarja 2006 znižanje prispevka za podjetja z visoko porabo električne energije pomenijo pomoč, ki je združljiva s členom 87(3)(c) Pogodbe, kot je določeno v smernicah iz leta 2001 in 2008 –
The creation and administration, between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2008, by Luxembourg of a compensation fund for the organisation of the electricity market constituted State aid under Article 87(1) of the Treaty for green electricity producers in Luxembourg and for large electricity-consuming enterprises.
Kompenzacijski sklad za organizacijo trga z električno energijo, ki ga je Luksemburg ustanovil in upravljal od 1. januarja 2001 in 31. decembra 2008, pomeni državno pomoč v skladu s členom 87(1) Pogodbe, ki daje prednost proizvajalcem okolju prijazne električne energije v Luksemburgu in podjetjem z visoko porabo električne energije.
The aid was compatible with the common market under Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.
Ta pomoč je združljiva s skupnim trgom v skladu s členom 87(3)(c) Pogodbe.
This Decision shall be valid subject to amendment of the compensation mechanism, such as Luxembourg has undertaken to provide in its legislation.
Ta odločba velja v primeru spremembe kompenzacijskega mehanizma, v zvezi s katero je Luksemburg sprejel obveznost, da jo vključi v zakonodajo.
OJ C 255, 23.10.2002, p. 15.
UL C 255, 23.10.2002, str. 15.
Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 62, 12.7.1994, p. 1140.
Mémorial A št. 62 z dne 12. julija 1994, str. 1140.
GDR of 14 October 2005 (1) concerning the supply of electrical energy using renewable energy sources and (2) amending the GDR of 30 May 1994 concerning the production of electrical energy using renewable energy sources or cogeneration and the GDR of 22 May 2001 concerning the introduction of a compensation fund for the organisation of the electricity market (Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 181, 14.11.2005, p. 2948).
Uredba Velikega vojvodstva z dne 14. oktobra 2005 (1) o dobavi električne energije iz obnovljivih virov energije ter (2) spremembi Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 30. maja 1994 o proizvodnji električne energije iz obnovljivih virov energije ali soproizvodnje toplote in električne energije in Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 22. maja 2001 o uvedbi kompenzacijskega sklada za organizacijo trga z električno energijo (Mémorial A št. 181 z dne 14. novembra 2005, str. 2948).
Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 16, 12.2.2008, p. 260.
Mémorial A št. 16 z dne 12. februarja 2008, str. 260.
According to Luxembourg, total electricity consumption in Luxembourg in 2000 came to 5650 GWh.
Po ocenah luksemburških organov je leta 2000 skupna poraba električne energije v Luksemburgu znašala 5650 GWh.
Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 79, 21.8.2000, p. 1896.
Mémorial A št. 79 z dne 21. avgusta 2000, str. 1896.
Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 70, 19.6.2001, p. 1407.
Mémorial A št. 70 z dne 19. junija 2001, str. 1407.
Large electricity consumers are enterprises connected to the electricity grid at a voltage greater than 65 kV.
Veliki porabniki električne energije so podjetja, ki so povezana z električnim omrežjem pri napetosti, višji od 65 kV.
Under Article 14 of the GDR of 22 May 2001, the number of beneficiaries of the exemption could, however, be reduced before 1 January 2006 if the contribution from customers subject to the compensation fund were to increase by more than 50 % during the 2002 and 2003 financial years.
V skladu s členom 14 Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 22. maja 2001 se lahko število upravičencev do oprostitve pred 1. januarjem 2006 vseeno zmanjša, če bi se moral prispevek odjemalcev v kompenzacijski sklad v poslovnih letih 2002 in 2003 povečati za več kot 50 %.
Luxembourg Official Gazette A No 203, 16.12.2005, p. 3256.
Mémorial A št. 203 z dne 16. decembra 2005, str. 3256.
Article 1 of the GDR of 9 December 2005 amending Article 21 of the GDR of 22 May 2001.
Člen 1 Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 9. decembra 2005, ki spreminja člen 21 Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 22. maja 2001.
Article 1 of the GDR of 9 December 2005.
Člen 1Uredbe Velikega vojvodstva z dne 9. decembra 2005.
