natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
These costs can vary, as has been shown with regard to the year 2003.
Ti stroški se lahko razlikujejo, kot je bilo prikazano v zvezi z letom 2003.
The aid actually granted was 20 % less than that forecasted.
Dejansko dodeljena pomoč je bila 20 % manjša od predvidene pomoči.
At the same time, on the basis of Article 10(2) of the Regulation, the Commission can take decisions on the annual aid which the Spanish authorities have granted or intend to grant to the coal industry for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005.
Hkrati lahko Komisija na podlagi člena 10(2) Uredbe sprejme odločitve o letni pomoči, ki so jo španske oblasti dodelile ali jo nameravajo dodeliti za premogovništvo za leta 2003, 2004 in 2005.
When deciding on the conformity of this aid, the Commission has to take into account the conditions and criteria set out in Articles 4 to 8 and the compliance with the objectives of this Regulation.
Komisija mora pri odločanju o skladnosti pomoči upoštevati pogoje in merila iz členov 4 do 8 ter skladnost s cilji te uredbe.
In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002, the overall amount of aid is following a downward trend and does not exceed, for any year after 2003, the amount of aid authorised by the Commission for the year 2001.
Skupni znesek pomoči v skladu s členom 6 Uredbe (ES) št. 1407/2002 sledi padajočemu trendu in v nobenem letu po letu 2003 ne presega zneska pomoči, ki ga je odobrila Komisija za leto 2001.
Regarding the access to coal reserves, as laid down in Article 5(3) of the Regulation, Spain proposes that, in 2005, access to coal reserves should be guaranteed with a total capacity of 12 million tce.
V zvezi z dostopom do zalog premoga, kot je določen v členu 5(3) Uredbe, Španija predlaga, da se v letu 2005 dostop do zalog premoga zagotovi s skupno zmogljivostjo 12 milijonov etp.
The Commission considers that the data submitted and framework outlined for 2006 and 2007 constitute a good approach containing all the necessary conditions.
Komisija meni, da predloženi podatki in predlagani okvir za leti 2006 in 2007 nudijo dobro usmeritev z zagotovitvijo vseh potrebnih pogojev.
Spain has guaranteed that it will continue to reduce both production and the total amount of aid for these years at the same pace as for the years 2003-2005.
Španija je zagotovila, da bo v teh letih še naprej zmanjševala proizvodnjo in zniževala skupne zneske pomoči enako hitro kot v obdobju 2003–2005.
The Commission therefore accepts the current level and relevance of the information provided by Spain for 2006 and 2007.
Komisija se zato strinja s trenutno ravnijo in ustreznostjo informacij, ki jih je Španija zagotovila za leti 2006 in 2007.
The detailed data concerning the total volume of aid in accordance with Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 for the period from 2006 to 2007 will be submitted by Spain at a later stage, together with the restructuring measures for the period up to 2010.
Španija bo podrobne podatke o celotnem obsegu pomoči v skladu s členoma 4 in 5 Uredbe (ES) št. 1407/2002 za leti 2006 in 2007 ter ukrepe za prestrukturiranje za obdobje do leta 2010 predložila pozneje.
The Commission considers that this timetable is justified in view of the social and regional implications of the closure of the production units, taking into account the fact that Spain has explicitly stated that it will meet the condition that the aid must also follow a downward trend in the period after 2005.
Komisija meni, da je ta časovna razporeditev utemeljena kot socialna in regionalna posledica zaprtja proizvodnih enot, ob upoštevanju dejstva, da je Španija izrecno navedla, da bo tudi v obdobju po letu 2005 izpolnjevala pogoj, da pomoč sledi padajočemu trendu.
This last element is crucial to the Commission’s assessment, since the ultimate purpose of the framework established by the aforementioned Regulation is to guarantee a final significant reduction of the aid granted to the coal industry.
Ta zadnji element je ključen za oceno Komisije, saj je osnovni namen okvira, določenega z zgoraj omenjeno uredbo, zagotoviti končno znatno zmanjšanje pomoči, dodeljene premogovništvu.
The Commission therefore concludes that the Spanish restructuring plan for 2003-2005 is detailed and offers a good approach, with the necessary conditions in place, for 2006 and 2007.
Komisija zato ugotavlja, da je španski načrt za prestrukturiranje za obdobje 2003–2005 dovolj podroben in nudi dobro usmeritev s potrebnimi pogoji za leti 2006 in 2007.
