natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The notification was withdrawn by Hungary and an NN case was later opened by the Commission on the PPAs themselves (see Chapter 1 above).
Madžarska je obvestilo preklicala in kasneje je Komisija odprla NN primer glede samih SNEE (glej zgornje poglavje 1).
It should also be noted that, as shown by the Table below, the Commission did not in fact miss the three-month deadline referred to by the interested parties:
Treba je poudariti, da kot prikazuje spodnja tabela, Komisija ni zamudila trimesečnega roka, na katerega se sklicujejo zainteresirane stranke:
Deadline after receipt of information
Rok po prejemu informacij
Notification by Hungary
Obvestilo Madžarske
Questions by the Commission
Vprašanja Komisije
29 days
29 dni
Answers by Hungary
Odgovori Madžarske
2 months and 6 days
2 meseca in 6 dni
2 months and 27 days
2 meseca in 27 dni
Withdrawal of the notification by Hungary
Preklic obvestila s strani Madžarske
In addition to the above written correspondence, personal meetings took place between the Commission and the Hungarian authorities on 15 July 2004, 30 November 2004 and 12 January 2005.
Poleg zgoraj omenjene pisne korespondence so se 15. julija 2004, 30. novembra 2004 in 12. januarja 2005 odvijala tudi zasebna srečanja med Komisijo in madžarskimi organi.
As far as the present procedure is concerned, the Commission hereunder assesses whether the PPAs contain existing or new aid on the basis of the provision of the Accession Act and the Procedural Regulation.
Glede zadevnega postopka Komisija v tej odločbi ocenjuje, ali SNEE vsebujejo veljavno ali novo pomoč na podlagi določb Akta o pristopu in Postopkovne uredbe.
In accordance with Chapter 3 of Annex IV to the Accession Act, all State aid measures that entered into force before accession, are still applicable after that date and do not fall under one of the categories of existing aid listed below shall be regarded, as of accession, as new aid within the meaning of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty.
V skladu s poglavjem 3 Priloge IV Akta o pristopu se vsi ukrepi državne pomoči, ki so bili veljavni pred pristopom in so še vedno veljavni po tem datumu ter ne spadajo v nobeno izmed spodaj navedenih kategorij obstoječe pomoči, od pristopa naprej štejejo za novo pomoč v smislu člena 88(3) Pogodbe ES.
It does not cover any PPA that ended before that date.
Ne nanaša se na SNEE, ki so bili zaključeni pred tem datumom.
For all additional reasons mentioned under point 7.4 above, the measure is applicable after accession within the meaning of the Accession Act.
Zaradi vseh dodatnih razlogov, omenjenih v zgornji točki 7.4., je ukrep veljaven po pristopu v smislu Akta o pristopu.
The three categories of existing aid referred to in the Accession Act comprise:
Tri kategorije veljavne pomoči iz Akta o pristopu obsegajo:
Aid measures put into effect before 10 December 1994.
Ukrepe pomoči, ki so začeli veljati pred 10. decembrom 1994.
All the PPAs were signed and entered into force after 10 December 1994.
Vsi SNEE so bili podpisani in so začeli veljati po 10. decembru 1994.
Aid measures which were included in the list of existing State aid measures attached to the Accession Act.
Ukrepe pomoči, ki so bili vključeni na seznam veljavnih ukrepov državne pomoči, ki je bil priložen Aktu o pristopu.
Neither the PPAs in general nor any of the individual PPAs were included in the Appendix to Annex IV to the Accession Act referred to in point 1(b), Chapter 3, Annex IV, which contains the list of existing aid measures.
Niti SNEE na splošno niti kateri koli izmed posameznih SNEE niso bili vključeni v Dodatek k Prilogi IV Akta o pristopu iz točke 1(b), poglavja 3, Priloge IV, ki vsebuje seznam obstoječih ukrepov pomoči.
