natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the case of the undertaking accepted by Decision 2006/109/EC, the specificity of the situation, i.e. the great number of companies which exceeds 20, requires a particular set-up for a special control and monitoring.
V primeru zaveze, sprejete s Sklepom 2006/109/ES, specifičnost situacije, tj. število družb, ki je večje od 20, zahteva posebno ureditev za poseben nadzor in spremljanje.
Norlong did not bring forward any relevant argument suggesting that it was in a different situation as the other companies part of the joint undertaking or justifying that the Commission should treat Norlong in a different way than the other companies that are part to the joint undertaking.
Družba Norlong ni predložila nobenih ustreznih argumentov, ki bi dokazovali, da je bila v drugačnem položaju kot ostale družbe, ki so del skupne zaveze, in da mora Komisija družbo Norlong obravnavati na drugačen način kot ostale družbe, ki so del skupne zaveze.
Moreover, Norlong’s offer would imply a duplication of efforts of the Commission’s control and monitoring system.
Poleg tega bi ponudba družbe Norlong pomenila podvajanje prizadevanj sistema Komisije za nadzor in spremljanje.
Since it would not be practicable and cost-effective for the Commission to control the respect of the obligations deriving from Norlong’s individual undertaking offer, the Commission considers that it cannot accept the separate undertaking offer made by Norlong.
Ker nadzor izpolnjevanja obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz ponudbe družbe Norlong za individualno zavezo, ne bi bil izvedljiv in stroškovno učinkovit, Komisija ne more sprejeti ločene zaveze, ki jo ponuja družba Norlong.
The Union industry objected to the undertaking offer submitted by CCCME together with HanDan, XianXian and Weifang, arguing that the MIP would be too low to protect the European industry from the effect of dumped imports and that the Union industry is suffering further injury.
Industrija Unije je ponudbo zaveze, ki so jo predložile CCCME z družbami HanDan, XianXian in Weifang, zavrnila z utemeljitvijo, da bi bila MIP prenizka, da bi evropsko industrijo ščitila pred učinki dampinškega uvoza, ter da bi bila industriji Unije povzročena še večja škoda.
As regards the level of the MIP, it should be noted that anti-dumping duties were imposed at the level of the dumping margins found which were lower than the injury margins.
Glede ravni MIP je treba opozoriti, da so bile protidampinške dajatve uvedene na ravni ugotovljenih stopenj dampinga, ki so bile nižje kot stopnje škode.
Therefore, the MIP was also set on the normal value and thus eliminates merely the dumping established, in conformity with the principle of the lesser duty rule set out in Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation.
Zato je bila MIP določena za normalno vrednost, kar v skladu s pravilom nižje dajatve iz člena 8(1) osnovne uredbe odpravlja le ugotovljeni damping.
The Union industry further argued that, despite the imposition of anti-dumping measures, the market share of Chinese exporters increased since the original investigation period [11].
Industrija Unije je nadalje utemeljevala, da se je tržni delež kitajskih izvoznikov kljub uvedbi protidampinških ukrepov še povečal od prvotnega obdobja preiskave [11].
The Union industry claimed that this was due to an increase in exports from China combined with a sharp drop in Union consumption.
Industrija Unije je trdila, da je bil razlog v povečanju izvoza iz Kitajske in hkratnem drastičnem upadu potrošnje v Uniji.
However, no conclusive evidence with regard to the alleged sharp drop in consumption was submitted.
Vendar odločilni dokazi o domnevnem drastičnem upadu potrošnje niso bili predloženi.
Moreover, from the statistics available [12], it appears that dumped imports have decreased by 14 % since the original investigation period.
Poleg tega pa se glede na razpoložljivo statistiko [12] zdi, da se je od prvotne preiskave dampinški uvoz zmanjšal za 14 %.
In view of the above, none of the reasons put forward by the Union industry could alter the conclusion that the undertaking offer submitted by CCCME together with HanDan, Weifang and XianXian should be accepted.