In addition, the plan offers an accurate overview of the role of coal in energy policy and environmental policy in the context of the supply of primary energy until 2010.
Poleg tega načrt nudi natančen pregled vloge premoga v energetski in okoljski politiki pri oskrbi s primarno energijo do leta 2010.
Electricity produced from natural gas will increase from 9,7 % to 33,1 % over the same period.
Delež elektrike, proizvedene iz zemeljskega plina, se bo v istem obdobju povečal z 9,7 % na 33,1 %.
Renewable energies will increase from 16,9 % of electricity production in 2000 to 28,4 % in 2011.
Delež obnovljivih virov energije pri proizvodnji elektrike se bo povečal s 16,9 % v letu 2000 na 28,4 % v letu 2011.
Consequently, by the end of 2005 this reduction will be around the 12 million tonnes proposed as the target. The Spanish authorities guaranteed to the Commission that aid for capacity closures under the terms of Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 will be used solely for covering the costs of such unit closures.
To zmanjšanje bo zato do konca leta 2005 znašalo približno 12 milijonov ton, kar je predlagani cilj Španske oblasti so Komisiji zagotovile, da se bo pomoč za zaprtje zmogljivosti pod pogoji člena 7 Uredbe (ES) št. 1407/2002 uporabljala izključno za kritje stroškov za tako zapiranje enot.
The comments sent by the Spanish authorities after the Commission opened the procedure are the following. Third parties did not submit comments of Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002.
Pripombe, ki so jih španske oblasti poslale potem, ko je Komisija začela postopek, so naslednje: Tretje osebe niso predložile pripomb.
Decision of the President of the European Commission
Sklep predsednika Evropske komisije
on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings
o funkciji in mandatu pooblaščenca za zaslišanje v nekaterih postopkih o konkurenci
Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Commission [1], and in particular Article 22 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Poslovnika Komisije [1] in zlasti člena 22 Poslovnika,
Under the system for competition law enforcement established under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter ‘the Treaty’), the Commission investigates and decides on cases by administrative decision, subject to judicial review by the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter ‘the Court of Justice’).
V okviru sistema izvajanja zakonodaje na področju konkurence, ki jo določa Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PDEU), Komisija opravlja preiskave v zadevah in o njih odloča z upravnimi sklepi, ki so predmet sodnega nadzora Sodišča Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sodišče).
The Commission has to conduct its competition proceedings fairly, impartially and objectively and must ensure respect of the procedural rights of the parties concerned as set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty [2], Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) [3], Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty [4], and Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 of 7 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings [5], as well as in the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice.
Komisija mora svoje postopke o konkurenci voditi pošteno, nepristransko in objektivno ter mora zagotoviti spoštovanje procesnih pravic zadevnih strank, kakor so določene v Uredbi Sveta (ES) št. 1/2003 z dne 16. decembra 2002 o izvajanju pravil konkurence iz členov 81 in 82 Pogodbe [2], Uredbi Sveta (ES) št. 139/2004 z dne 20. januarja 2004 o nadzoru koncentracij podjetij (Uredba ES o združitvah) [3], Uredbi Komisije (ES) št. 773/2004 z dne 7. aprila 2004 v zvezi z vodenjem postopkov Komisije v skladu s členoma 81 in 82 Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti [4] ter Uredbi Komisije (ES) št. 802/2004 z dne 7. aprila 2004 o izvajanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 139/2004 o nadzoru koncentracij podjetij [5], in v relevantni sodni praksi Sodišča.
In particular, the right of the parties concerned to be heard before the adoption of any individual decision adversely affecting them is a fundamental right of European Union law recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in particular Article 41 thereof [6].
Predvsem je pravica zadevnih strank do zaslišanja pred sprejetjem kakršne koli posamične odločitve, ki bi na njih vplivala negativno, temeljna pravica prava Evropske unije, ki jo priznava Listina o temeljnih pravicah, zlasti člen 41 Listine [6].
In order to ensure the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the parties concerned, other involved parties within the meaning of Article 11(b) of Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 (hereinafter ‘other involved parties’), complainants within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (hereinafter ‘complainants’) and persons other than those referred to in Articles 5 and 11 of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 and third persons within the meaning of Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 (hereinafter ‘third persons’) involved in competition proceedings, responsibility for safeguarding the observance of such rights should be entrusted to an independent person experienced in competition matters who has the integrity necessary to contribute to the objectivity, transparency and efficiency of those proceedings.
