natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In light of the above considerations, the Commission is unable to conclude that the aid does actually seek to address situations where the market does not allow fruitful economic results or to address other social or equitable objectives.
Ob upoštevanju navedenih ugotovitev Komisija ne more ugotoviti, da je pomoč res namenjena za razmere, ko trg ne daje učinkovitih gospodarskih rezultatov, ali za druge socialne ali pravične cilje.
As they are measures which only concern extra-cooperative transactions, targeting activities which are not directly linked to the principles of mutuality and not restricted to activities carried out between the cooperative and its members, the Commission considers that the aid does not meet the compatibility criteria stated above.
Ker sta to ukrepa, ki zadevata samo transakcije zunaj zadruge, pri čemer se nanašata na dejavnosti, ki niso neposredno povezane z načeli vzajemnosti niti niso omejene na trgovanje med zadrugo in njenimi člani, Komisija meni, da ti pomoči ne izpolnjujeta zgoraj navedenih meril združljivosti.
This Decision concerns the two aid schemes examined and is to be executed without delay, especially in relation to the recovery of all individual aid awarded under these schemes.
Ta sklep velja za obe proučeni shemi pomoči in se izvrši takoj, zlasti v zvezi z vračilom vseh posameznih pomoči, dodeljenih v teh shemah.
The Commission further declares that a decision on aid schemes does not prejudice the possibility that individual aid might be deemed as partially or wholly compatible with the common market for reasons specific to the case in question (for example, because the individual award of aid falls within the scope of the de minimis rules or within the context of a future Commission decision or by virtue of an exempting regulation).
Komisija poleg tega izjavlja, da odločba o shemah pomoči ne prejudicira možnosti, da se posamezne pomoči v celoti ali delno razglasijo za združljive s skupnim trgom zaradi razlogov, ki so značilni za zadevni primer (na primer, ker za dodelitev posamezne pomoči velja pravilo de minimis, ali zaradi okoliščin poznejše odločbe Komisije, ali v skladu z uredbo o oprostitvi).
Conclusion in the light of existing provisions
Sklep z vidika veljavnih določb
State aid in favour of agricultural cooperatives in the form of tax benefits must in principle be considered as operating aid, prohibited within the meaning of point 32 of the Commission notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation and prohibited by Community rules.
Državne pomoči kmetijskim zadrugam v obliki davčnih ugodnosti je treba načeloma šteti za pomoči za tekoče poslovanje, ki so prepovedane v smislu točke 32 Obvestila Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka, in ki jih prepovedujejo predpisi Skupnosti.
The aid in this case consists in tax reduction measures lacking any incentive element or counterpart on the part of the beneficiaries and its compatibility with competition rules has not been proven.
Zadevni pomoči sta davčni olajšavi brez kakršne koli spodbujevalne prvine ali protistoritve upravičencev, katerih združljivost s konkurenčnimi pravili ni dokazana.
As a result, the exception to the principle that State aid is prohibited as provided for in Article 107(3)(c) does not apply and this aid is incompatible with the TFEU.
Iz tega sledi, da ni mogoče uporabiti odstopanja od načela prepovedi pomoči iz člena 107(3)(c) in da sta to pomoči, ki nista združljivi s PDEU.
RECOVERY
IZTERJAVA
The State aid in favour of agricultural cooperatives implemented by Spain by virtue of Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 is not entitled to benefit from the exception to the principle that State aid is prohibited as provided for in Article 107(3)(c), thus constituting State aid incompatible with the TFEU.
Državni pomoči kmetijskim zadrugam, ki ju je izvajala Španija na podlagi člena 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000, nista upravičeni do odstopanja od načela prepovedi pomoči iz člena 107(3)(c), zato sta to državni pomoči, ki nista združljivi s PDEU.
In cases of incompatibility of unlawful aid with the internal market, Article 14(1) of (EC) Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 stipulates that the Commission decides that the Member State concerned must take all necessary steps to recover the aid from its beneficiary.