Aid measures which prior to the date of accession had been assessed by the State aid authority of the Member State and had been found to be compatible with Community law and which the Commission had not objected to because it had serious doubts regarding compatibility with the common market pursuant to the procedure laid down in the Accession Act, the so-called ‘interim procedure’ (cf. second paragraph, Chapter 3 of Annex IV to the Accession Act).
Ukrepi pomoči, ki jih je pred dnem pristopa ocenil organ za nadzor državnih pomoči države članice in za katere je bilo ugotovljeno, da so združljivi s pravom Skupnosti, ter jim Komisija ni ugovarjala v skladu s postopkom iz odstavka 2, zaradi resnih dvomov v združljivost ukrepov s skupnim trgom na podlagi postopka, ki je opisan v Aktu o pristopu, t. i. „začasnim postopkom“ (cf. drugi odstavek, poglavje 3 Priloge k Aktu o pristopu).
No PPAs were submitted to the Commission under the so-called interim procedure.
Komisija med t. i. začasnim postopkom ni prejela nobenih SNEE.
As the PPAs do not belong to any of the categories of existing aid enumerated in the Accession Act, they constitute new aid as of the date of accession.
Ker SNEE ne spadajo v nobeno izmed kategorij obstoječe pomoči, ki so naštete v Aktu o pristopu, predstavljajo od dneva pristopa novo pomoč.
The Commission notes that this categorisation is also in line with the last sentence of Article 1(b)(v) of the Procedural Regulation.
Komisija poudarja, da je ta kategorizacija tudi v skladu z zadnjim stavkom člena 1(b)(v) Postopkovne uredbe.
This Article states that where measures become aid following liberalisation under Community law (in this case liberalisation of the energy market pursuant to Directive 96/92/EC, which entered into force in Hungary when it joined the European Union), such measures are not deemed to be existing aid after the date fixed for liberalisation, i.e. they must be treated as new aid.
Ta člen navaja, da če ukrepi postanejo pomoč po liberalizaciji v okviru zakonodaje Skupnosti (v tem primeru liberalizacije trga z električno energijo v skladu z Direktivo 96/92/ES, ki je na Madžarskem začela veljati, ko je Madžarska vstopila v Evropsko unijo), se taki ukrepi ne štejejo za obstoječo pomoč po datumu, ki je bil določen za liberalizacijo, tj. treba jih je obravnavati kot novo pomoč.
Budapest power plant argues that this last sentence of Article 1(b)(v) of the Procedural Regulation should not apply.
Elektrarna Budapest trdi, da se zadnjega stavka člena 1(b)(v) Postopkovne uredbe ne sme uporabljati.
The plant invokes the Alzetta Mauro judgment [102], arguing that aid awarded in a market that was closed to competition before its liberalisation is to be regarded as existing aid from the date of liberalisation.
Elektrarna se sklicuje na razsodbo Alzetta Mauro [102] in trdi, da je treba pomoč, ki je bila dodeljena na trgu, ki je bil zaprt za konkurenco, pred njegovo liberalizacijo, šteti za obstoječo pomoč od dneva liberalizacije naprej.
The Commission cannot accept this argument.
Komisija tega argumenta ne more sprejeti.
As already discussed above, the Commission takes the view that the purpose of the State aid provisions contained in the Accession Act was precisely to ensure that all measures which might distort competition between Member States as of the date of accession were reviewed by the Commission.
Kot je bilo že omenjeno zgoraj, je Komisija mnenja, da je namen določb glede državne pomoči, ki jih vsebuje Akt o pristopu, zagotoviti, da Komisija od dneva pristopa naprej pregleda vse ukrepe, ki bi lahko izkrivljali konkurenco med državami članicami.
In contrast to the accession treaties prior to 1 May 2004, the Accession Act entered into on 1 May 2004 is designed to restrict measures deemed to constitute existing aid to the three specific cases described above.
V nasprotju s pristopnimi pogodbami pred 1. majem 2004 je Akt o pristopu, ki je začel veljati 1. maja 2004, zasnovan tako, da omejuje ukrepe, za katere se šteje, da predstavljajo obstoječo pomoč v treh posebnih primerih, ki so bili opisani zgoraj.