Glede na navedeno nobeden od razlogov, ki jih je predložila industrija Unije, ne more spremeniti odločitve, da je treba sprejeti ponudbo zaveze, ki so jo predložile CCCME ter družbe HanDan, Weifang in XianXian.
In order to enable the Commission to monitor effectively the companies’ compliance with the undertaking, when the request for release into free circulation is presented to the relevant customs authority, exemption from the anti-dumping duty will be conditional upon (i) the presentation of an undertaking invoice containing at least the elements listed in the Annex to Council Regulation (EC) No 268/2006 [13]; (ii) the fact that imported goods are manufactured, shipped and invoiced directly by the said company to the first independent customer in the Union; and (iii) the fact that the goods declared and presented to customs correspond precisely to the description on the undertaking invoice.
Da bi Komisija lahko učinkovito nadzorovala, ali družbe spoštujejo zavezo, bo oprostitev protidampinške dajatve, kadar je ustreznemu carinskemu organu predložen zahtevek za sprostitev v prosti promet, odvisna od (i) predložitve fakture na podlagi zaveze, ki vsebuje vsaj podatke iz Priloge k Uredbi Sveta (ES) št. 268/2006 [13]; (ii) tega, ali navedena družba uvoženo blago izdela, odpravi in fakturira neposredno prvi neodvisni stranki v Uniji; in (iii) tega, ali blago, ki je deklarirano in predloženo carinski službi, natanko ustreza opisu na fakturi na podlagi zaveze.
Where no such invoice is presented, or when it does not correspond to the product presented to customs, the appropriate rate of anti-dumping duty shall instead be payable.
Kadar takšna faktura ni predložena ali ne ustreza izdelku, predloženemu carinskim organom, se namesto tega plača ustrezna stopnja protidampinške dajatve.
To further ensure the respect of the undertaking, importers have been made aware by Regulation (EC) No 268/2006 that the non-fulfilment of the conditions provided for by that Regulation, or the withdrawal by the Commission of the acceptance of the undertaking, may lead to a customs debt being incurred for the relevant transactions.
Za zagotovitev upoštevanja zaveze so bili uvozniki z Uredbo (ES) št. 268/2006 opozorjeni, da zaradi kršitve pogojev iz navedene uredbe ali umika sprejetja zaveze s strani Komisije lahko nastane carinski dolg za relevantne transakcije.
In the event of a breach or withdrawal of the undertaking or in case of withdrawal of acceptance of the undertaking by the Commission, the anti-dumping duty imposed in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation shall automatically apply pursuant to Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation.
V primeru kršitve ali umika zaveze ali kadar Komisija umakne sprejetje zaveze, se v skladu s členom 9(4) osnovne uredbe samodejno uporablja protidampinška dajatev, uvedena v skladu s členom 8(9) osnovne uredbe.
In view of the above, the undertaking offered by Norlong should be rejected.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno je treba zavrniti zavezo, ki jo je ponudila družba Norlong.
The offer submitted by CCCME and HanDan, by CCCME and XianXian and by CCCME and Weifang to join the joint price undertaking as accepted by Decision 2006/109/EC should be accepted, and Article 1 of Decision 2006/109/EC should be amended accordingly,
Ponudbo, ki so jo predložile CCCME in HanDan, CCCME in XianXian ter CCCME in Weifang za pridružitev skupni cenovni zavezi, kakor je bila sprejeta s Sklepom 2006/109/ES, je treba sprejeti, člen 1 Sklepa 2006/109/ES pa ustrezno spremeniti –
The undertaking offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China by: (i) the China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronics Products (CCCME) and HanDan County Yan Yuan Smelting and Casting Co., Ltd; (ii) CCCME and XianXian Guozhuang Precision Casting Co. Ltd; and (iii) CCCME and Weifang Stable Casting Co., Ltd is hereby accepted.