Če so nezakonite pomoči nezdružljive z notranjim trgom, člen 14(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 določa, da Komisija odloči, da mora zadevna država članica sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe, da upravičenec vrne pomoč.
Such reimbursement is necessary to re-establish the situation applying previously and involves cancelling all the financial advantages from which beneficiaries of the unlawfully granted aid have unduly benefited since the date the aid was granted.
Povračilo je potrebno za ponovno vzpostavitev prejšnjega položaja, tako da se odpravijo vse finančne ugodnosti, ki jih je bil upravičenec do nezakonito dodeljene pomoči neupravičeno deležen od datuma dodelitve te pomoči.
Nevertheless, Article 14(1) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 stipulates that ‘the Commission shall not require recovery of the aid if this would be contrary to a general principle of Community law.’
Kljub temu člen 14(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 določa, da „Komisija ne zahteva vračila pomoči, če bi bilo to v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Skupnosti“.
It is desirable to examine whether in this case, a general principle of Community law such as, for example, the principle of legitimate expectations, could be applied to preclude recovery of unlawful and incompatible aid from its beneficiaries.
Treba je proučiti, ali se lahko v tej zadevi uporabi katero od splošnih načel prava Skupnosti, kot je načelo legitimnih pričakovanj, da se prepreči izterjava nezakonite in nezdružljive pomoči od upravičencev.
According to well-established case law, the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations aims to ensure the predictability of legal relations and situations which only arise by virtue of Community law.
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso je načelo varstva zaupanja v pravo namenjeno zagotavljanju predvidljivosti pravnih stanj in razmerij, ki izhajajo iz samega prava Skupnosti.
However, according to the case law of the Court, the observance of legitimate expectation may only be relied upon against a Community rule to the extent that the European Union itself has created a prior situation capable of causing a legitimate expectation [56].
Vendar se je v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča na spoštovanje varstva zaupanja v pravo v razmerju do zakonodaje Skupnosti mogoče sklicevati le, če je sama Unija prej ustvarila položaj, ki bi lahko ustvaril uporabo tega načela [56].
The Court has repeatedly held that the right to argue the principle of the protection of legitimate expectation is extended to any party according to whom a Community institution has caused justified expectations.
Sodišče je večkrat presodilo, da pravica sklicevanja na načelo varstva upravičenih pričakovanj velja za vsako zadevno osebo, pri kateri je institucija Skupnosti ustvarila upravičena pričakovanja.
Moreover, a breach of this principle cannot be invoked in the absence of specific assurances provided to the party by the administration [57].
Poleg tega se ne sme nihče sklicevati na kršitev tega načela brez natančnih zagotovil, ki bi mu jih je zagotovila uprava [57].
Thus, the right to invoke the principle of the protection of legitimate expectation is extended to any party according to whom a Community institution has caused justified expectations on the basis of the specific assurances that it has provided them.
Tako pravica do sklicevanja na načelo varstva zaupanja v pravo velja za vsako zadevno osebo, pri kateri je institucija Skupnosti ustvarila upravičena pričakovanja na podlagi natančnih zagotovil, ki ji jih je dala uprava.
In this case, there is no element that can be considered to have provided precise reassurance to the beneficiaries of the unlawful aid that it was in fact lawful.
V tej zadevi ni nobenega elementa, s katerim bi upravičenci do spornih pomoči dobili natančno zagotovilo, da so pomoči zakonite.
In fact, first of all, it should be specified that this aid was implemented without waiting for the Commission’s final decision on the issue within the meaning of Article 108(3) of the TFEU.
Najprej je namreč treba pojasniti, da so se te pomoči izvajale brez dokončnega sklepa Komisije o tem vprašanju v smislu člena 108(3) PDEU.