The Alzetta Mauro judgment does not concern a measure under the scope of the Accession Act and cannot therefore be deemed applicable in this regard to the PPAs under assessment.
Razsodba Alzetta Mauro se ne nanaša na ukrep, ki sodi v področje uporabe Akta o pristopu, in je zato v tem smislu ni mogoče šteti za veljavno v smislu SNEE, ki so predmet ocene.
Furthermore, the Alzetta Mauro judgment concerns a situation prior to the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
Poleg tega se razsodba Alzetta Mauro nanaša na stanje pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999.
Budapest power plant also argues that Article l(b)(v) is not applicable to individual aid measures ‘since individual aid measures are not explicitly mentioned’.
Elektrarna Budapest med drugim trdi, da člen 1(b)(v) ne velja za ukrepe individualne pomoči, saj „individualni ukrepi pomoči niso izrecno omenjeni“.
The Commission cannot accept this submission.
Komisija se ne more strinjati s to pripombo.
There is no reason why the reference to ‘aid’ and to ‘certain measures’ should not refer to both individual aid and aid schemes.
Ni razloga, da se sklicevanje na „pomoč“ in „določene ukrepe“ ne bi nanašalo tako na individualno pomoč kot tudi na programe pomoči.
Article 4 of Regulation (CE) No 659/1999 consistently refers to notified ‘measures’, but the Commission presumes that the interested party would not argue that Article 4 exclusively governs the preliminary examination of notified aid schemes.
Člen 4 Uredbe 659/1999 se nanaša na priglašene „ukrepe“, vendar Komisija predvideva, da zainteresirana stranka ne bi trdila, da se člen 4 nanaša izključno na predhodno raziskavo glede priglašenih programov pomoči.
Therefore, on the basis of the Accession Act and the Procedural Regulation, the Commission concludes that the PPAs constitute new aid.
Zato Komisija na podlagi Akta o pristopu in Postopkovne uredbe sklepa, da SNEE predstavljajo novo pomoč.
Validly concluded private agreements cannot be ended by the Commission (pacta sunt servanda) — Legal uncertainty — Proportionality
Veljavno sklenjenih zasebnih sporazumov Komisija ne more razdreti („pacta sunt servanda“) – pravna negotovost – sorazmernost
The Commission wishes to respond to comments submitted by the interested parties to the effect that private-law contracts cannot be ended by the Commission, as this outcome would, according to the interested parties, go against State aid rules of the EC Treaty, the principle of legal certainty and the requirement of proportionality.
Komisija želi odgovoriti na pripombe, ki so jih poslale zainteresirane stranke glede tega, da Komisija ne more razdreti pogodb v okviru zasebnega prava, saj bi bilo to, po mnenju zainteresiranih strank, v nasprotju s pravili glede državne pomoči iz Pogodbe ES, z načelom pravne gotovosti in z zahtevo po sorazmernosti.
The Commission rejects these arguments.
Komisija torej zavrača te argumente.
The form of aid (private-law contract in the case of the PPAs) is not relevant from the State aid viewpoint; only the effect of the measure is relevant to the Commission's analysis.
Oblika pomoči (pogodba v okviru zasebnega prava v primeru SNEE) z vidika državne pomoči ni pomembna; za analizo Skupnosti je pomemben samo učinek ukrepa.
Should the terms and conditions of a private law contract give rise to unlawful and incompatible State aid to one of the parties, such terms and conditions must be ended by the Member State.
Če bi pogoji iz pogodbe v okviru zasebnega prava zagotavljali nezakonito in neskladno državno pomoč eni izmed podpisnic, mora država članica take pogoje ukiniti.
The termination of the illegal and incompatible State aid measure must be ordered by the Commission, even if the State aid constitutes such an essential part of the agreement that its termination will actually affect the validity of the agreement itself.