Da bi zagotovili učinkovito izvajanje procesnih pravic zadevnih strank, drugih udeleženih strank v smislu člena 11(b) Uredbe (ES) št. 802/2004 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: druge udeležene stranke), pritožnikov v smislu člena 7(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: pritožniki) in oseb izven okvira členov 5 in 11 Uredbe (ES) št. 773/2004 ter tretjih oseb v smislu člena 11 Uredbe (ES) št. 802/2004 (v nadaljnjem besedilu: tretje osebe) udeleženih v postopkih o konkurenci, bi bilo treba odgovornost za varovanje spoštovanja teh pravic zaupati neodvisni osebi z izkušnjami na področju konkurence, ki ima integriteto, potrebno, da prispeva k objektivnosti, preglednosti in učinkovitosti teh postopkov.
The Commission created the function of hearing officer for these purposes in 1982, revised it in Commission Decision 94/810/ECSC, EC of 12 December 1994 on the terms of reference of hearing officers in competition procedures before the Commission [7] and in Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of hearing officers in certain competition proceedings [8].
Komisija je leta 1982 v te namene ustvarila funkcijo pooblaščenca za zaslišanje ter jo revidirala s Sklepom Komisije 94/810/ESPJ, ES z dne 12. decembra 1994 o mandatu pooblaščenca za zaslišanje v postopkih o konkurenci pred Komisijo [7] in Sklepom Komisije 2001/462/ES, ESPJ z dne 23. maja 2001 o mandatu pooblaščenca za zaslišanje nekaterih postopkih o konkurenci [8].
It is now necessary to clarify and further strengthen the role of the hearing officer and to adapt the terms of reference of the hearing officer in the light of developments in Union competition law.
Zdaj je treba vlogo pooblaščenca za zaslišanje pojasniti in dodatno okrepiti ter prilagoditi mandat pooblaščenca za zaslišanje glede na spremembe v konkurenčnem pravu Unije.
The function of the hearing officer has been generally perceived as an important contribution to the competition proceedings before the Commission due to the independence and expertise that hearing officers have brought to these proceedings.
Vloga pooblaščenca za zaslišanje je bila na splošno razumljena kot pomemben prispevek k postopkom o konkurenci pred Komisijo zaradi neodvisnosti in strokovnosti, ki so ju pooblaščenci za zaslišanje prispevali k tem postopkom.
In order to ensure the continued independence of the hearing officer from the Directorate-General for Competition, he or she should be attached, for administrative purposes, to the member of the Commission with special responsibility for competition.
Za zagotovitev trajne neodvisnosti od Generalnega direktorata za konkurenco bi moral pooblaščenec za zaslišanje za upravne namene spadati pod okrilje člana Komisije, posebej pristojnega za konkurenco.
The hearing officer should be appointed in accordance with the rules laid down in the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union.
Pooblaščenca za zaslišanje bi bilo treba imenovati v skladu s pravili, določenimi v kadrovskih predpisih za uradnike, ter pogoji za zaposlovanje drugih uslužbencev Evropske unije.
In accordance with those rules, consideration may also be given to candidates who are not officials of the Commission.
Skladno s temi pravili se lahko obravnavajo tudi kandidati, ki niso uradniki Komisije.
Transparency as regards the appointment, termination of appointment and transfer of hearing officers should be ensured.
Zagotoviti je treba preglednost imenovanja, odpoklica in premestitve pooblaščencev za zaslišanje.
The Commission may appoint one or more hearing officers and should provide for their supporting staff.
Komisija lahko imenuje enega ali več pooblaščencev za zaslišanje in jim mora zagotoviti podporno osebje.
Where the hearing officer perceives a conflict of interests in the performance of his or her functions, the hearing officer should cease from acting on a case.
Kadar pooblaščenec za zaslišanje med opravljanjem svojih nalog ugotovi, da obstaja navzkrižje interesov, bi moral prenehati opravljati naloge v zvezi z zadevo.
If the hearing officer is unable to act, his or her role should be carried out by another hearing officer.
Če pooblaščenec za zaslišanje ne more opravljati svojih nalog, bi moral njegovo vlogo prevzeti drug pooblaščenec za zaslišanje.
