natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, it cannot be excluded that, if the bidders had to take on all the risks of the operation, there would be no undertakings willing to bid or that the bidders would bid much higher to price in the added risk.
Vendar ni mogoče izključiti, da ne bi bilo nobeno podjetje pripravljeno predložiti ponudbe ali da bi bile ponudbe podjetij veliko dražje zaradi vračunanega dodanega tveganja, če bi morali prevzeti vsa tveganja obratovanja.
It cannot be concluded, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Altmark 4 condition is met.
Ni mogoče zaključiti brez vsakega dvoma, da je merilo Altmark 4 izpolnjeno.
Given that it cannot be concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the Altmark 2 and 4 criteria are met the public service contract with CalMac is deemed to contain State aid elements.
Glede na to, da ni mogoče brez vsakega dvoma zaključiti, da sta merili Altmark 2 in 4 izpolnjeni, se šteje, da pogodba o izvajanju javne službe s podjetjem CalMac vsebuje elemente državne pomoči.
As mentioned in recital 170 above, in this particular sector there is a Regulation specifying which elements should be part of an adequate definition of public service obligations.
Kot je omenjeno v uvodni izjavi 170 zgoraj, za zadevni sektor Uredba določa, kateri elementi morajo biti del ustrezne opredelitve obveznosti javne službe.
The fulfilment of the Altmark 1 criterion should therefore be assessed with regard to Article 4 of the Maritime Cabotage Regulation.
Izpolnitev merila Altmark 1 je treba torej oceniti glede na člen 4 Uredbe o pomorski kabotaži.
It is clear that the invitation to tender met this criterion by defining in detail all parameters referred to in the Maritime Cabotage Regulation, i.e. ports to be served, regularity, continuity, frequency, capacity to provide the service, rates to be charged and manning of the vessels.
Jasno je, da je razpis izpolnil to merilo, saj je podrobno opredelil vse parametre iz Uredbe o pomorski kabotaži, tj. glede pristanišč, rednosti, neprekinjenosti, pogostosti, zmogljivosti zagotavljanja prevozov, prevoznih tarif in številčnega stanja posadke.
This is confirmed by the Report of Audit Scotland of December 2005.
To potrjuje poročilo Revizijskega urada Škotske iz decembra 2005.
The public service contract also had a duration below the 6 years recommended by the Maritime Guidelines.
Pogodba o izvajanju javne službe je tudi trajala manj kot šest let, kot priporočajo Pomorske smernice.
There was a claw back clause stating that if the agreed profit margin was exceeded, the extra profits would be shared with the Scottish Executive.
Obstajala je klavzula o vrnitvi neupravičenega nadomestila, v kateri je navedeno, da se dodatni dobiček deli s škotsko vlado, če se preseže dogovorjena profitna marža.
Most of the economic/financial risks were to be borne by the winning bidder (risk of costs exceeding estimates, risk of falling demand, inflation risk, etc.).
Večino gospodarskih/finančnih tveganj naj bi nosil izbrani ponudnik (tveganje, da bodo stroški višji od predvidenih, tveganje zmanjšanja povpraševanja, inflacijsko tveganje itn.).
On the other hand, some risks remained with the Scottish Executive or were shared between the parties, notably the risk of policy changes (EU or national) and legislative risks (changes in corporate tax law, for example).
Po drugi strani pa nekatera tveganja še vedno nosi škotska vlada ali pa si jih pogodbenici delita, predvsem tveganje sprememb politike (EU ali nacionalne) in zakonodajna tveganja (spremembe zakona o davku od dohodkov pravnih oseb, na primer).
The contract also required the Scottish Executive to pay additional grants to NorthLink 1 in case its return on capital was less than a certain rate or if other factors outside its control affected its revenue (e.g. increase in fuel prices by more than 10 %).
Pogodba je škotski vladi nalagala tudi, da plača dodatne dotacije podjetju NorthLink 1, če bi bila njegova donosnost kapitala nižja od določene stopnje ali če bi na njegove prihodke vplivali drugi dejavniki, na katere ne more vplivati (npr. povečanje cen goriva za več kot 10 %).
Following the financial difficulties of NorthLink 1 in 2003 extra payments were made and in 2004 the MoA was signed, envisaging monthly payments to NorthLink 1 and the possibility for additional payments depending on NorthLink 1’s financial performance.
Po finančnih težavah podjetja NorthLink 1 leta 2003 je slednje prejelo dodatna plačila, leta 2004 pa je bil podpisan zapisnik, ki je predvideval mesečna plačila podjetju NorthLink 1 in možnost dodatnih plačil, odvisno od finančnega uspeha tega podjetja.
