natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to settled case law, trade between the Member States must be regarded as affected when a measure constituting an advantage strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Union trade [42].
V skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso učinek na trgovino med državami članicami obstaja, če ukrep, povezan z neko prednostjo, okrepi položaj nekega podjetja glede na njegove konkurente v trgovini v Uniji. [42] Iz tega izhaja, da taka okrepitev položaja upravičenega podjetja pri konkuriranju drugim podjetjem v trgovini v Uniji ne le izkrivlja konkurenco (ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco), temveč vpliva tudi na trgovino med državami članicami.
It is consequently necessary to assess whether the financing granted to the transport undertakings RBG and BSM by VRR constitutes an economic advantage which strengthens the position of these undertakings compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Union trade.
Zato je treba preučiti, ali finančna sredstva, ki jih je prevoznikoma RBG in BSM odobrilo združenje VRR, pomenijo ekonomsko prednost, ki krepi njun položaj glede na konkurente v trgovini v Uniji.
At the outset of the analysis, the Commission recalls that the market for the provision of local public transport services in Germany in which these undertakings are operating is a market opened up to competition from undertakings established in other Member States [44].
Komisija najprej opozarja, da je trg za storitve potniškega prevoza v Nemčiji, na katerem so ta podjetja dejavna, odprt za konkurenčna podjetja iz drugih držav članic. [44]
Further, the Court of Justice stated in its Altmark judgment:
Splošno sodišče v sodbi Altmark ugotavlja še:
In this respect it must be observed, first, that it is not impossible that a public subsidy granted to an undertaking which provides only local or regional transport services and does not provide any transport services outside its State of origin may none the less have an effect on trade between Member States.
V zvezi s tem je treba najprej opozoriti, da obstaja možnost, da lahko javna subvencija, ki se dodeli podjetju, ki zagotavlja le lokalne in regionalne prevozne storitve, pri čemer ne zagotavlja prevoznih storitev zunaj države izvora, vseeno vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
Where a Member State grants a public subsidy to an undertaking, the supply of transport services by that undertaking may for that reason be maintained or increased with the result that undertakings established in other Member States have less chance of providing their transport services in the market in that Member State …’ [45].
Kadar država članica dodeli javno subvencijo podjetju, lahko obseg zagotavljanja prevoznih storitev tega podjetja iz tega razloga ostane enak ali se poveča, zaradi česar imajo podjetja, ki so ustanovljena v drugih državah članicah, manj možnosti za zagotavljanje svojih prevoznih storitev na trgu te države članice […]“ [45]
The Commission further observes that the public financing granted to the transport undertakings RBG and BSM by VRR, which constitutes an economic advantage for them, strengthens their financial situation.
Dalje Komisija ugotavlja, da se z javnim financiranjem prevoznikov RBG in BSM, ki je povezano z ekonomsko prednostjo in ga izvaja VRR, izboljša njun finančni položaj.
This strengthened financial situation allows them to maintain the supply of transport services.
Zaradi tako okrepljenega finančnega položaja lahko še naprej zagotavljata prevozne storitve.
It also has the result that other undertakings from Germany as well as from other Member States have less chance of providing their transport services in the market served by these two transport undertakings (the Düsseldorf area), although it is legally possible for them to do so.
Poleg tega navaja, da imajo druga podjetja iz Nemčije in drugih držav članic manj možnosti, da zagotavljajo prevozne storitve na trgu, na katerem delujeta ta prevoznika (območje Düsseldorf), čeprav je to s pravnega vidika mogoče.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that the financing of public service compensation for RBG and BSM strengthens their position compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Union trade and that it therefore affects trade between the Member States.
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da se s financiranjem podjetij RBG in BSM z nadomestilom za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe krepi njun položaj glede na konkurente v trgovini v Uniji, s tem pa se vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
For the reasons set out above, the Commission concludes that the financing granted to RBG and BSM by VRR for discharging the public service obligation constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Komisija tako ugotavlja, da finančna sredstva, odobrena podjetjema RBG in BSM za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe, pomenijo državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Article 93 TFEU envisages conditions of compatibility of aid granted in the field of coordination of transport and public service obligation in transport.
