natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In addition, measures which, in various forms, mitigate the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking and which, without therefore being subsidies in the strict meaning of the word, are similar in character and have the same effect, are considered to constitute aid [31].
Poleg tega se za pomoč štejejo ukrepi, ki v različnih oblikah zmanjšujejo stroške, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetja, in so zato, ne da bi bili subvencije v pravem pomenu besede, iste narave in imajo enake učinke [31].
Selective advantage for service-providers
Selektivna prednost za podjetja, ki so zagotavljala storitve
The Commission considers that the activity of collection, transportation, processing and destruction of the material in question is an economic activity, as it constitutes a service provision in return for remuneration and may be carried out by numerous economic operators on the Community market.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so zbiranje, prevoz, predelava in uničevanje zadevnih snovi gospodarska dejavnost, saj pomenijo zagotavljanje storitev proti plačilu in jih lahko izvajajo številni gospodarski subjekti na trgu Skupnosti.
This conclusion is based, in particular, on the information provided by ETSA, as summarised in recital 73 et seq. of this Decision.
Te ugotovitve potrjujejo zlasti podatki, ki jih je zagotovila skupina ETSA in so povzeti v uvodni izjavi 73 in naslednjih tega sklepa.
With regard to this economic activity, the Portuguese authorities argue that the service-providers in question carried out a public service mission in the general interest, justified by reasons of public health and environmental protection.
V zvezi s to gospodarsko dejavnostjo portugalski organi trdijo, da so podjetja, ki so zagotavljala zadevne storitve, izpolnjevala nalogo javnih storitev splošnega interesa, ki je utemeljena z razlogi javnega zdravja in varstva okolja.
In this context, the Portuguese authorities stress the country’s specific situation in relation to the BSE crisis.
Portugalska v tem okviru poudarja posebne razmere v zvezi s krizo BSE.
Portugal therefore insists that all the measures taken were aimed at dealing with an emergency situation that threatened public health.
Zato ta država vztraja, da je bil namen vseh sprejetih ukrepov spopasti se z izrednimi razmerami, ki so ogrožale javno zdravje.
The Portuguese Government’s objective was therefore to allow measures to be immediately introduced until operators could arrange to carry out these tasks themselves, while remaining under state control (see recitals 21 and 59 of this Decision).
Portugalska uprava je posledično želela omogočiti takojšnje izvajanje ukrepov, dokler se subjekti ne bi organizirali, da bi lahko sami prevzeli te naloge, medtem ko bi ostali pod nadzorom države (glej uvodne izjave 21 do 59 tega sklepa).
In its comments, ETSA considers that it did not benefit from any illegal aid and that all the funds received were simply the legitimate consideration for the provision of a public service (see recital 79 of this Decision).
Skupina ETSA v svojih pripombah meni, da ni bila deležna nobene nezakonite pomoči, temveč da so bila vsa sredstva samo legitimno nadomestilo za zagotavljanje javnih storitev (glej uvodno izjavo 79 tega sklepa).
It is clear from the Court of Justice judgment in the Altmark case [32] that public subsidies intended to allow the operation of public services do not fall within Article 107 TFEU, given that they must be regarded as compensation for the services provided by the recipient undertakings in order to discharge public service obligations.
Iz sodbe Sodišča v zadevi Altmark [32] izhaja, da se člen 107 PDEU za javne subvencije, katerih namen je omogočiti izvajanje javnih storitev, ne uporablja, če je treba take subvencije šteti za nadomestilo za storitve, ki so jih opravila podjetja, ki prejemajo nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javnih storitev.
However, the Court requires the following conditions to be satisfied:
Vendar Sodišče navaja, da morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:
first, the recipient undertaking is actually required to discharge public service obligations and those obligations have been clearly defined,
prvič, podjetju, ki prejme nadomestilo, mora biti dejansko zaupano izpolnjevanje obveznosti javnih storitev, te obveznosti pa morajo biti jasno določene,
second, the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated have been established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner,
drugič, parametre, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo, je treba določiti vnaprej na objektiven in pregleden način,
third, 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,
tretjič, nadomestilo ne sme presegati zneska, potrebnega za pokrivanje vseh ali nekaterih stroškov, ki nastanejo zaradi izpolnjevanja obveznosti javnih storitev, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prejemkov in zmernega dobička za izpolnjevanje teh obveznosti,
fourth, 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 so as to be able to meet the necessary public service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging the obligations.