The possibilities for extra funding going beyond the level of compensation foreseen in the original contract were not established on the basis of ex ante, objective and transparent parameters, as shown by the subsequent need to provide additional funds outside the scope of the public service contract.
Možnosti za dodatna sredstva, ki bi presegala nadomestilo, predvideno v prvotni pogodbi, niso bile določene na podlagi vnaprej opredeljenih, objektivnih in preglednih parametrov, kar je razvidno iz kasnejše potrebe po dodatnih sredstvih zunaj obsega pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe.
In any case, the additional funding possibilities under the MoA and the additional payments made to NorthLink 1 following its financial difficulties were not based on objective and transparent parameters.
V vsakem primeru možnosti za dodatna sredstva po zapisniku in dodatna plačila podjetju NorthLink 1 po njegovih finančnih težavah niso temeljile na objektivnih in preglednih parametrih.
Therefore, it cannot be established beyond reasonable doubt, that the Altmark 2 condition is fulfilled.
Zato ni mogoče brez vsakega dvoma ugotoviti, ali je merilo Altmark 2 izpolnjeno.
As indicated in the preceding section, the parameters for the compensation were in general clearly established, with the exception of the criteria used in the arbitration procedure foreseen under certain circumstances.
Kot je navedeno v prejšnjem oddelku, so bili parametri za nadomestilo na splošno jasno določeni, z izjemo meril, ki se uporabljajo v arbitražnem postopku, predvidenem v določenih okoliščinah.
Even though some parameters of the compensation were not precisely defined in advance, the procedure in place to review the compensation amount in such circumstances was appropriate to ensure that there would be no overcompensation.
Čeprav nekateri parametri nadomestila niso bili natančno opredeljeni vnaprej, je bil obstoječi postopek za preučitev zneska nadomestila v takšnih okoliščinah ustrezen za zagotovitev, da nadomestilo ne bo prekomerno.
Thus, the public service contract of NorthLink 1 respected the Altmark 3 condition.
Torej je pogodba o izvajanju javne službe s podjetjem NorthLink 1 izpolnila merilo Altmark 3.
public tender - in case of no tender, costs calculated by reference to typical undertaking
Altmark 4 – javni razpis – v primeru, da razpisa ni, se stroški izračunajo glede na tipično podjetje
As in the case of CalMac analysed above (recital 178 above), NorthLink 1’s public service obligations were entrusted following a public tender procedure.
Kot v zgoraj analiziranem primeru podjetja CalMac (uvodna izjava 178 zgoraj), je bilo podjetje NorthLink 1 pooblaščeno za obveznosti javne službe po postopku javnega razpisa.
It must therefore be assessed whether the tender was well-designed, fair, open and transparent.
Zato je treba oceniti, ali je bil razpis dobro oblikovan, pošten, odprt in pregleden.
The tender procedure covered two routes (26 routes in the case of CalMac analysed above – see recitals 183-191 above).
Razpisni postopek je zajemal dve progi (26 prog v zgoraj analiziranem primeru podjetja CalMac – glej uvodne izjave 183–191 zgoraj).
The bundling issue is therefore less relevant in the case of NorthLink 1 and NorthLink 2 than in the case of CalMac.
Vprašanje povezovanja ima torej manjši pomen v primeru podjetij NorthLink 1 in NorthLink 2 kot v primeru podjetja CalMac.
For the same reasons invoked above with regard to CalMac, the Commission does not consider that the bundling of the two routes calls into question the open, non-discriminatory and transparent character of the tender.
Iz istih razlogov, na katere se sklicuje v zvezi s podjetjem CalMac, Komisija meni, da povezovanje dveh prog ne postavlja pod vprašaj odprte, nediskriminacijske in pregledne narave razpisa.
However, the subsidies granted to NorthLink 1 under the MoA, which went beyond the level of compensation foreseen in the original contract, were not the result of a public tender and were not determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs of a typical undertaking.
Vendar subvencije, dodeljene podjetju NorthLink1 skladno z zapisnikom, ki so presegale nadomestilo, predvideno v prvotni pogodbi, niso posledica javnega razpisa in niso bile določene na podlagi analize stroškov tipičnega podjetja.
In fact, by introducing a new deficit funding system during the implementation of the contract, the MoA in fact altered the nature and extent of the initial tender, thereby affecting its transparency in relation to the way it had been presented to potential bidders.
Z uvedbo novega sistema financiranja primanjkljaja med izvajanjem pogodbe je zapisnik dejansko spremenil naravo in obseg prvotnega razpisa, kar je vplivalo na njegovo preglednost glede na način, kako je bil predstavljen potencialnim ponudnikom.