Sprejme se zaveza v zvezi s protidampinškim postopkom glede uvoza nekaterih ulitkov s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, ki so jo ponudile: (i) kitajska gospodarska zbornica za uvoz in izvoz strojev ter elektronskih izdelkov („CCCME“) in družba HanDan County Yan Yuan Smelting and Casting Co., Ltd, (ii) CCCME in družba XianXian Guozhuang Precision Casting Co. Ltd ter (iii) CCCME in družba Weifang Stable Casting Co., Ltd.
The table of Article 1 in Decision 2006/109/EC as amended by Decision 2008/437/EC is replaced by the following table:
Preglednica iz člena 1 Sklepa 2006/109/ES, kakor je bil spremenjen s Sklepom 2008/437/ES, se nadomesti z naslednjo preglednico:
and sold by its related sales company GB International Trading Shanghai Co Ltd, B301-310 Yinhai Building., 250 Cao Xi Road., Shanghai
in prodaja z njo povezana prodajna družba GB International Trading Shanghai Co Ltd, B301-310 Yinhai Building., 250 Cao Xi Road., Shanghai
Manufactured and sold by Hebei Shunda Foundry Co., Ltd, Qufu Road, Quyang, 073100, PRC
Proizvaja in prodaja Hebei Shunda Foundry Co., Ltd, Qufu Road, Quyang, 073100, PRC
or manufactured by Hebei Shunda Foundry Co., Ltd, Qufu Road, Quyang, 073100, PRC
ali proizvaja Hebei Shunda Foundry Co., Ltd, Qufu Road, Quyang, 073100, PRC
Done at Brussels, 23 March 2010.
V Bruslju, 23. marca 2010
OJ L 151, 16.6.2009, p. 6.
UL L 151, 16.6.2009, str. 6.
OJ L 153, 12.6.2008, p. 37.
UL L 153, 12.6.2008, str. 37.
OJ L 129, 17.5.2008, p. 1.
UL L 129, 17.5.2008, str. 1.
OJ C 131, 10.6.2009, p. 18.
UL C 131, 10.6.2009, str. 18.
OJ L 164, 26.6.2007, p. 32.
UL L 164, 26.6.2007, str. 32.
The original investigation period covered the period from 1 April 2003 until 31 March 2004.
Prvotna preiskava je zajela obdobje od 1. aprila 2003 do 31. marca 2004.
Source: 14.6 database and Comext.
Vir: 14.6 zbirka podatkov Comext.
on State aid granted by Germany in respect of certain activities of the Bavarian Animal Health Service (C 24/06 (ex NN 75/2000))
o državni pomoči, ki jo je Nemčija dodelila v zvezi z določenimi storitvami bavarske veterinarske službe (Tiergesundheitsdienst Bayern) (C 24/06 (ex NN 75/2000))
(notified under document C(2009) 9954)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2009) 9954)
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti prvega pododstavka člena 108(2),
Having given interested parties notice to submit their comments pursuant to that Article, and having regard to those comments,
po pozivu zainteresiranim stranem, da predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedeno določbo, in ob upoštevanju teh pripomb,
By letter of 21 February 2000 a complaint was lodged with the Commission regarding measures taken by the Bavarian Animal Health Service (TGD).
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 21. februarja 2000 prejela pritožbo glede ukrepov bavarske veterinarske službe Tiergesundheitsdienst Bayern (v nadaljnjem besedilu: TGD).
The same complainant subsequently sent further letters regarding the same complaint.
Sledili so nadaljnji dopisi istega pritožnika, ki so se nanašali na isto pritožbo.
The State aid case was registered under number NN 75/00.
Zadeva je bila evidentirana pod številko NN 75/00.
The Commission wrote a number of letters to Germany in connection with the complaint.
Komisija je v zvezi s to pritožbo na Nemčijo naslovila več dopisov.
The aid was therefore entered in the register of non-notified aid measures.
Pomoč je bila zato vpisana v register nepriglašenih pomoči.
