natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Stromness-Scrabster route could easily be made virtually obsolete, thereby saving taxpayers’ money.
Progo Stromness–Scrabster bi zlahka lahko prenehali uporabljati, s čimer bi prihranili denar davkoplačevalcev.
COMMENTS FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM ON THE OPENING DECISION AND ON THE COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
PRIPOMBE ZDRUŽENEGA KRALJESTVA O OTVORITVENI ODLOČITVI IN O PRIPOMBAH ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
In its decision to open the formal investigation procedure the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the condition that the successful bidder in the public tender leading to the 2007 public service contract between the UK authorities and CalMac had to charter the CMAL vessels might have constituted an advantage to CalMac.
Komisija je v svoji odločitvi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave izrazila dvome o tem, ali bi lahko pogoj, da mora uspešni ponudnik v javnem razpisu, na podlagi katerega je bila sklenjena pogodba o izvajanju javne službe iz leta 2007 med organi Združenega kraljestva in podjetjem CalMac, zakupiti plovila podjetja CMAL, predstavljal prednost za podjetje CalMac.
The UK authorities believe that there was no advantage in this provision for CalMac or CMAL.
Organi Združenega kraljestva menijo, da ta določba ni prinesla nobene prednosti podjetju CalMac ali CMAL.
On the contrary, they consider that the ready availability of a fully compliant fleet capable of fulfilling the route requirements at commencement of the contract was an advantage to other bidders, lowered the barriers to potential bidders coming forward and created a level playing field in the tendering process.
Nasprotno, po njihovem mnenju je bila takoj dostopna in povsem skladna flota, s katero je mogoče izpolniti zahteve proge, ob začetku veljavnosti pogodbe prednost za druge ponudnike, zmanjšala je ovire za morebitne ponudnike in ustvarila enakovredne pogoje v razpisnem postopku.
The UK authorities referred to the Commission Communication on the interpretation of the Maritime Cabotage Regulation [40] (Section 5.3.2.1) which states that ‘where Member States’ authorities themselves own vessels or have them otherwise at their disposal, these may be placed at the disposal of all potential service operators under the same non-discriminatory terms’.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so se sklicevali na Sporočilo Komisije o razlagi Uredbe o pomorski kabotaži [40] (oddelek 5.3.2.1), kjer je navedeno, da „če imajo države članice lastna plovila ali so jim plovila drugače na razpolago, se lahko ta plovila dajo na razpolago vsem morebitnim izvajalcem storitev pod enakimi nediskriminacijskimi pogoji“.
The UK authorities consider that it would be almost impossible for a single operator to have a new fleet of compliant vessels to service all the routes and maintain the links to remote island communities in time for the beginning of the contract period.
Organi Združenega kraljestva menijo, da bi bilo skoraj nemogoče, da bi imel en sam izvajalec novo floto skladnih plovil za obratovanje na vseh progah in ohranjanje povezav z oddaljenimi otoškimi skupnostmi pravočasno ob začetku pogodbenega obdobja.
In the decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Commission also questioned whether the bundling of all western islands routes in the 2006 public tender, with the exception of Gourock-Dunoon, would have unduly and significantly restrained competition during the tender as argued by some interested parties.
Komisija je v odločitvi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave postavila tudi vprašanje, ali bi povezovanje vseh prog zahodnih otokov v javnem razpisu leta 2006, razen Gourock–Dunoon, neprimerno in pomembno omejilo konkurenco med javnim razpisom, kot trdijo nekatere zainteresirane stranke.
The UK authorities consider that tendering these routes as a single bundle was justified for a number of reasons: it maximised value for money for the Scottish Executive; it facilitated the provision of relief vessels in the event of a failure across the network; it avoided cherry picking of the more profitable routes; it facilitated management, enhanced fleet safety and maintenance; and avoided the additional administrative burden and cost of conducting multiple tenders.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so mnenja, da je bilo iz več razlogov upravičeno izvesti razpis za te proge v enem samem svežnju: stroškovna učinkovitost za škotsko vlado je bila največja; olajšano je bilo zagotavljanje nadomestnih plovil v okviru mreže v primeru okvare; preprečilo se je izbiranje zgolj donosnejših prog; upravljanje je bilo lažje, varnost in vzdrževanje flote sta bili izboljšani; in preprečilo se je dodatno administrativno breme in stroške izvajanja več razpisov.
