natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission thus considered in its opening decision that cable-laying might not be considered to constitute maritime transport and consequently might not be eligible for State aid to maritime transport within the meaning of the Community guidelines on State aid to maritime transport (hereinafter the Guidelines) [15].
Komisija je zato v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka menila, da polaganja kablov ni mogoče šteti za pomorski prevoz in zato ni upravičeno do državne pomoči v pomorskem prometu v smislu smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči v pomorskem prometu (v nadaljnjem besedilu: smernice) [15].
Doubts about the compatibility of the measures concerning dredging
Dvomi o združljivosti ukrepov v zvezi s poglabljanjem dna
The opening decision set out that the Commission had serious doubts as to whether all dredging activities covered by the scheme constitute maritime transport within the meaning of the Guidelines.
V odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka je bilo navedeno, da Komisija močno dvomi, da vse dejavnosti poglabljanja dna, ki so zajete v shemi, pomenijo pomorski prevoz v smislu smernic.
The Commission thus considered that not all of these dredging activities might be eligible for State aid to maritime transport.
Komisija je zato menila, da vse navedene dejavnosti poglabljanja dna ne morejo biti upravičene do državne pomoči v pomorskem prometu.
COMMENTS FROM DENMARK ON THE DECISION OPENING THE INVESTIGATION
PRIPOMBE DANSKE K ODLOČITVI O SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
Comments with respect to cable-laying
Pripombe glede polaganja kablov
With regard to cable-laying vessels, Denmark emphasises that the Commission services, in a letter dated 11 August 2006 [16], assured Denmark that cable-laying vessels could be covered by the State aid measures at stake provided that the requirement of 50 % maritime transport was fulfilled.
Danska glede plovil za polaganje kablov poudarja, da so ji službe Komisije v dopisu z dne 11. avgusta 2006 [16] zagotovile, da se lahko ukrepi državne pomoči nanašajo na plovila za polaganje kablov, če je izpolnjena zahteva po 50-odstotnem pomorskem prevozu.
According to Denmark, the Commission stated that cable-laying activities could be equated with maritime transport with respect to that part of the activities involving the transport of cable drums from the port of loading to the location on the high sea where cable-laying was to start, implying that the ratio of maritime activities on all activities should be calculated on the basis of the distance the vessel sails without laying a cable.
Po trditvah Danske je Komisija navedla, da se lahko dejavnosti polaganja kablov enačijo s pomorskim prevozom, in sicer tisti del dejavnosti, ki obsega prevoz kabelskih bobnov iz pristanišča natovarjanja na kraj na odprtem morju, kjer naj bi se polaganje kabla začelo, kar naj bi pomenilo, da je treba razmerje med pomorskimi dejavnostmi in vsemi dejavnostmi izračunati na podlagi razdalje, ki jo plovilo naredi brez polaganja kabla.
In addition, Denmark underlines that it has not understood why the Commission in its letter dated 10 July 2007 is of the view that cable-laying cannot be a combination of maritime transport and other activities and maintains that this view is contrary to the letter of the Commission services dated 11 August 2006.
Danska tudi poudarja, da ne razume, zakaj Komisija v dopisu z dne 10. julija 2007 meni, da polaganje kablov ne more združevati pomorskega prevoza in drugih dejavnosti, in trdi, da je tako stališče v nasprotju z dopisom služb Komisije z dne 11. avgusta 2006.
Comments with respect to dredging
Pripombe glede poglabljanja dna
According to Denmark, the Guidelines make is possible to divide the overall activity of dredgers into maritime transport and other activities.
Po trditvah Danske je celotno dejavnost plavajočih bagrov v skladu s smernicami mogoče razdeliti na pomorski prevoz in druge dejavnosti.
Therefore Denmark does not understand why a similar division cannot be made for cable-laying vessels.
Danska zato ne razume, zakaj enaka razdelitev ni mogoča pri plovilih za polaganje kablov.
Denmark is of the opinion that the judgment in question is irrelevant to the application of the Guidelines to cable-laying vessels.