Ukinitev nezakonitega in neskladnega ukrepa državne pomoči mora odrediti Komisija, četudi državna pomoč predstavlja tako bistven del sporazuma, da bi njena ukinitev dejansko vplivala na veljavnost samega sporazuma.
As far as legal certainty is concerned, the Commission makes the following observations.
V zvezi s pravno gotovostjo je Komisija podala naslednje pripombe.
The Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Hungary, of the other part, which paved the way for accession, was signed on 16 December 1991 and entered into force on 1 February 1994, i.e. before the conclusion of the PPAs.
Evropski sporazum o pridružitvi med Evropskimi skupnostmi in njihovimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Republiko Madžarsko na drugi strani, ki je utrl pot pristopu, je bil podpisan 16. decembra 1991 in je začel veljati 1. februarja 1994, tj. pred sklenitvijo SNEE.
It was also clear that the PPAs were signed for such a long duration that they would not end before Hungary's accession to the EU.
Jasno je bilo tudi, da so bili SNEE podpisani za tako dolgo obdobje, da se ne bi končali pred pristopom Madžarske k EU.
The Republic of Hungary signed the Accession Treaty on 16 April 2003 [103].
Republika Madžarska je podpisala Pristopno pogodbo 16. aprila 2003 [103].
Consequently, the so-called acquis communautaire applies to all contractual relations in the new Member States, and any exceptions to this rule can stem only from the Accession Act itself.
Zato se t. i. acquis communautaire uporablja za vse pogodbene odnose v novih državah članicah, vse izjeme od tega pravila pa lahko izhajajo samo iz samega Akta o pristopu.
The Accession Act annexed to the Treaty and its Annexes do not provide for any exception under the State aid rules that would exempt the PPAs or the energy sector in general from the direct application of EU State aid legislation.
Akt o pristopu, priložen Pogodbi, in njegove priloge ne določajo izjem v okviru pravil glede državne pomoči, s katerimi bi bili SNEE ali energetski sektor na splošno izvzeti iz neposredne uporabe zakonodaje EU o državni pomoči.
The Commission is thus bound to apply EU competition law to Hungary in the same way as it does to all other Member States as regards the energy sector.
Komisija je tako obvezana k izvajanju zakona EU o konkurenci na Madžarskem na isti način, kot ga izvaja v vseh drugih državah članicah.
Contrary to the arguments of interested parties, the Commission is of the view that it is in fact the non-application of State aid rules to the PPAs that would introduce legal uncertainty on the common energy market.
V nasprotju z argumenti zainteresiranih strank Komisija meni, da je pravzaprav neizvajanje pravil glede državne pomoči pri SNEE tisto, kar bi lahko povzročilo pravno negotovost na skupnem trgu z električno energijo.
The accession of a Member States may indeed give rise to situations whereby a measure not infringing any domestic legislation before accession qualifies as State aid as of accession and, as such, falls under the Commission's State aid control.
Pristop držav članic lahko dejansko privede do situacij, v katerih se ukrep, ki pred pristopom ni kršil nobene nacionalne zakonodaje, po pristopu šteje za državno pomoč in kot tak spada pod nadzor državne pomoči Komisije.
The Commission therefore found no valid arguments in the interested parties’ comments as to why the present procedure is incompatible with the principle of legal certainty.
Komisija torej v pripombah zainteresiranih strank ni našla trdnih argumentov glede tega zakaj zadevni postopek ni skladen z načelom pravne gotovosti.
Compatibility assessment
Ocena skladnosti
Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty provides for the general prohibition of State aid within the Community.
Člen 87(1) Pogodbe ES določa splošno prepoved glede državne pomoči znotraj Skupnosti.
Articles 87(2) and 87(3) of the EC Treaty provide for exemptions to the general rule that such aid is incompatible with the common market as stated in Article 87(1).
Člena 87(2) in 87(3) Pogodbe ES določata izjeme od splošnega pravila, da takšna pomoč ni skladna s skupnim trgom, kot je navedeno v členu 87(1).