According to the Commission Communication on the interpretation of the Maritime Cabotage Regulation (Section 5.5.3), ‘Member States often wish to group public service routes to and from different islands into a single bundle in order to generate economies of scale and attract operators.
V Sporočilu Komisije o razlagi Uredbe o pomorski kabotaži (oddelek 5.5.3.) je napisano, da „želijo države članice pogosto združiti proge javne službe prevozov do in od različnih otokov v en sveženj, da bi ustvarile ekonomijo obsega in pritegnile izvajalce.
Bundles as such are not contrary to Community law provided that bundling does not lead to discrimination.
Svežnji sami niso v nasprotju s pravom Skupnosti, pod pogojem, da povezovanje ne privede do diskriminacije.
The most appropriate size of bundles should be decided by taking account of the best synergy to be made in meeting essential transport needs.’
Najprimernejšo velikost svežnjev je treba določiti glede na najboljšo sinergijo pri izpolnjevanju nujnih potreb po prevozih.“
In the decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Commission also raised the question whether the transfer of certain assets [41] in the amount of GBP 1,55 million from NorthLink 1 to NorthLink 2 had been carried out below market price, thereby possibly constituting State aid to NorthLink 2.
Komisija je v odločitvi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave zastavila tudi vprašanjec [41] 3 v znesku 1,55 milijona GBP prenesena s podjetja NorthLink 1 na podjetje NorthLink 2 pod tržno ceno, kar bi lahko predstavljalo državno pomoč podjetju NorthLink 2.
The UK authorities argued that the possibility to buy assets from NorthLink 1 was already foreseen in the public tender document and that therefore all bidders had equal access to these assets on the same conditions.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so trdili, da je bila možnost nakupa sredstev od podjetja NorthLink 1 predvidena že v dokumentu javnega razpisa in da so torej imeli vsi ponudniki enak dostop do teh sredstev pod enakimi pogoji.
During the tender process information was passed on to the two selected bidders about the prices of the assets up for sale.
Med razpisnim postopkom so bile informacije o cenah sredstev, ki so naprodaj, posredovane dvema izbranima ponudnikoma.
There was no obligation to buy the assets, though, as bidders might prefer to bring in their own solutions.
Nista pa bila obvezana sredstva kupiti, saj bi morda raje uvedla lastne rešitve.
All bidders were allowed to inspect the vessels and the equipment and other assets.
Vsi ponudniki so lahko pregledali plovila in opremo ter druga sredstva.
The value of the more significant assets (vessel, tug masters and NorthLink brand in the amount of GBP 1,3 million) was established by independent valuations.
Vrednost pomembnejših sredstev (plovilo, terminalni vlačilci in blagovna znamka NorthLink v višini 1,3 milijona GBP) je bila določena z neodvisnimi cenitvami.
The remaining assets, in the amount of GBP 0,25 million were valued on the basis of market estimates.
Preostala sredstva v višini 0,25 milijona GBP so bila ocenjena na podlagi tržnih ocen.
With regard to the possible application of the SGEI Decision [42], the UK authorities considered that most of the routes on the Clyde and Hebrides and on the NorthLink’s network appear to be covered by the SGEI Decision.
V zvezi z možno uporabo Odločbe SSGP [42] so bili organi Združenega kraljestva mnenja, da je večina prog na reki Clyde in Hebridih ter v mreži podjetja NorthLink zajeta v Odločbi SSGP.
Only four of the routes served by CalMac and NorthLink do not fulfil the threshold criteria and these should be assessed directly pursuant to Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty.
Samo štiri proge, na katerih sta obratovali podjetji CalMac in NorthLink, ne izpolnjujejo mejnih meril in jih je treba oceniti neposredno po členu 86(2) Pogodbe ES.
The UK authorities considered that the public service contracts with CalMac and NorthLink constitute appropriate entrustment acts, by specifying in detail the nature and duration of the public service obligations, the undertakings and the territories concerned, the nature of any exclusive or special rights assigned to the undertakings, the parameters for calculating, controlling and reviewing the compensation and the arrangements for avoiding and repaying any overcompensation.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so bili mnenja, da pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe s podjetjema CalMac in NorthLink predstavljata ustrezno pooblastitev, saj podrobno opredeljujeta značaj in trajanje obveznosti javne službe, zadevnih podjetij in ozemelj, značaj vseh ekskluzivnih ali posebnih pravic, dodeljenih podjetjema, parametre za izračun, nadzor in preučitev nadomestila ter dogovore v izogib in za vračilo prekomernega nadomestila.