Danska meni, da zadevna sodba ne vpliva na uporabo smernic pri plovilih za polaganje kablov.
The Danish authorities mention that the Guidelines deal not only with maritime transport as defined in Regulations (EEC) No 4055/86 and (EEC) No 3577/92 but, ‘[…] also, in specific parts, relate to towage and dredging’.
Danski organi navajajo, da se v smernicah ne obravnava samo pomorski prevoz, kot je opredeljen v uredbah (EGS) št. 4055/86 in (EGS) št. 3577/92, ampak „[…] se v določenih delih nanašajo tudi na vleko in poglabljanje dna“.
According to the Guidelines at least 50 % of all activities constitute maritime transport which, for dredgers, is defined in the Guidelines, according to the Danish authorities, as ‘[…] transport at sea of extracted materials […]’.
V skladu s smernicami se vsaj 50 % vseh dejavnosti nanaša na pomorski prevoz, ki je za plavajoče bagre opredeljen v smernicah, in sicer po navedbah danskih organov kot „[…] prevoz izkopanega materiala po morju […]“.
According to the Danish authorities, the Guidelines should be interpreted as qualifying the transport at sea of extracted materials as maritime transport.
Po trditvah danskih organov je treba smernice razumeti, kot da se prevoz izkopanega materiala po morju šteje za pomorski prevoz.
Denmark also disputes the initiative of the Commission to unilaterally extend the scope of an investigation procedure to cover areas that are not included in the notification which is the subject of the investigation as the Commission seems to be carrying out [17].
Danska tudi nasprotuje pobudi Komisije za enostransko razširitev obsega postopka preiskave, da bi zajel področja, ki niso vključena v priglasitev, kar je očitno predmet preiskave, ki jo izvaja Komisija [17].
According to Denmark, there is no provision in Chapter II of the State Aid Procedure Regulation on notified aid allowing the Commission to include already existing State aid measures in the investigation.
Po trditvah Danske v poglavju II Uredbe o postopku državne pomoči ni nobene določbe o priglašeni pomoči, na podlagi katere bi lahko Komisija v preiskavo vključila že veljavne ukrepe državne pomoči.
If the Commission wishes to investigate existing State aid measures it should, according to Denmark, do so under Chapter V on procedure regarding existing aid schemes of the said Regulation.
Če Komisija želi preiskati veljavne ukrepe državne pomoči, bi po trditvah Danske to morala storiti na podlagi poglavja V navedene uredbe, ki se nanaša na postopek v zvezi z veljavnimi sistemi pomoči.
Denmark states that it notified the amendments on 21 January 2005 in the form of two bills which the Government had put before Parliament on 12 January 2005 (Bill on taxation of seafarers and Bill amending the tonnage tax Act).
Danska navaja, da je spremembe priglasila 21. januarja 2005, in sicer v obliki dveh zakonskih predlogov, ki ju je vlada predložila parlamentu 12. januarja 2005 (predlog Zakona o obdavčitvi pomorščakov in predlog Zakona o spremembi Zakona o davku na tonažo).
According to Denmark, the two bills in question could be regarded as approved by the Commission for the two following reasons:
Po trditvah Danske se lahko za oba zadevna zakonska predloga šteje, da ju je Komisija odobrila, in sicer iz naslednjih dveh razlogov:
firstly because, as alleged by the Danish authorities, the Commission did not react to the letter of 21 January 2005 from the Permanent Representation within the deadline set up by the State Aid Procedure Regulation,
prvič, ker se Komisija po trditvah danskih organov na dopis stalnega predstavništva z dne 21. januarja 2005 ni odzvala v roku iz Uredbe o postopku državne pomoči,
secondly, the Commission services subsequently confirmed that the amendments complied with the Guidelines.
drugič, službe Komisije so naknadno potrdile, da so spremembe v skladu s smernicami.
Therefore Denmark alleges that the Act on taxation of seafarers in its version of spring 2005 is an approved State aid measure under EU law.