The Court of Justice [58] has moreover specified on several occasions that ‘in view of the mandatory nature of the supervision of State aid by the Commission pursuant to Article 93 of the Treaty [now Article 108 of the TFEU], undertakings to which aid has been granted may not, in principle, entertain a legitimate expectation that the aid is lawful unless it has been granted in compliance with the procedure laid down in that Article’ and that furthermore, ‘A diligent businessman should normally be able to determine whether that procedure has been followed.’
Poleg tega je Sodišče [58] večkrat pojasnilo, da „imajo načeloma podjetja, ki prejemajo pomoč, ob upoštevanju obveznega nadzora državnih pomoči, ki ga v skladu s členom 93 Pogodbe [novi člen 108 PDEU] izvaja Komisija, lahko upravičena pričakovanja glede zakonitosti pomoči, samo če je bila ta odobrena ob upoštevanju postopka, določenega v tem členu, in drugič, da mora biti preudaren gospodarski subjekt ponavadi sposoben ugotoviti, ali se je ravnalo v skladu s tem postopkom“.
To this effect, the Court of Justice has also specified that ‘a Member State whose authorities have granted aid contrary to the procedural rules laid down in Article 88 EC [now Article 108 of the TFEU] may not rely on the legitimate expectations of recipients in order to justify a failure to comply with the obligation to take the steps necessary to implement a Commission decision instructing it to recover this aid.
V tem smislu je Sodišče tudi pojasnilo, da „se država članica, katere organi so dodelili pomoč v nasprotju s postopkovnimi pravili iz člena 88 ES [novi člen 108 PDEU], ne more sklicevati na legitimno pričakovanje upravičencev, da bi se izognila obveznosti, sprejeti vse potrebne ukrepe za izvršitev sklepa, s katerim ji Komisija nalaga vračilo te pomoči.
If it could do so, Articles 87 EC and 88 EC [now Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU] would be set at naught, since national authorities would thus be able to rely on their own unlawful conduct in order to deprive decisions taken by the Commission under provisions of the Treaty of their effectiveness’ [59].
Dopustiti tako možnost bi namreč pomenilo, da se določbam členov 87 ES in 88 ES [nova člena 107 in 108 PDEU] odvzame polni učinek, ker bi se nacionalni organi lahko oprli na lastno nezakonito ravnanje, da bi sklepom Komisije, sprejetim na podlagi določb Pogodbe, odvzeli učinek“ [59].
Next, the fact that the Commission made a decision specifying that the disputed aid did not constitute State aid [60] subject to appeal and therefore not yet final, then the annulment of the aforesaid Decision by the Court of First Instance cannot create legitimate expectation in its beneficiaries.
Nato dejstvo, da je Komisija sprejela odločbo, ki določa, da sporni pomoči nista državni pomoči [60], zoper katero je mogoče vložiti pritožbo in ki torej še ni dokončna, in dejstvo, da je Sodišče prve stopnje to odločbo razglasilo za nično, ne moreta ustvariti legitimnega pričakovanja upravičencev.
In fact, according to consistent case law, the Court of Justice has ruled that the fact that the Commission had initially already given a decision without raising objections to the disputed aid cannot be regarded as capable of having caused the beneficiary to entertain any legitimate expectation since that decision was challenged in due time before the Court, which annulled it [61].
V skladu s sodno prakso je Sodišče namreč odločilo, da dejstvo, da je Komisija prvotno sprejela odločbo, s katero ni nasprotovala spornim pomočem, ni moglo utemeljiti legitimnega zaupanja upravičenca, ker je bila ta odločba izpodbijana v rokih za tožbo in jo je Sodišče pozneje razglasilo za nično [61].
Consequently, ‘it follows that, so long as the Commission has not taken a decision approving aid and also so long as the period for bringing an action against such a decision has not expired, the recipient cannot be certain as to the lawfulness of the proposed aid which alone is capable of giving rise to a legitimate expectation on his part’ [62].