See paragraphs 14 to 19 of the decision to open the formal investigation procedure (OJ C 255, 23.10.2002, p. 15).
Glej točke 14–19 sklepa o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave (UL C 255, 23.10.2002, str. 15).
Commission Decision of 17 October 2001 in Case N 842/2000 (OJ C 5, 8.1.2002, p. 5).
Odločba Komisije z dne17. oktobra 2001 o zadevi N 842/2000 (UL C 5, 8.1.2002, str. 5).
See point 51.1(a).
Glej točko 51.1(a).
See point 51.1(b), second indent.
Glej drugo alineo točke 51.1(b).
See point 46.
Glej točko 46.
Case C-379/98 [2001] ECR I-2099.
C-379/98, Recueil 2001, str. I-2099.
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted on 11 December 1997.
Kjotski protokol k okvirni konvenciji Združenih narodov o podnebnih spremembah, ki je bil sprejet 11. decembra 1997.
See paragraphs 14 to 19 of the decision to open the formal investigation procedure.
Glej točke 14–19 sklepa o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave.
OJ C 30, 2.2.2002, p. 15.
UL C 30, 2.2.2002, str. 15.
OJ C 148, 25.6.2003, p. 12.
UL C 148, 25.6.2003, str. 12.
OJ C 221, 14.9.2006, p. 8.
UL C 221, 14.9.2006, str. 8.
OJ C 39, 13.2.2008, p. 3.
UL C 39, 13.2.2008, str. 3.
The cases were divided into two parts, part A (renewable energy sources) and part B (cogeneration) (OJ C 221, 14.9.2006, p. 8).
Zadeve so bile razdeljene na del A (obnovljivi viri energije) in del B (soproizvodnja toplote in električne energije) (UL C 221, 14.9.2006, str. 8).
OJ L 219, 24.8.2007, p. 9.
UL L 219, 24.8.2007, str. 9.
See, for example, the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-482/99 France v Commission [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraph 24.
Glej na primer sodbo Sodišča z dne 16. maja 2002, Francija proti Komisiji (C-482/99, Recueil 2002, str. I-4397), odstavek 24.
See the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-83/98 France v Ladbroke Racing and Commission [2000] ECR I-3271, paragraph 50, and the judgment of the Court of First Instance in Case T-358/94 Air France v Commission [1996] ECR II-2109, paragraph 67.
Glej sodbo Sodišča z dne 16. maja 2000, Francija proti Ladbroke Racing in Komisiji (C-83/98, Recueil 2000, str. I-3271), odstavek 50, in sodbo Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 12. decembra 1996, Air France proti Komisiji (T-358/94, Recueil 1996, str. II-2109), odstavek 67.
See the conclusions of Advocate-General Jacobs in Case C-482/99 France v Commission [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraphs 38 to 42, and the judgment in Case C-379/98, cited in footnote 20, paragraphs 59 to 61.
Glej sklepne predloge generalnega pravobranilca Jacobsa v zadevi C-482/99, Francija proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. I-4397, odstavki 38–42, in sodbo z dne 13. marca 2001, navedeno v opombi 20, odstavki 59–61.
See the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-482/99 France v Commission [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraph 37.
Glej sodbo Sodišča z dne 16. maja 2002, Francija proti Komisiji (C-482/99, Recueil 2002, str. I-4397), odstavek 37.
See paragraph (22).
Glej uvodno izjavo 22.
See points 70(5) and 70(10) of the 2008 guidelines.
Glej točko 70(5) in (10) smernic iz leta 2008.
The energy sources concerned are hydro, solar and wind energy, biomass and biogas.
Zadevni viri energije so hidroenergija, sončna energija, vetrna energija, biomasa in bioplin.
Commission Decision of 17 October 2001 in Case N 842/2000.
Odločba Komisije z dne 17. oktobra 2001 o zadevi N 842/2000.
The Luxembourg authorities have also pointed out that cogeneration systems had to meet the high-efficiency criteria set out in point 70(11) of the 2008 guidelines.
Luksemburški organi so tudi določili, da morajo sistemi soproizvodnje toplote in električne energije izpolnjevati merila glede visoke učinkovitosti iz točke 70(11) smernic iz leta 2008.