The hearing officer should operate as an independent arbiter who seeks to resolve issues affecting the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the parties concerned, other involved parties, complainants or interested third persons where such issues could not be resolved through prior contacts with the Commission services responsible for the conduct of competition proceedings, which must respect these procedural rights.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje bi moral delovati kot neodvisen arbiter, ki skuša razrešiti vprašanja, ki negativno vplivajo na učinkovito uveljavljanje procesnih pravic zadevnih strank, drugih udeleženih strank, pritožnikov ali zainteresiranih tretjih oseb, kadar jih ni bilo mogoče razrešiti v predhodnih stikih s službami Komisije, odgovornimi za vodenje postopkov o konkurenci, ki morajo spoštovati te procesne pravice.
The terms of reference of the hearing officer in competition proceedings should be framed in such a way as to safeguard the effective exercise of procedural rights throughout proceedings before the Commission pursuant to Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty and Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, in particular the right to be heard.
(9) Mandat pooblaščenca za zaslišanje v postopkih o konkurenci bi moral biti oblikovan tako, da bi varoval učinkovito uveljavljanje procesnih pravic ves čas postopkov pred Komisijo na podlagi členov 101 in 102 Pogodbe ter Uredbe (ES) št. 139/2004, zlasti pravice do zaslišanja.
In order to strengthen this role, the hearing officer should be attributed with the function of safeguarding the effective exercise of procedural rights of undertakings and associations of undertakings in the context of the Commission’s powers of investigation under Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, as well as pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 which empowers the Commission to impose fines on undertakings and associations of undertakings.
Da bi to vlogo okrepili, bi morala biti pooblaščencu za zaslišanje dodeljena naloga varovanja učinkovitega uveljavljanja procesnih pravic podjetij in podjetniških združenj v okviru pooblastil Komisije za preiskavo v skladu s poglavjem V Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003 ter v skladu s členom 14 Uredbe (ES) št. 139/2004, na podlagi katerih je Komisija pooblaščena za nalaganje glob podjetjem in podjetniškim združenjem.
The hearing officer should also be attributed with specific functions during this investigative phase in relation to claims for legal professional privilege, the privilege against self-incrimination, deadlines for replying to decisions requesting information pursuant to Article 18(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, as well as with regard to the right of undertakings and associations of undertakings subject to an investigative measure by the Commission under Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 to be informed of their procedural status, namely whether they are subject to an investigation and, if so, the subject matter and purpose of that investigation.
Pooblaščencu za zaslišanje bi morale biti dodeljene tudi posebne naloge v tej preiskovalni fazi v zvezi z zahtevami za varovanje zaupnosti sporazumevanja med odvetnikom in stranko, privilegij zoper samoobtožbo, roke za odgovor na sklepe o zahtevah po informacijah v skladu s členom 18(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003 ter v zvezi s pravico podjetij in podjetniških združenj, ki so predmet preiskovalnega ukrepa Komisije na podlagi poglavja V Uredbe (ES) št. 1/2003, da so obveščena o svojem postopkovnem statusu, t.j. ali so predmet preiskave, in če so, kakšna sta vsebina in namen te preiskave.
In assessing claims made in relation to privilege against self-incrimination, the hearing officer may consider whether undertakings make clearly unfounded claims for protection merely as a delaying tactic.
Pri oceni zahtev v zvezi s privilegijem zoper samoobtožbo lahko pooblaščenec za zaslišanje meni, da podjetja vlagajo očitno neutemeljene zahteve za zaščito le kot taktiko zavlačevanja.
The hearing officer should be able to facilitate the resolution of claims that a document is covered by legal professional privilege.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje bi moral biti sposoben olajšati razrešitev zahtev, da za nek dokument velja varovanje zaupnosti sporazumevanja med odvetnikom in stranko.
To this end, if the undertaking or association of undertakings making the claim agrees, the hearing officer will be allowed to examine the document concerned and make an appropriate recommendation, referring to the applicable case-law of the Court of Justice.
Zato bo lahko, če se podjetje ali podjetniško združenje, ki je vložilo zahtevo, s tem strinja, pooblaščenec za zaslišanje pregledal zadevni dokument in izdal ustrezno priporočilo ob sklicevanju na relevantno sodno prakso sodišča.