Danska zato trdi, da je različica Zakona o obdavčitvi pomorščakov iz pomladi 2005 na podlagi zakonodaje EU odobren ukrep državne pomoči.
Therefore Denmark concludes that the investigation procedure can only cover the allegedly sole notified measure, i.e. the possible inclusion of seafarers on board cable-laying vessels in the DIS scheme.
Danska iz tega sklepa, da se lahko postopek preiskave nanaša samo na domnevno edini priglašeni ukrep, in sicer morebitno vključitev pomorščakov, ki delajo na plovilih za polaganje kablov, v sistem DIS.
In relation to dredging vessels, the Danish government indicates that on 13 December 2006 it adopted the Act amending the Act on the taxation of seafarers.
Danska vlada glede plovil za poglabljanje dna navaja, da je 13. decembra 2006 sprejela Zakon o spremembi Zakona o obdavčitvi pomorščakov.
The amendment to the Act on taxation of seafarers in question was notified on 15 January 2007.
Zadevna sprememba Zakona o obdavčitvi pomorščakov je bila priglašena 15. januarja 2007.
Denmark considers the transport at deep sea of extracted materials to be maritime transport for the purpose of the Guidelines.
Danska šteje prevoz izkopanega materiala po odprtem morju za pomorski prevoz v smislu smernic.
Dredgers are therefore covered by the Guidelines regardless of the content of Regulations (EEC) No 4055/86 and (EEC) No 3577/92 where the dredgers are carrying out maritime transport (defined, according to Denmark, as ‘transport at sea of extracted material’) for at least 50 % of their operational time.
Plavajoči bagri so zato ne glede na vsebino uredb (EGS) št. 4055/86 in (EGS) št. 3577/92 zajeti v smernicah, če pomorski prevoz (ki je po navedbah Danske opredeljen kot „prevoz izkopanega materiala po morju“) obsega najmanj 50 % njihovega obratovalnega časa.
The Danish authorities add that activities in ‘limited maritime traffic’ are not covered by the Danish State aid schemes.
Danski organi dodajajo, da dejavnosti „omejenega pomorskega prometa“ niso zajete v danskih shemah državnih pomoči.
‘Limited maritime traffic’ is understood to be activities in ports and fjords, for example.
„Omejen pomorski promet“ naj bi obsegal na primer dejavnosti v pristaniščih in fjordih.
Excavation or dredging work in and around ports and fjords therefore always falls outside the scope of the DIS regime.
Izkopavanje ali poglabljanje dna v pristaniščih in fjordih ali v njihovi okolici torej nikoli ne spada na področje uporabe sistema DIS.
The same applies to cases where a vessel is lying stationary.
Enako velja za primere, ko plovilo miruje.
The Danish authorities explain that, in practice, excavation and dredging work are (most) often carried out using bucket-chain dredgers which do not have their own engines and so fall outside the scope of the DIS regime for that reason too.
Danski organi pojasnjujejo, da se izkopavanje in poglabljanje dna v praksi (najbolj) pogosto izvajata s plavajočimi bagri vedričarji, ki nimajo lastnih motorjev in tudi zato ne spadajo na področje uporabe sistema DIS.
Vessels with their own motive power can be covered.
Plovila na lastni pogon so lahko zajeta.
However vessels employed on contracting activities at sea are also excluded from the DIS regime.
Vendar so iz sistema DIS izključena tudi plovila, ki se uporabljajo za investicijsko-vzdrževalna dela na morju.
Contracting activities are understood to mean the construction and repair of ports, moles, bridges, oil rigs, wind farms and other installations at sea.
Med investicijsko-vzdrževalna dela prištevamo izgradnjo in popravila pristanišč, pomolov, mostov, naftnih ploščadi, vetrnih polj in drugih naprav na morju.