četrtič, če podjetje, ki naj bi izpolnjevalo obveznosti javnih storitev, ni izbrano v skladu s postopkom za oddajo javnih naročil, je treba stopnjo potrebnega nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi v povprečnem podjetju, ki je dobro vodeno in ustrezno opremljeno za izpolnjevanje zahtev javnih storitev, nastali pri izpolnjevanju teh obveznosti, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prihodkov in zmernega dobička za izpolnjevanje obveznosti.
Applying the judgment in Altmark to the present case leads the Commission to consider the following:
Uporaba sodne prakse iz sodbe Altmark v obravnavanem primeru vodi Komisijo do naslednjih premislekov.
Genuine service of general economic interest, as defined in Article 106(2) TFEU
Resnične storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 106(2) PDEU
To start with, it must be examined whether the present case involves a genuine service of general economic interest, as defined in Article 106(2) TFEU.
Najprej je treba preučiti, ali gre v obravnavanem primeru za resnične storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 106(2) PDEU.
It is clear from the case-law of the Court of Justice that, with the exception of the sectors in which there are Community rules governing the matter, Member States have a wide margin of discretion regarding the nature of services that could be qualified as being services of general economic interest.
Iz sodne prakse Sodišča izhaja, da imajo države članice, razen v sektorjih, v katerih je to vprašanje že urejeno s predpisi Skupnosti, široko diskrecijsko pravico pri presoji narave storitev, ki jih je mogoče opredeliti kot storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena.
Thus, the Commission’s task is to ensure that this margin of discretion is applied without manifest error as regards the definition of services of general economic interest.
Zato je naloga Komisije zagotoviti, da se ta diskrecijska pravica pri opredelitvi storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena uporablja brez očitnih napak.
Since the 1990s, the occurrence of various transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) has been detected separately in humans and animals.
Od devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja je bil pri človeku in pri živalih ločeno ugotovljen pojav več različnih transmisivnih spongiformnih encefalopatij (TSE).
Since 1996, evidence has been gathered pointing to the similarity between BSE agents and the new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
Od leta 1996 so se nakopičili dokazi, ki kažejo na podobnost med povzročiteljem BSE (goveja spongiformna encefalopatija) in novo različico Creutzfeldt-Jakobove bolezni.
Since 1990, the European Community has adopted a number of measures aimed at protecting public and animal health from the risk of BSE.
Skupnost je od devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja sprejela vrsto ukrepov, namenjenih varovanju zdravja ljudi in živali pred tveganjem za pojav BSE.
These measures are based on the safeguard provisions of the directives on animal health and environmental measures.
Ti ukrepi temeljijo na zaščitnih določbah direktiv v zvezi z ukrepi za zdravstveno varstvo živali in varstvo okolja.
Pursuant to Decision 2000/766/EC, Member States had to ensure that animal waste, as defined by Directive 90/667/EEC [33] was collected, transported, processed, stored or disposed of in accordance with that Directive, with Commission Decision 97/735/EC [34] and with Council Decision 1999/534/EC [35].
Na podlagi Odločbe 2000/766/ES so morale države članice poskrbeti, da se živalski odpadki v smislu Direktive Sveta 90/667/EGS [33] zbirajo, prevažajo, predelujejo, skladiščijo ali odstranjujejo v skladu z navedeno direktivo, Odločbo Komisije 97/735/ES [34] in Odločbo Sveta 1999/534/ES [35].
In that respect, Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 laid down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption, and required Member States to ensure that adequate arrangements were in place and that a sufficient infrastructure existed to collect, transport and destroy animal by-products.
V tem pogledu so bili z Uredbo (ES) št. 1774/2002 določeni zdravstvena pravila za živalske stranske proizvode, ki niso namenjeni prehrani ljudi, in obveznosti držav članic, ki so morale zagotoviti vzpostavitev ustrezne ureditve in obstoj zadovoljive infrastrukture za zbiranje, prevoz in odstranjevanje živalskih stranskih proizvodov.
Given that the Court of Justice has recognised that the management of particular waste may form the subject of a service of general economic interest [36], and bearing in mind the specific situation of the BSE crisis as indicated above, the Commission has no objection to the Portuguese authorities attributing the nature of services of general economic interest to this activity of collecting and subsequently destroying carcasses and other animal waste unfit for consumption from 1999 to 2005, during which time the Portuguese State assumed full responsibility (from 1999 to 2003) and partial responsibility (from 2003 to 2005) for these operations.