The hearing officer should be responsible for deciding whether a third person shows a sufficient interest to be heard.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje bi moral biti odgovoren za odločanje, ali tretja oseba izkazuje zadosten interes za zaslišanje.
Consumer associations that apply to be heard should be generally regarded as having a sufficient interest, where the proceedings concern products or services used by end-consumers or products or services that constitute a direct input into such products or services.
Združenja potrošnikov, ki zaprosijo za zaslišanje, se na splošno obravnavajo, kot da imajo ustrezen interes, kadar postopek zadeva izdelke ali storitve, ki so namenjeni končnemu uporabniku, ali izdelke ali storitve, ki predstavljajo neposredni vložek v takšne izdelke ali storitve.
The hearing officer should decide whether to admit complainants and interested third persons to the oral hearing, taking into account the contribution they can make to the clarification of the relevant facts of the case.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje bi moral odločiti, ali bo dovolil udeležbo pritožnikov in zainteresiranih tretjih oseb na ustnem zaslišanju ob upoštevanju njihovega morebitnega prispevka k razjasnitvi relevantnih dejstev v zvezi z zadevo.
The right of the parties concerned to be heard before a final decision adversely affecting their interests is taken is guaranteed through their right to reply in writing to the preliminary position of the Commission, as set out in the statement of objections and their right to develop their arguments, if they so request, at the oral hearing.
Pravica zadevnih strank do zaslišanja pred sprejetjem končnega sklepa, ki bi negativno vplival na njihove interese, je zagotovljena s pravico do pisnega odgovora na predhodno stališče Komisije, kakor je navedeno v obvestilu o nasprotovanju, in pravico, da svoje trditve pojasnijo, če to zahtevajo, na ustnem zaslišanju.
In order to exercise these rights effectively, parties to whom a statement of objections has been addressed have the right of access to the Commission’s investigation file.
Za učinkovito uveljavljanje teh pravic imajo stranke, na katere je bilo naslovljeno obvestilo o nasprotovanju, pravico do dostopa do preiskovalnega spisa Komisije.
In order to safeguard the effective exercise of the rights of defence of parties to whom a statement of objections has been addressed, the hearing officer should be responsible for ensuring that disputes about access to the file or about the protection of business secrets and other confidential information between those parties and the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition are resolved.
Za varovanje učinkovitega uveljavljanja pravic obrambe strank, na katere je bilo naslovljeno obvestilo o nasprotovanju, bi moral biti pooblaščenec za zaslišanje odgovoren za zagotavljanje razrešitve sporov v zvezi z dostopom do spisa ali o varovanju poslovnih skrivnosti ter drugih zaupnih informacij med temi strankami in Generalnim direktoratom Komisije za konkurenco.
In exceptional circumstances, the hearing officer may suspend the running of the time period in which an addressee of a statement of objections should reply to that statement until a dispute about access to file has been resolved, if the addressee would not be in a position to reply within the deadline granted and an extension would not be an adequate solution at that point in time.
V izjemnih okoliščinah lahko pooblaščenec za zaslišanje prekine potek roka, v katerem bi moral naslovnik obvestila o nasprotovanju odgovoriti na to obvestilo, dokler se spor v zvezi z dostopom do spisa ne razreši, če naslovnik ne bi mogel odgovoriti v določenem roku, podaljšanje roka pa v tistem trenutku ne bi bila ustrezna rešitev.
In order to safeguard the effective exercise of procedural rights while respecting the legitimate interests of confidentiality, the hearing officer should, where appropriate, be able to order specific measures for access to the Commission’s file.
Za varovanje učinkovitega uveljavljanja procesnih pravic ob hkratnem spoštovanju upravičenih interesov zaupnosti, bi moral imeti pooblaščenec za zaslišanje, kadar je primerno, možnost, da odredi posebne ukrepe za dostop do spisa Komisije.
In particular, the hearing officer should have the power to decide that parts of the file are made accessible to the party requesting access in a restricted manner, for example by limiting the number or category of persons having access, and the use of the information being accessed.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje bi moral biti zlasti pooblaščen za odločanje, da se stranki, ki zahteva dostop, omogoči omejen dostop do določenih delov spisa, na primer z omejitvijo števila ali kategorij oseb, ki lahko dostopajo, in uporabo informacij, do katerih je bil omogočen dostop.