Accordingly, it cannot be concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the Altmark 4 criterion is met.
Zato ni mogoče zaključiti brez vsakega dvoma, da je merilo Altmark 4 izpolnjeno.
Given that it cannot be concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the Altmark 2 and 4 criteria are met, the public service contract with NorthLink 1 is deemed to contain State aid elements.
Glede na to, da ni mogoče brez vsakega dvoma zaključiti, da sta merili Altmark 2 in 4 izpolnjeni, se šteje, da pogodba o izvajanju javne službe s podjetjem NorthLink 1 vsebuje elemente državne pomoči.
As mentioned above, in this particular sector there is a Regulation specifying what elements should be part of an adequate definition of public service obligations.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, za zadevni sektor Uredba določa, kateri elementi morajo biti del ustrezne opredelitve obveznosti javne službe.
The public service contract also has a reasonable duration – 6 years – in compliance with the Maritime Guidelines.
Tudi trajanje pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe je ustrezno – šest let – skladno s Pomorskimi smernicami.
There is a claw back clause stating that if the agreed profit margin is exceeded, the extra profits would be shared with the Scottish Executive.
Obstaja klavzula o vrnitvi neupravičenega nadomestila, v kateri je navedeno, da se dodatni dobiček deli s škotsko vlado, če se preseže dogovorjena profitna marža.
In this second contract with NorthLink 2, more risks are borne by the Scottish Executive or shared between the parties (weather risk, inflation risk, risk of falling demand, change in transport policy, etc.).
Po tej drugi pogodbi s podjetjem NorthLink 2 več tveganj nosi škotska vlada ali pa si jih pogodbenici delita (tveganje vremena, inflacijsko tveganje, tveganje zmanjšanja povpraševanja, spremembe prometne politike itd.).
On the other hand, similar to the 2007 public service contract with CalMac, subsidy amounts are to be reviewed annually on the basis of the actual performance in the previous year.
Po drugi strani naj bi, podobno kot po pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe iz leta 2007 s podjetjem CalMac, zneske subvencij preučili vsako leto na podlagi dejanske uspešnosti v prejšnjem letu.
The operator will submit a provisional draft revised Base Case scenario which then has to be agreed by the Scottish authorities.
Izvajalec bo predložil začasni osnutek prilagojenega scenarija za osnovni primer, ki ga morajo potrditi škotski organi.
In case of conflict an expert is called upon to arbitrate.
V primeru nesoglasja odloča strokovnjak.
Although the public service contract contains some indications as to how the compensation will be adjusted in the case of certain unforeseen circumstances, the exact parameters of these adjustments are not known in advance.
Čeprav pogodba o izvajanju javne službe vsebuje nekatere navedbe o tem, kako bo nadomestilo prilagojeno v primeru določenih nepredvidenih okoliščin, točni parametri teh prilagoditev niso znani vnaprej.
The amount of compensation will rather be adjusted via a bilateral arbitration procedure between the Scottish authorities and NorthLink 2, possibly involving the intervention of an expert.
Znesek nadomestila se bo prilagodil prek dvostranskega arbitražnega postopka med škotskimi organi in podjetjem NorthLink 2, morda ob posredovanju strokovnjaka.
The Commission notes that the criteria used in this arbitration procedure are not set out in advance in an objective manner for all possible events.
Komisija ugotavlja, da merila, uporabljena v tem arbitražnem postopku, niso predhodno objektivno določena za vse možne dogodke.
Therefore, it cannot be established beyond reasonable doubt that the Altmark 2 condition is fulfilled.
Zato ni mogoče brez vsakega dvoma ugotoviti, ali je merilo Altmark 2 izpolnjeno.
Even though some parameters of the compensation are not precisely defined in advance, the procedure in place to review the compensation amount in such circumstances is appropriate to ensure that there will be no over-compensation.
Čeprav nekateri parametri nadomestila niso natančno opredeljeni vnaprej, je obstoječi postopek za preučitev zneska nadomestila v takšnih okoliščinah ustrezen za zagotovitev, da nadomestilo ne bo prekomerno.
As with NorthLink 1, the bundling of the two routes calls into question the open, non-discriminatory and transparent character of the tender.
Kot pri podjetju NorthLink 1 povezovanje dveh prog ne postavlja pod vprašaj odprte, nediskriminacijske in pregledne narave razpisa.
As in the case of CalMac, the requirement for the winning bidder to use the vessels of NorthLink 1 is a reasonable condition of the tender, taking into account that the Scottish Executive had a clear interest in using already available vessels rather than having to keep them unused or otherwise to dispose of these assets.