OBSERVATIONS EXPRESSED BY INTERESTED PARTIES
PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI
European Dredging Association, hereinafter (EUDA)
5.1 Evropsko združenje za čiščenje in poglabljanje morskega dna (v nadaljnjem besedilu: EUDA)
firstly, EUDA supports the view that the maritime cluster of the European dredging industry should be able to benefit from State aid under the Guidelines in all cases where it is confronted with competition from third countries’ vessels,
prvič, EUDA se strinja, da bi moral biti pomorski grozd evropske industrije poglabljanja morskega dna upravičen do državne pomoči na podlagi smernic v vseh primerih, ko se sooča s konkurenco plovil iz tretjih držav,
secondly, EUDA thinks that State aid approved by the Commission on the basis of the Guidelines should not impose any unduly administrative burdens on the maritime cluster of the European dredging industry.
drugič, EUDA meni, da državna pomoč, ki jo Komisija odobri na podlagi smernic, ne bi smela povzročiti nepotrebnih upravnih obremenitev za pomorski grozd evropske industrije poglabljanja dna.
European Community Shipowners’ Association (ECSA)
Združenje ladjarjev Evropske skupnosti (ECSA)
ECSA considers that the approach of the Commission is very theoretical and does not take into account the objectives and the contents of the Guidelines.
ECSA meni, da je pristop Komisije zelo teoretičen ter ne upošteva ciljev in vsebine smernic.
According to ECSA, it is already a precondition in the Guidelines that a substantial part of dredging activity consists of maritime transport.
Po trditvah združenja ECSA že smernice vsebujejo predpogoj, da mora precejšen del dejavnosti poglabljanja morskega dna obsegati pomorski prevoz.
ECSA holds that dredgers and cable-layers transport respectively extracted materials and cables from point A to point B. In this respect the loading and unloading point would be irrelevant according to ECSA.
ECSA meni, da plavajoči bagri in ladje za poglabljanje morskega dna prevažajo izkopani material in kable z enega kraja na drugega. Pri tem naj bi bil kraj natovarjanja in raztovarjanja po mnenju združenja ECSA nepomemben.
ECSA emphasises that the coverage of the transport activities of dredgers and cable-layers by the Guidelines is fully in accordance with the objectives of the Guidelines since these specialised vessels also operate in a global market with fierce global competition and within a global labour market.
ECSA poudarja, da je uporaba smernic za prevozne dejavnosti plavajočih bagrov in ladij za polaganje kablov popolnoma v skladu s cilji smernic, saj ta specializirana plovila delujejo tudi na svetovnem trgu z ostro svetovno konkurenco in na svetovnem trgu delovne sile.
Chamber of British Shipping
Britanska pomorska zbornica
The Chamber of British Shipping underlines that the Guidelines acknowledges that eligible and non-eligible activities of dredgers could indeed be carried out by the same ship and must in consequence be differentiated.
Britanska pomorska zbornica poudarja, da se v smernicah priznava, da lahko ista ladja dejansko izvaja dejavnosti poglabljanja morskega dna, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje za pomoč, in dejavnosti, ki teh pogojev ne izpolnjujejo, ter da jih je zato treba obravnavati ločeno.
Therefore the Chamber of British Shipping expresses concerns at the statement that ‘the Commission considers it impossible to divide a given activity into a part falling under the notion of maritime transport and a part excluded thereof’.
Britansko pomorsko zbornico zato skrbi navedba, da „Komisija meni, da je določeno dejavnost nemogoče razčleniti na del, ki se šteje za pomorski prevoz, in del, ki je iz tega izključen“.
In the opinion of the Chamber of British Shipping there is no need to draw a distinction between the transport of goods or passengers that is carried out to or from a place which appears on a list of ports and installations and such transport to some other specific points at sea.
Po mnenju britanske pomorske zbornice ni nobene potrebe po razlikovanju med prevozom blaga ali potnikov v kraje in iz krajev, ki so na seznamu pristanišč in naprav, ter takim prevozom na nekatere druge točno določene kraje na morju.
It is concerned that a new test seems to be introduced, relating to the purpose for which the cargo or passenger is being transported.
Zaskrbljena je, ker je očitno uvedeno novo merilo, ki se nanaša na namen prevoza blaga ali potnikov.