The exemptions in Article 87(2) of the EC Treaty do not apply in the present case because the measure does not have a social character, was not awarded to individual consumers, is not designed to make good damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences and was not awarded to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany affected by the division of that country.
Izjeme v členu 87(2) Pogodbe ES ne veljajo v zadevnem primeru, saj ukrep ni socialne narave, ni bil dodeljen individualnim potrošnikom, ni namenjen za nadomestilo škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne katastrofe ali izjemne okoliščine, in ni bil dodeljen gospodarstvu določenih območij Zvezne republike Nemčije, ki jih je prizadela delitev države.
Further exemptions are provided for in Article 87(3) of the EC Treaty.
Nadaljnje izjeme so določene v členu 87(3) Pogodbe ES.
Article 87(3)(a) states that ‘aid to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment’ may be declared compatible with the common market.
Člen 87 (3)(a) navaja, da se „pomoč za pospeševanje gospodarskega razvoja območij, kjer je življenjska raven izjemno nizka, ali kjer je podzaposlenost velika“, lahko razglasi za skladno s skupnim trgom.
Hungary's entire territory could be regarded as such an area at the time of accession and most of its regions can still benefit from such aid [104].
V času pristopa bi se za tako lahko štelo celotno področje Madžarske in večina njenih regij še vedno prejema takšno pomoč [104].
The Commission adopted guidelines for the assessment of such aid.
Komisija je sprejela smernice za oceno take pomoči.
When Hungary joined the EU the guidelines on national regional aid [105] (the previous Regional Aid Guidelines) were in force.
Ko se je Madžarska pridružila EU, so veljale smernice o nacionalni regionalni pomoči [105] („prejšnje smernice Skupnosti o regionalni pomoči“).
These guidelines also governed the assessment of regional aid in the light of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.
Te smernice so veljale tudi za oceno regionalne pomoči v smislu člena 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES.
For the period after 1 January 2007, new guidelines on regional aid were adopted by the Commission [106] (the new Regional Aid Guidelines).
Za obdobje po 1. januarju 2007 je Komisija sprejela nove smernice o regionalni pomoči [106] („nove smernice o regionalni pomoči“).
Under both Regional Aid Guidelines, State aid could in principle be authorised only for investment costs [107].
V okviru obeh svežnjev smernic o regionalni pomoči bi bila državna pomoč načeloma lahko odobrena samo v primeru investicijskih stroškov [107].
According to both Guidelines:
Oba svežnja smernic navajata:
‘Regional aid aimed at reducing a firm's current expenses (operating aid) is normally prohibited.
„Regionalna pomoč, namenjena zmanjševanju tekočih izdatkov podjetja (pomoč za tekoče poslovanje), je praviloma prepovedana.
Exceptionally, however, such aid may be granted in regions eligible under the derogation in Article 87(3)(a) provided that (i) it is justified in terms of its contribution to regional development and its nature and (ii) its level is proportional to the handicaps it seeks to alleviate.
Izjemoma pa se ta pomoč lahko odobri v regijah, ki izpolnjujejo pogoje za odstopanje iz člena 87(3)(a), če (i) je upravičena zaradi njenega prispevka k regionalnemu razvoju ter če sta njena narava in (ii) višina sorazmerna pomanjkljivostim, ki jih skuša zmanjšati.
It is for the Member State to demonstrate the existence and importance of any handicaps’ [108].
Država članica mora izkazati obstoj katerih koli pomanjkljivosti in oceniti njihov pomen“ [108].
The aid cannot be regarded as investment aid.
Pomoči ni mogoče šteti za investicijsko pomoč.
Investment aid is defined using a list of potential eligible costs which are indicated in both the Regional Aid Guidelines.
Investicijska pomoč je določena s pomočjo seznama potencialnih upravičenih stroškov v obeh svežnjih smernic o regionalni pomoči.
Payments under the PPAs clearly cover other costs as well.
Plačila v okviru SNEE nedvomno pokrivajo tudi druge stroške.
The most obvious example is that PPAs guarantee the fuel costs associated with operating the power plants.