Zato „dokler Komisija ne sprejme odločbe o odobritvi pomoči in dokler rok za vložitev tožbe zoper odločbo ni potekel, prejemnik ne more biti prepričan o zakonitosti načrtovane pomoči, ki lahko edina utemelji njegovo legitimno zaupanje“ [62].
In this case, Commission Decision 2003/293/EC considering the measures not to constitute State aid, was subject to an action in due time and, in accordance with the aforementioned case law, could not therefore be a final Decision capable of having caused the addressee of the aforementioned Decision to entertain any legitimate expectation.
V tej zadevi je bila zoper odločbo Komisije 2003/293/ES, v kateri se ukrepi niso šteli za državne pomoči, v predpisanem roku vložena tožba, zato v skladu z navedeno sodno prakso ta odločba ne more biti dokončni sklep, ki lahko ustvari legitimno pričakovanje naslovnikov odločbe.
Consequently, in the absence of conditions capable of having caused any legitimate expectation, the Commission demands the recovery of the disputed aid.
Ker ni posebnih okoliščin, ki bi lahko ustvarile legitimno pričakovanje, Komisija zahteva izterjavo spornih pomoči.
This Decision concerns the aid measures considered and must be implemented immediately, particularly in so far as concerns the recovery of all individual aid granted under these schemes, with the exception of those awarded for specific projects which, at the time the aid was granted, fulfilled all the conditions prescribed in the applicable de minimis Regulation [63] or exemption regulation or in an aid scheme approved by the Commission,
Ta odločba se nanaša na proučena ukrepa pomoči in jo je treba izvršiti takoj, zlasti kar zadeva vračilo posamičnih pomoči, dodeljenih v okviru teh shem, razen pomoči, namenjenih posebnim projektom, ki so v trenutku dodelitve izpolnjevali pogoje, določene v uredbi de minimis [63] ali za uporabo oprostitve ali v shemi pomoči, ki jo je potrdila Komisija –
The State aid in favour of agricultural cooperatives implemented by Spain by virtue of Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000 is, without prejudice to the application of Article 2, State aid incompatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU.
Državni pomoči v korist kmetijskih zadrug, ki ju je Španija izvajala na podlagi člena 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000, sta brez poseganja v uporabo člena 2 državni pomoči, ki sta nezdružljivi z notranjim trgom na podlagi člena 107(3)(c) PDEU.
The measures referred to in Article 1 shall not constitute State aid if they satisfy the conditions laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid.
Ukrepov iz člena 1 ni mogoče šteti za državni pomoči, če izpolnjujeta pogoje Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1998/2006 z dne 15. decembra 2006 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe pri pomoči de minimis.
Spain shall take the necessary steps to recover the incompatible aid referred to in Article 1 from its beneficiaries, without prejudice to Article 2.
Španija sprejme potrebne ukrepe za izterjavo nezdružljivih pomoči iz člena 1 od prejemnikov teh pomoči, brez poseganja v člen 2.
The aid to be recovered shall include interest applicable from the date on which the aid was made available to the beneficiaries until the date of its recovery.
Pomoči, ki ju je treba vrniti, vključujejo obresti od datuma, ko so bile dane na razpolago prejemnikom, do datuma njihovega vračila.
The interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 [64].
Obresti se izračunajo na podlagi obrestnoobrestnega računa v skladu z določbami iz poglavja V Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 794/2004 [64].
Recovery of the aid shall be implemented without delay in conformity with procedures laid down under national law, in so far as they allow the immediate and effective implementation of this Decision.
Vračilo se opravi takoj in v skladu s postopki nacionalnega prava, če ti omogočajo takojšnjo in učinkovito izvršitev tega sklepa.
Spain shall ensure that this Decision is implemented within four months of its notification.
Španija zagotovi, da se ta sklep izvede v štirih mesecih od datuma, ko je bila o njem uradno obveščena.