V členu 93 PDEU so določeni pogoji za združljivost pomoči, odobrenih v povezavi s koordinacijo prometa ali prevzemom obveznosti javne službe v prometu.
The Commission notes that, as Article 93 constitutes a lex specialis with regard to Article 106(2), Article 106(2) cannot therefore be applied to the public transport undertakings in question [46].
Komisija ugotavlja, da člena 106(2) v obravnavanem primeru ni mogoče uporabiti za podjetja na področju javnega prometa, saj je člen 93 lex specialis glede na člen 106(2) [46].
According to the Altmark judgment [47], Article 93 TFEU could not be applied directly but only by virtue of Council Regulations, in particular Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 or Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70.
Člena 93 PDEU v skladu s sodbo Altmark [47] ni bilo mogoče uporabiti neposredno, temveč le na podlagi uredb Sveta, predvsem na podlagi Uredbe (EGS) št. 1191/69 ali Uredbe (EGS) št. 1107/70.
On 3 December 2009, Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 entered into force.
3. decembra 2009 je začela veljati Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007.
This Regulation also repealed Regulations (EEC) No 1191/69 and (EEC) No 1107/70.
Z njo sta bili hkrati razveljavljeni Uredba (EGS) št. 1191/69 in Uredba (EGS) št. 1107/70.
Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 applies to the compensation of public service obligations concerning public passenger transport services by rail and other track-based modes and by road.
Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 velja za nadomestila za opravljanje javne službe, ki se nanašajo na javni potniški prevoz po železnici in druge vrste železniškega prevoza ter cestni prevoz.
Therefore, the Commission has to assess the compatibility of the measures in the present case with the internal market on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007, the instrument in force at the time of the Commission’s decision.
Zato mora Komisija preučiti združljivost obravnavanih ukrepov z notranjim trgom na podlagi Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 kot veljavnega pravnega akta v času zadevne odločbe Komisije.
Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 lays down the conditions under which competent authorities may compensate public service obligations for passenger transport rendered through public service contracts.
V Uredbi (ES) št. 1370/2007 so določeni pogoji, pod katerimi lahko pristojni organ izplača nadomestilo za opravljanje javne službe s storitvami potniškega prevoza, ki se opravljajo po pogodbah o izvajanju javne službe.
In the present case, the public service obligations have been imposed by the so-called threefold act of entrustment (i.e. by means of licences, the Local Public Transport Schemes and the respective financing notice by VRR based on VRR’s Financing Guidelines).
V obravnavanem primeru je bila pooblastitev za obveznosti javne službe izvedena s tako imenovanim trojnim aktom o pooblastitvi (to pomeni z dovoljenji, načrti lokalnega prevoza in odločbo združenja VRR o financiranju na podlagi direktive o financiranju).
The Commission notes further that the interested party has not contested the applicability of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 in the present case.
Komisija še ugotavlja, da zainteresirana stran v obravnavanem primeru ni izpodbijala uporabe Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007.
The Commission also notes that Germany is of the opinion that Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 should in principle apply only to payments disbursed as from 3 December 2009.
Poleg tega ugotavlja, da se po mnenju Nemčije Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 načeloma uporablja le za nadomestila, ki niso bila odobrena pred 3. decembrom 2009.
After examining the arguments advanced by Germany, the Commission has come to the conclusion, however, that they do not call into question the ratione temporis application of the State aid rules, according to which the Commission must base its reasoning on the law applicable at the time when it takes its decision.
Komisija pa je po preučitvi trditev Nemčije sklenila, da se zaradi njih ne dvomi o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči ratione temporis; na tej podlagi mora Komisija utemeljitev navezati na pravna pravila, veljavna ob izdaji odločbe.