Therefore it holds that the motive of the customer is not relevant to the eligibility of a shipping operation.
Zato meni, da strankin namen ne vpliva na upravičenost prevoza po morju.
The Chamber of British Shipping clarifies that the specific destination of the material transported is mostly determined by the client in accordance with its future use and/or environmental or other licences.
Britanska pomorska zbornica pojasnjuje, da namembni kraj prevažanega materiala večinoma določi stranka glede na njegovo prihodnjo uporabo in/ali okoljska ali druga dovoljenja.
Concerning the description of the normal operation of a cable-layer in the notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union, the Chamber of British Shipping disagrees with the preliminary assessment of the Commission: according to it, cable-layers load their customer’s cargo of cable at port facilities and transport it to a sequence of other locations, which may include other ports, where it is delivered through progressive laying on or in the seabed.
Britanska pomorska zbornica se glede opisa običajnega delovanja ladje za polaganje kablov iz obvestila, objavljenega v Uradnem listu Evropske unije, ne strinja s predhodno oceno Komisije: v njem je navedeno, da ladje za polaganje kablov naložijo strankin tovor s kabli v pristaniških objektih in ga prepeljejo na veliko drugih lokacij, med katerimi so lahko druga pristanišča, pri čemer se tja dostavi s postopnim polaganjem na ali v morsko dno.
Norwegian Shipowners’ Association
Združenje norveških ladjarjev
According to the Norwegian Shipowners’ Association, the Commission should interpret the concept of ‘maritime transport’ in a flexible manner, given that cable-laying and dredging companies have the same international mobility and are subject to the same forces of global competition as classic ‘maritime transportation’.
Komisija bi po mnenju združenja norveških ladjarjev morala uporabiti prožno razlago pojma „pomorski prevoz“, saj so podjetja za polaganje kablov in poglabljanje morskega dna enako mednarodno mobilna in izpostavljena enakim silam svetovne konkurence kot tradicionalni „pomorski prevoz“.
In their view the transport and the laying of a cable from point A to point B is a simultaneous and integrated operation, where the cable is gradually ‘unloaded’ on the seabed.
Po njihovem mnenju sta prevoz in polaganje kablov od enega kraja do drugega hkratna in povezana postopka postopnega „raztovarjanja“ kablov na morsko dno.
Similarly, the Norwegian Shipowners’ Association is of the opinion that transportation aiming at disposing of sludge resulting from a dredging operation must be considered as transportation, even if the dredging and/or unloading site is neither a port, nor an offshore installation.
Združenje norveških ladjarjev podobno meni, da je treba prevoz zaradi odstranjevanja mulja, ki nastane pri poglabljanju dna, šteti za prevoz, tudi če poglabljanje dna oziroma raztovarjanje ne poteka v pristanišču ali na plavajoči napravi.
According to Armateurs de France, maritime transport is not defined identically in Regulations (EEC) No 4055/86 and (EEC) No 3577/92, as the Guidelines refer to.
Po trditvah združenja francoskih ladjarjev pomorski prevoz v uredbah (EGS) št. 3577/92 in (EGS) št. 4055/86, na kateri se sklicujejo smernice, ni opredeljen popolnoma enako.
Therefore the definition for maritime transport concerning State aid matters does not have to be the same as the definition set out in the Regulations.
Zato ni nujno, da je opredelitev pomorskega prevoza na področju državnih pomoči enaka opredelitvi iz uredb.
Armateurs de France holds that nevertheless the definition provided for by Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 is understood as not being exhaustive.
Združenje francoskih ladjarjev kljub temu meni, da opredelitve iz Uredbe (EGS) št. 3577/92 ne smemo razumeti kot izčrpne.
According to Armateurs de France, the Guidelines do not thus exclude cable-laying and dredging activities.
Po mnenju združenja francoskih ladjarjev smernice tako ne izključujejo dejavnosti polaganja kablov in poglabljanja morskega dna.