By letter dated 7 July 2006, the Commission informed Germany that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU [1] in respect of the aid.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 7. julija 2006 obvestila Nemčijo o odločitvi, da bo na podlagi te pomoči sprožila postopek iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije [1].
The Commission received written comments from interested parties by letters dated 30 October 2006, 2 November 2006 and 7 November 2006.
Komisija je prejela pripombe zainteresiranih strani z dopisi z dne 30. oktobra 2006, 2. novembra 2006 in 7. novembra 2006.
Germany sent its comments to the Commission by letters dated 6 November 2006, 22 January 2007, 25 July 2008 and 9 February 2009.
Nemčija je predstavila mnenje z dopisi z dne 6. novembra 2006, 22. januarja 2007, 25. julija 2008 in 9. februarja 2009.
The measure is taken pursuant to Article 14(1) of the Law on support for Bavarian agriculture (Gesetz zur Förderung der bayerischen Landwirtschaft — LwFöG).
Ukrep se izvaja v skladu s členom 14(1) zakona o spodbujanju bavarskega kmetijstva (v nadaljnjem besedilu: LwFöG).
The objective of the measure is to safeguard and improve the hygiene of foodstuffs of animal origin.
Cilj ukrepa je zagotoviti in izboljšati higieno živil živalskega izvora.
The beneficiaries are farmers and fishermen (hereinafter referred to collectively as farmers).
Do ukrepa so upravičeni kmetje in ribiči (v nadaljnjem besedilu obe skupini skupaj: kmetje).
A further beneficiary is the Bavarian Animal Health Service (TGD).
Do ukrepa je upravičena tudi bavarska veterinarska služba Tiergesundheitsdienst Bayern (v nadaljnjem besedilu: TGD).
The measure is financed from the resources of the Land of Bavaria and the Bavarian Animal Disease Fund (hereinafter: BTSK).
Ukrep se financira s sredstvi zvezne dežele Bavarska in bavarskega sklada za kužne bolezni živali Bayerische Tierseuchenkasse (v nadaljnjem besedilu: BTSK).
Although described as ‘general measures’ (Globalmaßnahmen), the measures in question benefit only farmers in Bavaria.
Ukrepi v korist kmetov so bili sicer označeni kot „splošni ukrepi“, vendar so to ukrepi, ki so namenjeni le kmetom s prebivališčem na Bavarskem.
Moreover, according to the information provided by Germany, they are very specific and of a purely preventive nature relating to the production of milk and meat and to the rearing of pigs, poultry, sheep and fish.
Poleg tega so to po navedbah Nemčije čisto posebni, izključno preventivni ukrepi v korist pridobivanju mleka in mesa, vzreji prašičev, reji perutnine in ovac ter ribogojstvu.
Stocks (Tierbestände) are examined according to an established programme that takes account of specific animal disease risks or criteria for the prevention and eradication of animal diseases.
Živalske populacije se pregledujejo po točno določenem programu, v katerem se upoštevajo posebna tveganja bolezni živali oziroma merila za preprečevanje bolezni živali in boj proti njim.
Germany has also specified that the support is granted only for general measures in the public interest that go beyond the legal requirements for the individual farmer (letter of 6 November 2006, p. 4).
Poleg tega je Nemčija navedla, da se podpora dodeljuje le za splošne ukrepe javnega interesa, ki presegajo običajne zakonske določbe za posameznega rejca (dopis z dne 6. novembra 2006, str. 4).
The following types of measure are taken on agricultural holdings: continuous monitoring by means of tests and/or precautionary examinations, sampling and (laboratory/serial) analyses, veterinary advice, drawing up prevention and eradication plans and developing vaccination programmes.
Na kmetijskih gospodarstvih se sprejemajo naslednji ukrepi: sprotno spremljanje s testi oziroma preventivnimi pregledi, preiskave in (laboratorijski/sistematski) pregledi, veterinarsko svetovanje, izdelava načrtov za preprečevanje oziroma sanacijskih programov in razvoj programov cepljenja.