Najočitnejši primer je, da SNEE zagotavljajo stroške goriva, povezane z obratovanjem elektrarn.
Staff costs are also covered by the PPAs.
Izdatke za osebje prav tako krijejo SNEE.
Clearly, these costs are not eligible for investment aid.
Nedvomno ti stroški niso upravičeni v okviru investicijske pomoči.
On the contrary, they come under the operator's current expenses and as such must be included in operating costs as defined by both Regional Aid Guidelines.
Nasprotno, sodijo v okvir tekočih stroškov upravljavca in morajo biti kot taki vključeni v operativne stroške, kot to določata oba svežnja smernic za regionalno pomoč.
As far as operating aid is concerned, during the procedure neither the Hungarian authorities nor the interested parties demonstrated any regional handicaps relating to specific regions targeted by the PPAs, nor did they show the proportionality of the aid level to such handicaps.
V zvezi s pomočjo za tekoče poslovanje niti madžarski organi niti zainteresirane stranke med postopkom niso dokazali kakršnih koli regijskih pomanjkljivosti, ki se nanašajo na določene regije, ki jih pokrivajo SNEE, niti niso dokazali sorazmernosti višine pomoči ob takih pomanjkljivostih.
Moreover, both Regional Aid Guidelines provide that operating aid should in any case be progressively reduced and limited in time.
Nadalje oba svežnja smernic za regionalno pomoč določata, da bi bilo treba pomoč za tekoče poslovanje v vsakem primeru postopoma zmanjšati in časovno omejiti.
The aid granted through the PPAs is not reduced progressively and the duration of 15 to 27 years goes far beyond what can be allowed under both Guidelines.
Pomoč, ki se dodeljuje v okviru SNEE, se ne zmanjšuje postopoma, trajanje od 15 do 27 let pa je veliko več, kot je dovoljeno v okviru obeh svežnjev smernic.
Nor do the PPAs come under any specific exemption in the Regional Aid Guidelines and neither the Hungarian authorities nor the interested parties ever argued to that effect.
SNEE ne sodijo v okvir nobene posebne izjeme iz smernic za regionalno pomoč, sicer pa niti madžarski organi niti zainteresirane stranke tega nikoli niso trdili.
In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that the aid is not eligible for the derogation provided for in Article 87(3)(a) of the EC Treaty.
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega Komisija sklepa, da pomoč ni upravičena do odstopanja iz člena 87(3)(a) Pogodbe ES.
Article 87(3)(b) of the EC Treaty states that ‘aid to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State’ may be declared compatible with the common market.
Člen 87(3)(b) Pogodbe ES navaja, da je „pomoč za pospeševanje izvajanja projektov, ki so v skupnem evropskem interesu, ali za odpravo resnih motenj v gospodarstvu države članice“ skladna s skupnim trgom.
The Commission notes that the aid in question is not designed to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest.
Komisija opozarja, da zadevna pomoč ni namenjena pospeševanju izvajanja pomembnega projekta skupnega evropskega interesa.
Nor has the Commission found any evidence that the aid is designed to remedy a serious disturbance in the Hungarian economy.
Komisija tudi ni našla nobenih dokazov, da je pomoč namenjena odpravi resnih motenj v madžarskem gospodarstvu.
The Commission acknowledges that electricity is an important product for any Member State's economy, and that there was a need to modernise this sector in Hungary in the 1990s.
Komisija priznava, da je električna energija pomemben proizvod v gospodarstvu vseh držav članic in da se je na Madžarskem v 90-tih letih pojavila potreba po posodobitvi tega sektorja.
However, the Commission takes the view that the notion of ‘serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State’ refers to much more serious cases and cannot be applied to agreements providing for normal electricity supply.
Kljub temu pa Komisija meni, da se pojem „resnih motenj v gospodarstvu države članice“ nanaša na veliko bolj resne primere in ga ni mogoče uporabljati za sporazume, ki zagotavljajo običajno dobavo električne energije.