Kot v primeru podjetja CalMac je zahteva, da izbrani ponudnik uporabi sredstva podjetja CMAL, razumen pogoj razpisa, ob upoštevanju, da so imeli škotski organi jasen interes za uporabo plovil, ki so že razpoložljiva, namesto da bi le-ta ostala neuporabljena ali da bi ta sredstva prodali drugače.
Even though this requirement is legitimate, it may lead to a higher cost of the service.
Čeprav je ta zahteva legitimna, lahko povzroči večje stroške pri opravljanju storitev.
For these reasons and in line with the assessment above regarding CalMac [46], the Commission cannot conclude, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Altmark 4 criterion is met.
Iz teh razlogov in skladno z zgornjo oceno glede podjetja CalMac [46] Komisija ne more brez vsakega dvoma skleniti, ali je merilo Altmark 4 izpolnjeno.
Given that it cannot be concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the Altmark 2 and 4 criteria are met, the public service contract with NorthLink 2 is deemed to contain State aid elements.
Glede na to, da ni mogoče brez vsakega dvoma zaključiti, da sta merili Altmark 2 in 4 izpolnjeni, se šteje, da pogodba o izvajanju javne službe s podjetjem NorthLink 2 vsebuje elemente državne pomoči.
NATURE OF THE AID
NARAVA POMOČI
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
SPLOŠNE UGOTOVITVE
Having established that the payments granted to CalMac, NorthLink 1 and NorthLink 2 constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, the Commission must assess whether this State aid is existing or whether it constitutes new aid.
Ker je Komisija ugotovila, da plačila podjetjem CalMac, NorthLink 1 in NorthLink 2 predstavljajo državno pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe, mora presoditi, ali je ta državna pomoč obstoječa ali gre za novo pomoč.
In this respect, it should be noted that when initiating the formal investigation procedure the Commission did not address the question whether the aid should be considered as new or existing aid.
V zvezi s tem je treba omeniti, da pri začetku formalnega postopka preiskave Komisija ni obravnavala vprašanja, ali je treba pomoč šteti za novo ali obstoječo pomoč.
As mentioned previously [47], during the course of the formal investigation procedure, it became apparent, however, that part of the aid might be considered as existing aid in view of the date of entry into force of the legal provisions providing for the aid.
Kot je bilo predhodno omenjeno [47], je med formalnim postopkom preiskave postalo očitno, da je mogoče del pomoči šteti za obstoječo pomoč glede na datum začetka veljavnosti pravnih določb, ki določajo pomoč.
Therefore, the Commission decided to initiate, in parallel to the formal investigation procedure, the cooperation procedure foreseen pursuant to Article 17 of the Procedural Regulation.
Zato se je Komisija odločila, da sočasno s formalnim postopkom preiskave sproži postopek sodelovanja, predviden v členu 17 Postopkovne uredbe.
In the case of existing State aid, the Commission is only required to check its compatibility at present and recommend possible changes for the future.
V primeru obstoječe pomoči je Komisija obvezana le preveriti njeno trenutno združljivost in predlagati možne spremembe za prihodnost.
Inversely, in the case of new aid, the Commission is required to check its compatibility with the common market also in the past.
Obratno pa je v primeru nove pomoči Komisija obvezana preveriti, ali je bila združljiva s skupnim trgom tudi v preteklosti.
Pursuant to Article 1(b)(i) of the Procedural Regulation as amended, existing aid is ‘… without prejudice to Articles 144 and 172 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, to Annex IV, point 3 and the Appendix to said Annex to the Act of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and to Annex V, point 2 and 3(b) and the Appendix to said Annex to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania, all aid which existed prior to the entry into force of the Treaty in the respective Member States, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the Treaty.’
Skladno s členom 1(b)(i) Postopkovne uredbe s spremembami obstoječa pomoč pomeni „(i) brez poseganja v člena 144 in 172 Akta o pristopu Avstrije, Finske in Švedske, točko 3 Priloge IV in Dodatek k tej prilogi Akta o pristopu Češke, Estonije, Cipra, Latvije, Litve, Madžarske, Malte, Poljske, Slovenije in Slovaške ter točko 2 in točko 3(b) Priloge V in Dodatek k tej prilogi Akta o pristopu Bolgarije in Romunije, vso pomoč, ki je obstajala pred začetkom veljavnosti Pogodbe v zadevnih državah članicah, se pravi programe pomoči in posamično pomoč, ki se jih je začelo izvajati pred začetkom veljavnosti Pogodbe in se jih izvaja tudi po začetku veljavnosti Pogodbe“.