In the opinion of Armateurs de France, the judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 January 2007 in Case C-251/04 is not relevant for the activities in question as it does not exclude cable-laying or dredging activities from maritime transport.
Združenje francoskih ladjarjev meni, da sodba Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti z dne 11. januarja 2007 v zadevi C-251/04 za zadevne dejavnosti ni pomembna, ker dejavnosti polaganja kablov ali poglabljanja morskega dna ne izključuje iz pomorskega prometa.
Armateurs de France emphasises that these activities are not services ‘related, incidental or ancillary to the provision of maritime transport services’, within the meaning of the judgment, but constitute rather a transport at sea of goods to or from offshore installations.
Združenje francoskih ladjarjev poudarja, da te dejavnosti niso storitve, „ki so povezane, dodatne ali pomožne storitvi pomorskega prometa“, v smislu navedene sodbe, ampak pomenijo pomorski prevoz blaga na plavajoče naprave ali z njih.
Armateurs de France maintains that, if the Guidelines were to be interpreted so that only pure maritime transport could be eligible for aid to maritime transport, such an interpretation would in theory also exclude from the scope of the Guidelines vessels travelling empty on their way back from transporting goods.
Združenje francoskih ladjarjev trdi, da bi razlaga smernic v smislu, da je lahko samo pravi pomorski prevoz upravičen do pomoči v pomorskem prometu, s področja uporabe smernic teoretično izključila tudi plovila, ki se prazna vračajo po prevozu blaga.
Since the Guidelines already cover towage and dredging vessels in the case that more than 50 % of the activity effectively carried out by a tug during a given year constitutes maritime transport, according to Armateurs de France, this concept should be extended to all service vessels, such as dredgers and cable-layers.
Ker smernice že zajemajo plovila za vleko in poglabljanje dna, če se več kot 50 % dejansko izvedenih dejavnosti vlačilca med letom nanaša na pomorski prevoz, je po mnenju združenja francoskih ladjarjev ta pojem treba razširiti na vsa servisna plovila, kot so plavajoči bagri in ladje za polaganje kablov.
Alcatel-Lucent underlines the importance of cable-layers in the maritime labour market, taking into account the requirement of high level of technical knowledge in that field.
Družba Alcatel-Lucent poudarja pomen ladij za polaganje kablov na pomorskem trgu delovne sile glede na visoko stopnjo zahtevanega strokovnega znanja na tem področju.
In the opinion of Alcatel-Lucent, cable-layers employ the most qualified workers in the maritime labour market.
Po mnenju družbe Alcatel-Lucent so na ladjah za polaganje kablov zaposleni najbolje usposobljeni kadri na celotnem pomorskem trgu delovne sile.
Therefore the extension of the DIS regime to cable-layers fulfils the objective of State aid to maritime transport as defined in the Guidelines as it would safeguard high quality employment in Europe for European marine employees.
Zato razširitev sistema DIS na ladje za polaganje kablov izpolnjuje v smernicah opredeljeni cilj državnih pomoči v pomorskem prometu, saj bi Evropejcem, ki opravljajo pomorski poklic, zagotovila visokokakovostna delovna mesta v Evropi.
Due to the crisis on the telecom market, the fleet of Community-flagged telecom cable vessels decreased from 80 to 35 vessels competing with vessels registered under flags of convenience.
Število plovil za polaganje telekomunikacijskih kablov, ki plujejo pod zastavo Skupnosti, se je zaradi krize na telekomunikacijskem trgu z 80 zmanjšalo na 35 plovil, ki konkurirajo plovilom, registriranim pod zastavami ugodnosti.
The market is global.
Trg je svetoven.
It reached 100000 km per year at the height of the Internet bubble, then decreased to 20000 km per year between 2003 and 2006 and approaches at present 50000 km to 70000 km per year.
Na vrhuncu internetnega mehurčka je na leto dosegel 100000 km, se nato med letoma 2003 in 2006 zmanjšal na 20000 km na leto, medtem ko trenutno znaša blizu 50000 do 70000 km na leto.