Germany has indicated that the measures listed above in recital 14 constitute a basis for specific advice to farmers for appropriate preventive or curative action.
Po navedbah Nemčije pomenijo dejavnosti iz uvodne izjave 14 podlago za svetovanje kmetom glede primernih preventivnih in kurativnih ukrepov.
According to Germany, however, services normally provided by practising veterinary surgeons (e.g. treatment with medicinal products or preventive vaccination) are not part of these ‘general measures’.
Po njenih podatkih pa ti „splošni ukrepi“ ne zajemajo storitev, ki jih običajno ponujajo delujoči veterinarji (npr. zdravljenje z zdravili ali preventivno cepljenje).
These ‘general measures’ are free of charge for farmers.
„Splošni ukrepi“ so za kmete brezplačni.
However, farmers cannot request the measures; the TGD — which has been entrusted with taking them — undertakes them on its own initiative.
Vendar kmetje teh ukrepov ne morejo zahtevati, temveč jih na lastno pobudo sprejme pooblaščena služba TGD.
The Land of Bavaria reimburses the cost of the measures to the TGD.
Stroške teh ukrepov službi TGD povrne dežela Bavarska.
Pursuant to the second sentence of Article 14(1) of the LwFöG, State payments are granted for 50 % of essential expenditure.
V skladu z drugim stavkom člena 14(1) LwFöG „država povrne 50 % potrebnih stroškov“.
A further percentage of the TGD’s personnel and non-personnel costs is reimbursed from other State resources, namely the BTSK (see State aid case numbers NN 23/07, N 426/03 and N 81/04).
Drugi del kadrovskih in materialnih stroškov službe TGD se nadomesti iz drugih državnih sredstev, in sicer jih povrne BTSK (glej zadeve NN 23/07, N 426/03 in N 81/04).
Together, this amounts to reimbursement of up to 100 % of the costs.
Skupaj to pomeni do 100-odstotno povračilo stroškov.
The benefits to the TGD are set out below.
V korist službe TGD se izvajajo naslednje storitve.
Under the wording of the LwFöG, the TGD is reimbursed only half of the essential expenditure from State resources.
V skladu z besedilom LwFöG se službi TGD iz državnih sredstev nadomesti le polovica „potrebnih stroškov“.
According to the information provided by Germany, however, up to 100 % reimbursement can be obtained.
Dejansko pa se po navedbah Nemčije lahko pridobi do 100-odstotno nadomestilo.
The aid has been paid to the TGD since 1974.
Službi TGD se pomoč dodeljuje od leta 1974.
Under Article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [3], the powers of the Commission to recover aid are subject to a limitation period of ten years.
V skladu s členom 15(1) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [3] imajo pooblastila Komisije, zahtevati vračilo pomoči, desetletni zastaralni rok.
Accordingly, the budgetary data provided by Germany and presented in the Annex concern the payments to the TGD for the costs incurred in discharging public service obligations during the period from 1990 to 2008.
Proračunski podatki, ki jih je Nemčija posredovala in so navedeni v Prilogi, ustrezno zadevajo plačila službi TGD za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe v obdobju od leta 1990 do leta 2008.
Reasons for initiating the formal investigation procedure and the scope thereof
Razlogi za začetek formalnega postopka preiskave in njegov obseg
It was not clear, after initial examination, whether the budget payments and the payments from the BTSK favoured the TGD or not.
Po prvi preiskavi ni bilo jasno, ali plačila iz proračunskih sredstev in plačila sklada BTSK, namenjena službi TGD, zagotavljajo konkurenčno prednost.
Furthermore, the complainant alleged that the veterinary surgeons employed by the TGD provide certain clinical/diagnostic and therapeutic services (care services) at up to 90 % below cost price.