Ker je Sodišče priznalo, da je ravnanje z določenimi odpadki lahko predmet storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena [36], in glede na zgoraj navedene posebne razmere zaradi krize BSE, Komisija nima ugovorov v zvezi z naravo storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena, ki so jo portugalski organi po svojih navedbah želeli pripisati tej dejavnosti zbiranja in poznejšega uničevanja trupov in drugih živalskih odpadkov, neprimernih za prehrano, v obdobju med letoma 1999 in 2005, ko je portugalska država v celoti (1999–2003) ali delno (2003–2005) prevzela odgovornost za te dejavnosti.
That decision was justified on grounds of public health and environmental protection, and is therefore covered by the concept of general economic interest, as defined in Article 106(2) TFEU.
Gre za odločitev, ki je utemeljena z razlogi javnega zdravja in varstva okolja, zato spada v okvir pojma splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 106(2) PDEU.
Discharge of the public service obligation
Izpolnjevanje obveznosti javnih storitev
The Altmark judgment requires a mandate in the form of one or more official acts with binding legal force under national law.
S sodbo Altmark se zahteva pooblastilo v obliki enega ali več uradnih in pravno zavezujočih aktov v nacionalnem pravu.
With regard to the first condition imposed by the Altmark judgment, it is confirmed that Decree-Laws No 393-B/98 and No 244/2003 required the collection, transportation, processing and destruction of animal by-products unfit for human consumption.
Kar zadeva prvi pogoj, postavljen v sodbi Altmark, je mogoče ugotoviti, da so na Portugalskem zbiranje, prevoz, predelava in uničevanje živalskih stranskih proizvodov, neprimernih za prehrano ljudi, postali obvezni z zakonskima odlokoma iz leta 1998 in iz leta 2003.
Article 6 of Decree-Law No 393-B/98 provided that INGA, which was responsible for the collection, processing and destruction of animal by-products unfit for consumption, would select the undertakings to provide this service.
Člen 6 zakonskega odloka iz leta 1998 je določal, da zavod INGA, ki je odgovoren za zbiranje, predelavo in uničevanje živalskih stranskih proizvodov, neprimernih za prehrano, izbere podjetja, ki bodo zadolžena za opravljanje teh storitev.
Joint Order No 95/99 established beforehand the parameters used to calculate the remuneration for the public service, together with other obligations associated with the service provision, such as the obligation for the undertaking to collect all by-products generated in the national territory in accordance with the health and technical rules laid down by law.
S skupnim odlokom št. 95/99 so bili vnaprej določeni parametri, na podlagi katerih je bila izračunana višina nadomestila za javne storitve, ter druge obveznosti, povezane z zagotavljanjem storitev, kot je obveznost, da mora podjetje vse stranske proizvode na celotnem nacionalnem ozemlju zbirati v skladu z zdravstvenimi in tehničnimi pravili, predvidenimi v zakonodaji.
The Portuguese authorities maintain that the obligations of the service-providers were clearly defined in the service contracts.
Portugalski organi trdijo, da so bile obveznosti podjetij, ki so zagotavljala storitve, jasno opredeljene v pogodbah o opravljanju storitev.
By way of example, they have provided the Commission with a service provision contract from 2003, concluded on the basis of Decree-Law No 393-B/98.
Kot primer so Komisiji predložili pogodbo o opravljanju storitev iz leta 2003, ki je bila sklenjena na podlagi zakonskega odloka iz leta 1998.
The Commission notes that the obligations of the service-provider are clearly defined in the service provision contract submitted by the Portuguese authorities.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so obveznosti podjetij, ki so zagotavljala storitve, jasno opredeljene v pogodbi, ki so jo portugalski organi posredovali Komisiji.
In view of the provisions of Decree-Law No 393-B/98 and the Joint Order, as also the model service provision contract submitted, the Commission concludes that the first condition of the Altmark judgment is satisfied.
Glede na določbe zakonskega odloka iz leta 1998 in zadevnega skupnega odloka ter pogodbo o opravljanju storitev, ki je bila predložena kot primer, Komisija sklepa, da je prvi pogoj iz sodne prakse v sodbi Altmark izpolnjen.