The quantity had to reflect the diversity of green energies supported by the compensation fund and, in accordance with the terms of the amendment of 13 April 2005, was determined on the basis of the following three factors: ‘1. the enterprise's electricity consumption during the period when it benefited from exemption; 2. the rate of cover of national electricity consumption by the production of electricity supported by the compensation fund; 3. the percentage difference between the enterprise's energy efficiency improvement rate and the general rate [of energy efficiency improvement]’.
Ta količina mora izražati raznolikost okolju prijaznih virov električne energije, ki jih podpira kompenzacijski sklad, in bo določena na podlagi naslednjih treh dejavnikov v skladu s spremembo z dne 13. aprila 2005: „1. električne energije, ki jo podjetje porabi v obdobju, v katerem je bilo upravičeno do oprostitve; 2. deleža proizvodnje električne energije, ki jo podpira kompenzacijski sklad, v okviru nacionalne porabe električne energije; 3. razlike med stopnjo povečane energetske učinkovitosti podjetja in splošno stopnjo [povečane energetske učinkovitosti] v odstotkih“.
The percentage difference could not exceed 100 %.
Razlika v odstotkih ne sme biti višja od 100 %.
The target of a 15 % energy efficiency improvement was adjusted pro rata in the case of enterprises which had started business after 1990.
Cilj povečanja energetske učinkovitosti za 15 % je sorazmerno prilagojen za podjetja, ki so začela delovati pred letom 1990.
Judgment of 17 July 2008 in Case C-206/06, not yet reported.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 17. julija 2008 v zadevi Essent (C-206/06), še ni objavljena v Zbirki odločb.
See, for example, the judgment of the Court of Justice in Joined Cases C-261/01 and C-262/01 Belgium v Eugene van Calster, Felix Cleeren and Openbaar Slachthuis NV [2003] ECR I-12249.
Glej na primer sodbo Sodišča z dne 21. oktobra 2003, Belgija proti Eugene van Calster, Felix Cleeren in Openbaar Slachthuis NV (C-261/01 in C-262/01, Recueil 2003, str. I-12249).
Commission Decision of 4 July 2006 in Cases NN 162/03 and N 317/06 (see footnote 27).
Odločba Komisije z dne 4. julija 2006 o zadevah NN 162/03 in N 317/06 (glej opombo 27).
The notified measure had, however, been de facto implemented on 1 January 2001.
Kljub temu se je priglašeni ukrep dejansko izvajal od 1. januarja 2001.
The Commission accordingly took the view that the measure could not be considered planned aid within the meaning of Article 88(3) of the Treaty and on 30 July 2001 entered it in the register of non-notified aid under number NN 75/01.
Zato je Komisija ocenila, da se ukrep ne more šteti za načrtovano pomoč v smislu člena 88(3) Pogodbe, in ga je 30. julija 2001 vpisala v register nepriglašenih pomoči pod številko NN 75/01.
By letter dated 22 November 2005, registered as received on 23 November 2005, Luxembourg asked for an extension of the time limit for replying, in response to which the Commission, by letter dated 5 December 2005, set the time limit at 31 January 2006.
Luksemburg je z dopisom z dne 22. novembra 2005, evidentiranim 23. novembra 2005, zaprosil za podaljšanje roka za predložitev odgovora, ki ga je Komisija z dopisom z dne 5. decembra 2005 določila za 31. januar 2006.
The Commission received a reply from Luxembourg by letters dated 31 January 2006, registered as received on 3 February 2006.
Komisija je odgovor Luksemburga prejela v dopisih z dne 31. januarja 2006, evidentiranih 3. februarja 2006.
By letter dated 6 December 2007, registered as received on 10 December 2007, Luxembourg requested a further extension of the time limit for replying, which request the Commission granted by letter dated 14 December 2007, fixing the time limit at 17 January 2008.
Luksemburg je z dopisom z dne 6. decembra 2007, evidentiranim 10. decembra 2007, zaprosil za podaljšanje roka za predložitev odgovora, ki ga je Komisija z dopisom z dne 14. decembra 2007 odobrila in kot novi rok določila 17. januar 2008.