Within two months of notification of this Decision, Spain shall submit the following to the Commission:
V dveh mesecih od uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu Španija Komisiji predloži naslednje informacije:
a list of beneficiaries who have received aid under the scheme referred to in Article 1 and the total amount of aid received by each one;
seznam prejemnikov, ki so prejeli pomoč na podlagi sheme iz člena 1, in skupni znesek pomoči, ki ga je prejel vsak izmed njih;
details of the total amount (principal and interest) to be recovered from each beneficiary;
skupni znesek (glavnica in obresti vračila), ki ga je treba izterjati od prejemnikov;
a detailed description of the measures already taken and those planned to comply with this Decision;
podroben opis že sprejetih ali načrtovanih ukrepov za uskladitev s tem sklepom;
Spain shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of the national measures taken to implement this Decision until recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 has been completed.
Španija obvešča Komisijo o napredku glede sprejetih nacionalnih ukrepov za izvajanje tega sklepa, dokler se vračanje pomoči iz člena 1 ne konča.
After the two-month period referred to in paragraph 1, Spain shall submit, on simple request by the Commission, a report on the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision.
Po dvomesečnem obdobju iz odstavka 1 Španija na zahtevo Komisije predloži poročilo o že sprejetih in načrtovanih ukrepih za uskladitev s tem sklepom.
The report shall also contain detailed information concerning the amounts of aid and interest already recovered from the beneficiaries.
V tem poročilu navede tudi podrobne informacije o zneskih pomoči in obrestih vračila, ki so jih prejemniki že vrnili.
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.
Ta sklep je naslovljen na Španijo.
With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 107 and 108, respectively, of the TFEU.
S 1. decembrom 2009 sta člena 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES postala člena 107 in 108 PDEU.
The two sets of provisions are in substance identical.
Oba sklopa določb sta vsebinsko enaka.
For the purposes of this Decision, references to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU should be understood as references to Articles 87 and 88, respectively, of the EC Treaty.
Za potrebe tega sklepa je treba sklicevanje na člena 107 in 108 PDEU, če je smiselno, razumeti kot sklicevanje na člena 87 in 88 Pogodbe ES.
OJ C 172, 16.6.2001, p. 2.
UL C 172, 16.6.2001, str. 2.
OJ L 111, 6.5.2003, p. 24.
UL L 111, 6.5.2003, str. 24.
OJ C 171, 19.7.2003, p. 34.
UL C 171, 19.7.2003, str. 34.
Case T-146/03 Asociación de Estaciones de Servicio de Madrid, Federación Catalana de Estaciones de Servicio v Commission of the European Communities [2003] ECR II-98.
Zadeva T-146/03, Asociación de Estaciones de Servicio de Madrid in Federación Catalana de Estaciones de Servicio proti Komisiji. Recueil 2003, str. II-98.
Boletín Oficial del Estado (Spanish Official Gazette – BOE) 241, 7.10.2000, p. 34614.
BOE 241, 7.10.2000, str. 34614.
This concerns measures relating to the amendment to Law No 37/1992 pursuant to Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, as well as tax measures provided for by the Order of 29 November 2000 issued by the Ministry of Finance on the application of a corrective index to feed purchased from third parties in the case of certain livestock farming activities covered by the scheme for objective assessment of personal income tax.
Gre za ukrepe v zvezi s spremembo zakona 37/1992, določeno s kraljevim zakonodajnim odlokom 10/2000, in za davčne ukrepe, določene z odlokom ministrstva za finance z dne 29. novembra 2000 o njihovi uporabi za določene dejavnosti živinoreje, za katere velja sistem objektivnega določanja korekcijskega faktorja za krmo, kupljeno od tretjih oseb.
These measures also include a reduction in the net yield under the scheme for the objective assessment of personal income tax for agricultural activities, a reduction of the percentage for calculating quarterly VAT payments under the simplified arrangements for certain agricultural activities and a tax measure to increase the percentage of expenditure which is difficult to substantiate in the context of personal income tax.