Poleg tega je pritožnik navedel, da so bile nekatere klinično-diagnostične in terapevtske (kurativne) storitve nameščenih veterinarjev službe TGD ponujene po cenah, ki so bile do 90 % nižje od osnovnih stroškov.
This was the sphere in which the TGD became a commercial operator.
To naj bi bilo področje, na katerem naj bi TGD delovala v skladu z vidiki pridobitne gospodarske dejavnosti.
According to the complainant, this is possible only because the TGD receives financial assistance for the ‘general measures’, which enables it to offer clinical/diagnostic and therapeutic services considerably cheaper than veterinary surgeons in independent practice, since the latter have to manage without financial assistance and are not on site, whereas the TGD veterinarians are already on site, thus saving transport costs and giving them the opportunity to acquire business.
To pa naj bi bilo po mnenju pritožnika mogoče le zato, ker je TGD prejemala subvencije za „splošne ukrepe“ in ji je bilo tako omogočeno, da je klinično-diagnostične in terapevtske storitve ponujala precej ugodneje, kot so to lahko storili samostojni veterinarji, ki so morali preživeti brez subvencij. Poleg tega je pritožnik opozoril na primernost ugodnega sklepanja pogodb in neobstoj potnih stroškov zaposlenih veterinarjev službe TGD, ki so že delovali v kraju samem.
In line with its notice on the determination of the rules applicable for the assessment of unlawful State aid [4], the Commission always assesses the compatibility of unlawful State aid with the internal market in accordance with the substantive criteria set out in any instrument in force at the time when the aid was granted.
V skladu s Sporočilom Komisije o določitvi pravil, ki se uporabljajo za oceno nezakonite državne pomoči [4], Komisija vedno presoja združljivost nezakonitih državnih pomoči s skupnim trgom na podlagi meril, ki so opredeljena v določbah, veljavnih ob dodelitvi pomoči.
The Commission did not have, at the time it initiated the procedure, sufficient information to be sure that the aid for farmers complied with the relevant Community provisions, i.e. the Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural sector and the Guidelines for examining State aid to fisheries and aquaculture.
Komisija ob sprožitvi postopka ni imela na voljo zadostnih informacij, da bi se prepričala, ali so pomoči v korist kmetov ustrezale zadevnim določbam Unije, tj. Smernicam za državne pomoči v kmetijstvu in Smernicam za preučitev državnih pomoči na področju ribištva in ribogojstva.
The Commission therefore requested the relevant information from Germany.
Zato je Komisija pozvala Nemčijo, da predloži potrebne informacije.
By letter of 12 December 2008, the Commission services asked Germany to confirm whether the aid under investigation continued being granted after 1 January 2008 and, if so, to provide the information necessary to assess the compatibility of the aid with the Community Guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013 [5] (hereinafter ‘Guidelines’), which replaced the Community Guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector [6] (hereinafter ‘Community Guidelines’) as of 1 January 2007, and the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture [7] (hereinafter ‘the 2008 Guidelines’).
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 12. decembra 2008 pozvala Nemčijo, da potrdi, ali se je dodeljevanje pomoči, ki so predmet preiskave, nadaljevalo po 1. januarju 2008, in če se je, da predloži potrebne dokumente za preizkus združljivosti pomoči s Smernicami Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem in gozdarskem sektorju 2007–2013 [5] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: okvirna ureditev), ki so nadomestile okvir Skupnosti z dne 1. februarja 2000 za državne pomoči v kmetijstvu [6] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: okvir Skupnosti) in so začele veljati 1. januarja 2007, ter s Smernicami za preučitev državne pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo [7] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice iz leta 2008).
By letter of 9 February 2009, Germany declared that the aid would continue to be granted in the agriculture sector after 2008 and provided the requested information.
Nemčija je v dopisu z dne 9. februarja 2009 sporočila, da se je dodeljevanje pomoči v kmetijstvu po letu 2008 nadaljevalo, in predložila zahtevane informacije.