Moreover, CalMac and NorthLink are obliged to keep separate accounts for SGEI and non-SGEI activities, only the costs related to the SGEI activities can be subject to compensation (all variable costs incurred in providing the SGEI, a proportionate contribution of fixed costs common to SGEI and non-SGEI activities and a reasonable profit) and there are appropriate reporting and monitoring procedures in place.
Poleg tega sta podjetji CalMac in NorthLink dolžni voditi ločene račune za SSGP dejavnosti in dejavnosti, ki niso SSGP, in nadomestilo se lahko izplača samo za stroške, povezane z dejavnostmi SSGP (vsi spremenljivi stroški, nastali pri izvajanju SSGP, sorazmerni delež stalnih stroškov, ki so skupni SSGP dejavnostim in dejavnostim, ki niso SSGP, ter zmerni dobiček), izvajajo pa se tudi ustrezni postopki poročanja in spremljanja.
With regard to the Gourock-Dunoon route, the UK authorities recognise that it may be questionable whether the service provided by CalMac constitutes a legitimate SGEI, since a private sector operator operates on an adjacent route without subsidy.
Kar zadeva progo Gourock–Dunoon, organi Združenega kraljestva priznavajo, da bi lahko bilo vprašljivo, ali storitev, ki jo izvaja podjetje CalMac, predstavlja legitimno SSGP, ker izvajalec iz zasebnega sektorja obratuje na sosednji progi brez subvencije.
However, they consider that the Western Ferries service is seen by many local people as complementary and useful but not as an effective substitute for the town centre to town centre CalMac service.
Vendar menijo, da številni lokalni prebivalci dojemajo storitev podjetja Western Ferries kot dopolnilno in koristno, vendar ne kot učinkovit nadomestek za prevozno storitev podjetja CalMac od mestnega jedra do mestnega jedra.
The UK authorities informed the Commission that, after the unsuccessful tender procedure carried out in 2006 for the Gourock-Dunoon route, they intend to launch a new open, transparent and non-discriminatory public tender for a public service contract for this route with the following characteristics:
Organi Združenega kraljestva so Komisijo obvestili, da nameravajo po neuspešnem postopku javnega razpisa leta 2006 za progo Gourock–Dunoon izvesti nov, odprt, pregleden in nediskriminacijski javni razpis za pogodbo o izvajanju javne službe na tej progi z naslednjimi lastnostmi:
the public service contract will cover a town centre to town centre ferry service by means of a 6-year public service contract;
pogodba o izvajanju javne službe bo zajemala prevoze s trajekti od mestnega jedra do mestnega jedra v okviru šestletne pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe;
the tender will allow for a subsidy to operate this route (unlike the preceding tender);
javni razpis bo omogočal subvencijo za obratovanje na tej progi (v nasprotju s prejšnjim razpisom);
the current timetable restrictions will be removed;
obstoječe omejitve voznih redov bodo ukinjene;
the subsidy will cover only passenger traffic;
subvencija bo zajemala samo prevoz potnikov;
the winning bidder will be allowed to provide an unrestricted commercial vehicle transport service, subject to appropriate accountancy measures and audit monitoring to prevent cross subsidisation from the passenger service to the commercial vehicle service;
izbrani ponudnik bo lahko opravljal neomejeno komercialno storitev prevoza vozil pod pogojem, da bo izvajal ustrezne računovodske ukrepe in revizijsko spremljanje za preprečevanje navzkrižnega subvencioniranja prevoza potnikov in gospodarskih vozil;
the winning bidder will be free to bring in its own vessel solutions, replacing the old vessels currently operating on the route.
izbrani ponudnik bo lahko uvedel lastne rešitve za plovila in nadomestil stara plovila, ki trenutno obratujejo na progi.
The UK authorities intend to procure the replacement vessels through CMAL, which will then lease them to the operator awarded the public service contract.
Organi Združenega kraljestva nameravajo pridobiti nadomestna plovila prek podjetja CMAL, ki jih bo nato dal v zakup izvajalcu, ki mu bo dodeljena pogodba o izvajanju javne službe.
The UK authorities consider that this SGEI is justified for several reasons dealing with the frequency, convenience of service, overall journey time, integration with other means of transport and service reliability, among others.