Gre tudi za zmanjšanje neto donosa v okviru sistema objektivnega določanja dohodnine za kmetijske in živinorejske dejavnosti; za zmanjšanje odstotka, ki se uporablja za določitev trimesečnih plačil v poenostavljeni ureditvi davka na dodano vrednost za nekatere kmetijske dejavnosti in za davčni ukrep zvišanja odstotka težko dokazljivih izdatkov pri dohodnini.
In its Decision, the Commission had considered that these measures did not constitute State aid.
Komisija je v Odločbi menila, da ti ukrepi niso državna pomoč.
These measures consisted in State aid granted by Spain to farmers in the form of subsidies on loans and guarantees provided for in a Ministry of Agriculture Decision of 15 November 2000 publishing a Council of Ministers Agreement of 10 November 2000, and the measure extending, for 2000 and 2001, tax benefits applicable to personal income on transfer of certain agricultural land and holdings provided for in the seventh transitional provision of Law No 14/2000.
Gre za državne pomoči, ki jih je Španija dodelila imetnikom kmetijskih gospodarstev v obliki ugodnosti pri posojilih in garancijah, določenih z odločbo ministrstva za kmetijstvo z dne 15. novembra 2000 o napovedi objave soglasja sveta ministrov z dne 10. novembra 2000, za ukrep podaljšanja davčnih ugodnosti pri dohodnini na poslovni leti 2000 in 2001 ter za prenos nekaterih zemljišč in kmetijskih gospodarstev iz sedme prehodne določbe zakona 14/2000.
In its Decision, the Commission declared these measures incompatible with the TFEU.
Komisija je v Odločbi te ukrepe razglasila za nezdružljive s PDEU.
BOE 241, 7.10.2000, p. 34614.
BOE 241 z dne 7.10.2000, str. 34614.
BOE 170, 17.7.1999, p. 27027.
BOE 170 z dne 17.7.1999, str. 27027.
BOE 304, 20.12.1990, p. 37970.
BOE 304 z dne 20.12.1990, str. 37970.
BOE 241, 8.10.1998, p. 33517.
BOE 241 z dne 8.10.1998, str. 33517.
The obligation for cooperatives to constitute these reserves is laid down in Article 55 of Law No 27/1999.
Obveznost zadrug, da morajo ustanoviti ta rezervni sklad je določena v členu 55 zakona 27/1999.
In the first instance, reserves are constituted using cooperative income and extra-cooperative profits.
Sklad sestavljajo, prvič, zadružni poslovni presežki in zunajzadružni dobiček.
A similar obligation applies to companies with share capital, which by virtue of Article 214 of Spanish Law No 1564/1989 on public limited companies must allocate a sum amounting to 10 % of profit for the financial year to a legal reserve until the reserve amounts to at least 20 % of the company’s registered capital (BOE of 27.12.1989).
Podobna obveznost obstaja za kapitalske družbe, ki morajo na podlagi člena 214 španskega zakona o delniških družbah 1564/1989 10 % dobička v poslovnem letu nameniti v zakonito rezervo, dokler ta ne doseže 20 % kapitala družbe (BOE z dne 27.12.1989).
The obligation for cooperatives to constitute this reserve is provided for in Article 56 of Law No 27/1999.
Obveznost zadrug, da morajo ustanoviti ta sklad, je določena v členu 56 zakona 27/1999.
BOE 188, 7.8.1986, p. 27907.
BOE 188 z dne 7.8.1986, str. 27907.
BOE 58, 9.3.1970, p. 3820.
BOE 58 z dne 9.3.1970, str. 3820.
BOE 308, 24.12.1992, p. 43867.
BOE 308 z dne 24.12.1992, str. 43867.
BOE 295, 10.12.1998, p. 40730.
BOE 295 z dne 10.12.1998, str. 40730.