According to Article 4(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [48] (hereinafter ‘the Implementing Regulation’), ‘… an alteration to existing aid shall mean any change, other than modifications of a purely formal or administrative nature which cannot affect the evaluation of the compatibility of the aid measure with the common market.’
V skladu s členom 4(1) Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 z dne 21. aprila 2004 o izvajanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [48] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Izvedbena uredba), „sprememba obstoječe pomoči pomeni katero koli spremembo, razen preoblikovanja povsem formalne ali upravne narave, ki ne more vplivati na ocenjevanje združljivosti ukrepa pomoči s skupnim trgom“.
According to the established case-law [49], not every alteration to existing aid should be regarded as changing the existing aid into new aid.
Glede na ustaljeno sodno prakso [49] ni treba vsake spremembe obstoječe pomoči obravnavati kot njeno spreminjanje v novo pomoč.
In that case, the Court of First Instance held ‘… it is only where the alteration affects the actual substance of the original scheme that the latter is transformed into a new aid scheme.
V tem primeru je Sodišče prve stopnje menilo, „da se prvotni program spremeni v nov program pomoči samo takrat, ko sprememba vsebinsko vpliva na prvotni program.
There can be no question of such a substantive alteration where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme.’
Vsebinske spremembe ni, ko se nova prvina lahko jasno loči od prvotnega programa.“
The Court of First Instance has also clarified that ‘… whether aid may be classified as new aid or as alteration of existing aid must be determined by reference to the provisions providing for it’ [50].
Sodišče prve stopnje je pojasnilo tudi, da „[…] je treba določiti, ali se pomoč lahko opredeli kot nova pomoč ali sprememba obstoječe pomoči s sklicevanjem na določbe, ki jo predpisujejo“ [50].
When the relevant legal provisions have not been changed as regards the nature of the advantage or the activities of the beneficiaries, there is no new aid.
Če ustrezne pravne določbe niso bile spremenjene v zvezi z naravo prednosti ali dejavnosti upravičencev, ne gre za novo pomoč.
Therefore, it should be assessed, by reference to the legal framework and to the evolution of the scheme, whether there have been substantial changes since the United Kingdom’s accession to the EU in 1973 that would involve new aid.
Zato je treba glede na pravni okvir in presojo programa oceniti, ali je prišlo do bistvenih sprememb od vstopa Združenega kraljestva v EU leta 1973, zaradi katerih bi šlo za novo pomoč.
The case law refers to changes in the nature of the advantage, the objective pursued, the beneficiary or the source of financing.
Sodna praksa omenja spremembe v obliki prednosti, zasledovanega cilja, upravičenca ali vira financiranja.
It should also be assessed whether subsequent modifications are severable from the original measure or whether the non-severable changes affect the actual substance of the original legal framework, i.e. the nature of the advantage or the source of financing, the purpose or legal basis of the aid, the beneficiaries or the scope of activities of the beneficiaries so that the latter as a whole is transformed into a new aid.
Oceniti je treba tudi, ali je naknadne spremembe mogoče ločiti od prvotnega ukrepa in ali neločljive spremembe vplivajo na dejansko vsebino prvotnega pravnega okvira, tj. na naravo prednosti ali vir financiranja, namen ali pravno podlago pomoči, upravičence ali obseg dejavnosti upravičencev, zaradi česar se celotna pomoč pretvori v novo pomoč.
CalMac has been providing ferry shipping services in the western Scottish islands long before the UK accession to the European Community in 1973.
CalMac je opravljal storitve prevozov s trajekti na zahodnih škotskih otokih že dolgo pred vstopom Združenega kraljestva v Evropsko skupnost leta 1973.
The initial legal basis for the subsidies was Section 2(1) of the Highlands and Islands Shipping Services Act of 1960 which allowed the Scottish Ministers [51] to provide grants/loans to persons providing public sea transport services.
Prvotna pravna podlaga za subvencije je bil razdelek 2(1) Zakona o prevozih na področju višavja in otokov iz leta 1960, ki je škotskim ministrom [51] omogočal zagotavljanje dotacij/posojil osebam, ki opravljajo javne službe pomorskega prometa.
Sections 2(3) and 2(4) of the Act provided that an ‘Undertaking’ (which took the form of subordinate legislation in practice) had to be used when such a grant/loan exceeded GBP 10000 and that any such Undertaking had to be approved by the Scottish Parliament [52].
Razdelka 2(3) in 2(4) Zakona sta določala, da je treba uporabiti „obvezo“ (ki je imela v praksi obliko sekundarne zakonodaje), če takšna dotacija/posojilo presega 10000 GBP, in da mora vsako takšno obvezo odobriti škotski parlament [52].