Organi Združenega kraljestva menijo, da je ta SSGP upravičena iz več razlogov, ki se med drugim nanašajo na pogostost, udobnost storitve, skupni čas potovanja, integracijo z drugimi prevoznimi sredstvi in zanesljivost storitve.
CRITERIA PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 87(1) OF THE TREATY
MERILA PO ČLENU 87(1) POGODBE
Under Article 87(1) of the Treaty ‘… any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.’
V členu 87(1) Pogodbe je navedeno, da je „vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The criteria laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty are cumulative.
Merila iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe so kumulativna.
Therefore, in order to determine whether the above-described payments to CalMac, NorthLink 1 and NorthLink 2 constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, it must be established whether the financial support:
Da bi torej ugotovili, ali zgoraj omenjena plačila podjetjem CalMac, NorthLink 1 in NorthLink 2 predstavljajo državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe, je treba ugotoviti, ali finančna podpora:
involves a loss of State resources imputable to the State;
vključuje izgubo državnih sredstev, ki jo je mogoče pripisati državi,
provides a selective advantage to certain undertakings or the production of certain goods;
daje selektivno prednost določenim podjetjem ali proizvodnji določenega blaga,
The various payments described above have been granted through State resources and are imputable to the Member State concerned.
Različna plačila, opisana zgoraj, so bila odobrena prek državnih sredstev in jih je mogoče pripisati zadevni državi članici.
Thus, the first criterion pursuant to Article 87(1) of the Treaty is met.
To pomeni, da je prvo merilo iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe izpolnjeno.
The relevant payments, in the form of deficit grants and capital grants/loans are only made to certain specific undertakings.
Zadevna plačila v obliki dotacij za primanjkljaj in kapitalskih dotacij/posojil prejmejo samo nekatera določena podjetja.
They are therefore selective.
Torej so selektivna.
The regular financing of CalMac and NorthLink 1 and NorthLink 2 reduces the operating costs that these undertakings would normally have to bear and provides them with an economic benefit compared to other undertakings which finance their activities based on commercial revenues only.
Redno financiranje podjetij CalMac, NorthLink 1 in NorthLink 2 zmanjšuje stroške poslovanja, ki bi jih ta podjetja sicer imela, in jim zagotavlja gospodarske koristi v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji, ki financirajo svoje dejavnosti samo iz komercialnih prihodkov.
Nevertheless, in order to establish that there is an advantage capable of constituting State aid in the sense of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the Commission must assess whether the ‘Altmark conditions’ are fulfilled [43].
Kljub temu mora Komisija oceniti, ali so izpolnjena „merila Altmark“, da bi ugotovila, ali obstaja prednost, ki lahko predstavlja državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe [43].
As such, the third and fourth criteria of Article 87(1) of the Treaty would also be fulfilled.
Potemtakem bi bili izpolnjeni tudi tretje in četrto merilo iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
The Commission also confirms its preliminary assessment that the payments made to CalMac and NorthLink 1 and NorthLink 2 are not consistent with the behaviour that a private investor would have under normal market conditions.
Komisija tudi potrjuje svojo predhodno oceno, da plačila podjetjem CalMac, NorthLink 1 in NorthLink 2 niso skladna z vedenjem zasebnega vlagatelja v običajnih tržnih pogojih.
Therefore, those payments cannot be considered as exempt from State aid on the basis of the market economy investor principle.
Zato teh plačil ni mogoče šteti kot izvzetih iz državne pomoči na podlagi načela vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu.
The sale of assets that occurred during the transition from the NorthLink 1 to the NorthLink 2 contracts did not contain State aid elements.
Prodaja sredstev, do katere je prišlo med prehodom s pogodbe s podjetjem NorthLink 1 na pogodbo s podjetjem NorthLink 2, ni vsebovala elementov državne pomoči.
All assets owned by NorthLink 1 which were relevant for the operation of the ferry services were made available to all bidders during the 2004-2005 public tender (see recital 88 above).
Vsa sredstva v lasti podjetja NorthLink 1, ki so bila pomembna za opravljanje prevozov s trajekti, so bila med javnim razpisom leta 2004–2005 na voljo vsem ponudnikom (glej uvodno izjavo 88 zgoraj).
The sale, which totalled around GBP 1,5 million for all assets, was carried out on the basis of the actual market price or the estimated market price, depending on the assets.