Parameters established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner
Vnaprej ter objektivno in pregledno določeni parametri
With regard to the second condition, the Commission considers — based on the available information — that the parameters used to calculate the compensation were established beforehand in an objective and transparent manner.
V zvezi z drugim pogojem Komisija na podlagi podatkov, ki so ji na voljo, meni, da so bili parametri, na katerih je temeljil izračun nadomestila, določeni vnaprej ter na objektiven in pregleden način.
The Joint Orders submitted by the Portuguese authorities define the calculation method and eligible expenditure (see recital 26 of this Decision).
Tako skupni odloki, ki so jih predložili portugalski organi, določajo metodo za izračun in upravičene stroške (glej uvodno izjavo 26 tega sklepa).
These figures were periodically checked based on previous years.
Ti podatki so bili redno pregledovani glede na prejšnja leta.
From 2005, public procurement procedures were organised.
Od leta 2005 se uporabljajo postopki za oddajo javnih naročil.
Based on the available information, the Commission considers that the second condition of the Altmark judgment is satisfied.
Z vidika razpoložljivih podatkov Komisija meni, da je drugi pogoj iz sodne prakse v sodbi Altmark izpolnjen.
Compensation necessary to cover the service costs
Znesek, potreben za pokrivanje stroškov storitev
With regard to the third condition, the Portuguese authorities and the interested party state that the compensation did not exceed what was 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.
Kar zadeva tretji pogoj, portugalski organi in zainteresirana tretja stran navajajo, da nadomestilo ni presegalo zneska, potrebnega za pokrivanje vseh ali nekaterih stroškov, ki so nastali zaradi izpolnjevanja obveznosti javnih storitev, ob upoštevanju ustreznih prihodkov in zmernega dobička za izpolnjevanje teh obveznosti.
On several occasions, particularly when it initiated the examination procedure, the Commission asked the Portuguese authorities to provide information on the method used to calculate the actual economic cost of the services.
Komisija je od portugalskih organov večkrat in zlasti ob sprožitvi postopka preiskave zahtevala, naj ji predložijo podrobnosti o metodi za izračun dejanskih gospodarskih stroškov storitev.
The Portuguese authorities have provided documents showing the annual expenditure of the service-providers with regard to 1999 to 2005, and have compared these figures with what INGA paid providers for performing these services.
Portugalski organi so predložili dokumente, ki vsebujejo podatke o letnih stroških ponudnikov storitev v obdobju 1999–2005, te podatke pa so primerjali z zneski, ki jih je zavod INGA plačeval ponudnikom za opravljanje storitev.
The documents in question show that the compensation paid by INGA to the service-providers did not exceed what was necessary to cover all or part of the costs incurred in performing the service.
Ti dokumenti dokazujejo, da nadomestilo, ki ga je zavod INGA plačeval podjetjem, ki so zagotavljala storitve, ni presegalo zneska, potrebnega za pokrivanje vseh ali nekaterih stroškov, ki so nastali pri opravljanju storitev.
The documents received show that the compensation also takes into account a profit of between 30 % and 39,5 %, depending on the year (see recital 62 of this Decision).
Predloženi dokumenti kažejo, da je bil poleg tega v nadomestilu upoštevan dobiček, ki je glede na obravnavano leto znašal od 30 do 39,5 % (glej uvodno izjavo 62 tega sklepa).
The Portuguese authorities have given an assurance that the resources could not have been diverted to competing activities in which the undertakings may have been engaged (cross-subsidies) because the service-providers chosen were not engaged in other activities.
Portugalski organi zatrjujejo, da sredstva niso mogla biti uporabljena za morebitne konkurenčne dejavnosti, s katerimi bi se ukvarjala podjetja (navzkrižno subvencioniranje), saj izbrani ponudniki storitev niso izvajali drugih dejavnosti.
However, based on the information provided by the Portuguese authorities, the Commission considers that it is unable to conclude that the profit taken into account was ‘reasonable’ as defined by the Altmark judgment.
Vendar Komisija na podlagi podatkov, ki so jih zagotovili portugalski organi, ugotavlja, da ne more sklepati, da je bil upoštevani dobiček „zmeren“ v smislu sodne prakse iz sodbe Altmark.