The Commission considers that the public service contracts must be examined on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 for the following reasons:
Komisija meni, da je treba pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe preučiti na podlagi Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 iz naslednjih razlogov:
Firstly, the Commission points out that Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 itself provides for the procedures concerning its entry into force and its ratione temporis application.
Prvič, Komisija ugotavlja, da Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 načeloma vsebuje ureditev o začetku veljavnosti in predvideva uporabo ratione temporis.
Pursuant to its Article 12, Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 entered into force on 3 December 2009.
V skladu s členom 12 Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 je ta začela veljati 3. decembra 2009.
By virtue of Article 10(1), Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 was repealed on the same date.
V skladu s členom 10(1) se Uredba (EGS) št. 1191/69 razveljavi od tega datuma.
Hence the Commission can no longer base its assessment on Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69, as it was no longer in force at the time when it adopted its decision; instead, it must base its assessment on Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007.
Komisija torej presoje ne more več opreti na Uredbo (EGS) št. 1191/69, ki ob izdaji odločbe ni bila več veljavna, temveč se mora opreti na Uredbo (ES) št. 1370/2007.
Secondly, the Commission points out that Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 contains no indication that it does not apply to public service contracts concluded prior to its entry into force.
Drugič, Komisija ugotavlja, da v Uredbi (ES) št. 1370/2007 ni navedeno, da se ta ne uporablja za pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe, sklenjene pred začetkom njene veljavnosti.
Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 thus lays down transitional arrangements for contracts which were awarded before the Regulation entered into force.
Člen 8(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 namreč vsebuje prehodna pravila za pogodbe, sklenjene pred začetkom njene veljavnosti.
This provision is in reality an exception to the application of Article 8(2) of the Regulation, which concerns the application of the provisions of Article 5 on the award of contracts.
Ta določba v bistvu pomeni izjemo glede uporabe člena 8(2) Uredbe, ki se nanaša na uporabo pravil o sklenitvi pogodb, določenih v členu 5.
It should be noted that these exceptional transitional arrangements for the award of contracts would not have been necessary if public service contracts awarded before the entry into force of the Regulation did not fall within its scope.
Torej lahko ugotovimo, da izjeme glede sklenitve pogodb v prehodnem obdobju ne bi bile potrebne, če pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe, sklenjene pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe, ne bi spadale na njeno področje uporabe.
On the contrary, Article 8 thus confirms that the other provisions of the Regulation apply to such contracts.
Nasprotno je s členom 8 tako potrjeno, da se druge določbe Uredbe uporabljajo za te pogodbe.
Thirdly, the Commission points out that its notice on the determination of the applicable rules for the assessment of unlawful State aid [48] is not applicable in the present case.
Tretjič, Komisija pojasnjuje, da se Obvestilo Komisije o določitvi pravil, ki se uporabljajo za oceno nezakonite državne pomoči [48], v tej zadevi ne uporablja.
The notice states expressly that it is without prejudice to the interpretation of Council and Commission regulations in the field of State aid.
V tem obvestilu je namreč izrecno navedeno, da ne posega v razlago uredb Sveta in Komisije na področju državnih pomoči.
And Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 specifically lays down rules for its temporal application.
Vendar Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 določa pravila o njeni časovni uporabi.
Fourthly, the Commission points out that the Court of Justice has confirmed the principle that new rules apply immediately to the future effects of a situation which arose under the old rule.
Četrtič, Komisija poudarja, da je Sodišče potrdilo tudi načelo, da se novo pravilo uporablja neposredno za bodoče učinke položaja, ki je nastal med veljavnostjo starega pravila. Prav tako je razsodilo, da se načela varstva legitimnih pričakovanj ne sme razširiti do takega obsega, da bi na splošno oviralo, da bi se novo pravilo uporabilo za bodoče učinke položajev, ki so nastali med veljavnostjo starega pravila.