Prodaja v skupni vrednosti približno 1,5 milijona GBP za vsa sredstva, je bila izvedena na podlagi dejanske tržne vrednosti ali ocenjene tržne vrednosti, odvisno od sredstev.
Since these assets were available at the same price to all bidders and since these prices corresponded to the market price of the goods, their sale did not involve the use of State resources and did not confer a selective economic advantage to any undertaking.
Ker so bila ta sredstva po enaki ceni na voljo vsem ponudnikom in ker so te cene ustrezale tržni vrednosti blaga, v prodajo sredstev niso bila vključena državna sredstva in nobenemu podjetju ni bila zagotovljena selektivna gospodarska korist.
Thus, the existence of State aid elements in the asset sale is excluded.
To pomeni, da je obstoj elementov državne pomoči v prodaji sredstev izključen.
In the decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Commission questioned whether the rates charged for certain loans advanced to CalMac were consistent with the market economy investor principle and therefore whether they contained State aid.
Komisija je v odločitvi o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave postavila tudi vprašanje, ali so stroški, zaračunani za nekatera posojila podjetju CalMac, skladni z načelom vlagatelja v tržnem gospodarstvu in torej, ali vsebujejo državno pomoč.
This would have been important to establish whether CalMac had been overcompensated for discharging its public service obligations, taking into account all sources of public funding.
To bi bilo pomembno, zato da se ugotovi, ali je podjetje CalMac prejelo prekomerno nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje svojih obveznosti javne službe, upoštevajoč vse vire javnih sredstev.
However, since in the case of CalMac the aid scheme is an existing aid and since its compatibility must only be assessed for the future (see Section 5.2 below), there is no need for the Commission to further assess the State aid character of these loans as they only relate to the past.
Ker pa je v primeru podjetja CalMac program pomoči obstoječa pomoč in ker je treba njeno združljivost oceniti samo za prihodnost (glej oddelek 5.2 spodaj), Komisiji ni treba dodatno ocenjevati, ali imajo ta posojila značaj državne pomoči, ker se nanašajo samo na preteklost.
ALTMARK CRITERIA
MERILA ALTMARK
As mentioned in recital 112 above, in order to establish that there is an advantage capable of constituting State aid in the sense of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the Commission must assess whether the Altmark conditions are fulfilled.
Kot je omenjeno v uvodni izjavi 112 zgoraj, mora Komisija oceniti, ali so izpolnjena merila Altmark, da bi ugotovila, ali obstaja prednost, ki lahko predstavlja državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe.
According to the Altmark case-law, compensation for public service obligations or contracts does not favour the recipient(s) - and thus does not fall within the scope of the prohibition laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty - when the following four conditions are cumulatively met:
V skladu s sodno prakso Altmark nadomestilo za obveznosti javne službe ali za pogodbo o izvajanju javne službe ne daje prednosti prejemniku oz. prejemnikom – in torej ne sodi v okvir prepovedi, določene v členu 87(1) Pogodbe –, če so kumulativno izpolnjena naslednja štiri merila:
the recipient undertaking is actually required to discharge public service obligations and those obligations have been clearly defined (hereinafter ‘Altmark 1’),
podjetje, ki je prejemnik nadomestila, mora dejansko izpolnjevati obveznosti javne službe in te morajo biti jasno opredeljene (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Altmark 1);
the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated have been established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner (hereinafter ‘Altmark 2’),
parametri za izračun nadomestila so bili izračunani vnaprej, in sicer objektivno in pregledno (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Altmark 2);
the compensation does not exceed what is necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations (hereinafter ‘Altmark 3’), and
nadomestilo ne presega zneska, potrebnega za pokrivanje vseh ali dela stroškov, ki nastanejo zaradi izpolnjevanja obveznosti javne službe, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prejemkov in zmernega dobička za izpolnjevanje teh obveznosti (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Altmark 3) in
where the undertaking which is to discharge public service obligations is not chosen in a public procurement procedure, the level of compensation needed has been determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately equipped, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligations (hereinafter ‘Altmark 4’).
če podjetje, ki naj bi izpolnilo obveznosti javne službe, ni izbrano na podlagi postopka za oddajo javnih naročil, je bila stopnja potrebnega nadomestila določena na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi nastali med izpolnjevanjem navedenih obveznosti v tipičnem podjetju z dobrim upravljanjem in ustrezno opremo, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prejemkov in zmernega dobička za poravnavo teh obveznosti (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Altmark 4).