In its comments, ETSA has confirmed that the remuneration received for the service provision adequately reflected the costs incurred, allowing a profit margin which did not result in any particular advantage, and that, in the period prior to 2005, the level of remuneration for providing the public service corresponded to the European average and was below the level of remuneration established in the public service contract awarded through the public procurement procedure.
Skupina ETSA je v svojih pripombah zatrdila, da je nadomestilo za zagotovljene storitve ustrezno odražalo nastale stroške, pri čemer je omogočalo zmerno stopnjo dobička, ki ni privedla do nobene posebne prednosti, ter da je v obdobju pred letom 2005 višina nadomestila za javne storitve ustrezala evropskemu povprečju in je bila nižja od tiste, ki je bila določena v javnem naročilu storitev, oddanem z javnim razpisom.
With regard to this information, the Commission notes that neither the Portuguese authorities nor the interested party have provided supporting documents.
V zvezi s tem Komisija ugotavlja, da niti portugalski organi niti zainteresirana tretja stran niso predložili dokumentov, ki bi potrjevali te trditve.
As a result, the Commission cannot conclude that the third condition of the Altmark judgment is satisfied in the present case.
Zato Komisija ne more sklepati, da je tretji pogoj, postavljen s sodno prakso v sodbi Altmark, v obravnavanem primeru izpolnjen.
Analysis of the costs of a typical undertaking
Ocena stroškov povprečnega podjetja
Given that, prior to 2005, the service-providers were not selected through a public procurement procedure, the Altmark judgment requires a comparative analysis with the costs of a typical undertaking.
Ker pred letom 2005 podjetja, ki so zagotavljala storitve, niso bila izbrana v postopkih javnega naročanja, se v sodbi Altmark zahteva primerjalna ocena glede na stroške povprečnega podjetja.
The Portuguese authorities have not provided any evidence that the costs have been assessed based on an analysis of the costs of a typical undertaking.
Portugalski organi niso zagotovili podatkov, ki bi dokazovali, da so bili stroški ocenjeni na podlagi ocene stroškov povprečnega podjetja.
The Commission is therefore obliged to conclude that not all (four) criteria in the Altmark judgment are satisfied in the present case, and that it cannot rule out the possibility that there was an advantage for the service-providers in the period between the entry into force of Decree-Law No 393-B/98 and the end of the transitional scheme introduced by Decree-Law No 244/2003, which expired in 2005.
Zato mora Komisija sklepati, da v obravnavanem primeru niso izpolnjena vsa štiri merila iz sodne prakse v sodbi Altmark in da ni mogoče izključiti morebitne prednosti za podjetja, ki so zagotavljala storitve, v obdobju od začetka veljavnosti zakonskega odloka iz leta 1998 do leta 2005, ko je prenehala veljati prehodna ureditev, določena z zakonskim odlokom iz leta 2003.
The Commission therefore concludes that it cannot rule out the possibility that there was a selective advantage for the service-providers in the period between 1998 and the end of the transitional scheme introduced by Decree-Law No 244/2003, which expired in 2005.
Zato Komisija sklepa, da ni mogoče izključiti selektivne prednosti za ponudnike storitev v obdobju od leta 1998 do leta 2005, ko je prenehala veljati prehodna ureditev, predvidena z zakonskim odlokom iz leta 2003.
Selective advantage for slaughterhouses and cutting plants, importers of bone-in beef, veal, pigmeat and poultrymeat, and intra-Community operators, i.e. bone-in beef, veal and pigmeat operators/receivers
Selektivna prednost za klavnice in razsekovalnice, uvoznike govedine, teletine, svinine in perutninskega mesa s kostmi ter trgovce znotraj Skupnosti, tj. trgovce z govedino, teletino in svinino s kostmi oziroma prevzemnike teh proizvodov
According to the Court of Justice judgment in the GEMO case [37], the fact that the service for the collection and disposal of animal carcasses and waste available to farmers and slaughterhouses is carried out by private undertakings cannot call into question any classification as State aid as the organisation of that service originates with the public authorities.
Sodišče je v sodbi GEMO [37] menilo, da dejstvo, da zbiranje in odstranjevanje živalskih trupel in klavniških odpadkov, ki sta na voljo klavnicam in rejcem, izvajajo zasebna podjetja, ne more izpodbijati morebitne opredelitve ukrepa kot državne pomoči, ker za ureditvijo te dejavnosti stojijo javni organi.