Fifthly, the Court has held that the substantive rules of Community law must be interpreted as applying to situations existing before their entry into force only in so far as it clearly follows from their terms, their objectives or their general scheme that such effect must be given to them [50].
Petič, Sodišče je razsodilo, da je treba materialnopravne predpise Skupnosti razlagati tako, da se na položaje, nastale pred začetkom njihove veljavnosti, nanašajo samo, če iz njihovega besedila, ciljev ali sistematike jasno izhaja, da jim je treba pripisati tak učinek [50].
As indicated in recital 228, this last condition is clearly fulfilled in the case of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007.
Ta zadnji pogoj je očitno izpolnjen v primeru Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 228.
Sixthly, the Commission points out that, in the same judgment, the Court concluded that, where the law in force at the date on which the notification of a Member State’s proposed aid scheme took place changes before the Commission takes its decision, the Commission must decide on the basis of the new rules [51].
Šestič, poleg tega Komisija navaja, da je Sodišče v prej omenjeni sodbi še ugotovilo, da iz tega sledi, da če se je pravna ureditev, med veljavnostjo katere je država članica priglasila načrtovano pomoč, spremenila, preden je Komisija sprejela odločbo, mora Komisija odločiti na podlagi novih predpisov.
The Court has further held that the notification by a Member State of a proposed aid scheme does not give rise to a definitively established legal situation or a legitimate expectation which requires the Commission to rule on the compatibility of the aid with the internal market by applying the rules in force at the date on which that notification took place.
Sodišče je še pojasnilo, da priglasitev načrtovane pomoči, ki jo opravi država članica, ne ustvari dokončnega pravnega položaja, ki bi privedel do tega, da bi se Komisija izrekla o njihovi združljivosti s skupnim trgom, tako da bi uporabila predpise, ki veljajo na datum te priglasitve.
Consequently, it would be contradictory to allow a Member State which has not complied with the obligation to notify to create a definitively established legal situation by granting unlawful aid.
Zato bi bilo v nasprotju s tem sklepanjem državi članici, ki, nasprotno, ne bi upoštevala obveznosti priglasitve, dovoliti, da ustvari dokončen pravni položaj, tako da dodeli nezakonito pomoč.
Consequently, Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 is applicable in the present case [52].
Zato se Uredba (ES) št. 1370/2007 uporablja v tej zadevi [52].
COMPATIBILITY OF THE AID WITH THE INTERNAL MARKET ON THE BASIS OF REGULATION (EC) No 1370/2007
ZDRUŽLJIVOST POMOČI Z NOTRANJIM TRGOM NA PODLAGI UREDBE (ES) ŠT. 1370/2007
According to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 ‘public service compensation for the operation of public passenger transport services … paid in accordance with this Regulation shall be compatible with the common market.’ In what follows, the Commission will examine whether the Financing Guidelines and the compensation paid on their basis to RBG and BSM fulfil the requirements set out in Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007.
Na podlagi člena 9(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 so „s skupnim trgom […] združljiva nadomestila za opravljanje javne službe, namenjena opravljanju storitev javnega potniškega prevoza […] ki se plačujejo v skladu s to uredbo“. V nadaljevanju Komisija preučuje, ali se v direktivi o financiranju in nadomestilih, ki se na njeni podlagi izplačujejo podjetjema RBG in BSM, upoštevajo določbe Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007.
Pursuant to Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007, ‘where a competent authority decides to grant the operator of its choice an exclusive right and/or compensation, of whatever nature, in return for the discharge of public service obligations, it shall do so within the framework of a public service contract.’
V členu 3(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 je določeno: „Kadar se pristojni organ odloči, da izvajalcu, ki ga izbere sam, dodeli izključno pravico in/ali nadomestilo, ne glede na vrsto nadomestila, v zameno za izvajanje obveznosti javne službe, to stori v okviru pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe.“
In the present case the public service obligations were imposed by the so-called threefold act of entrustment (i.e. by means of licences, the Local Public Transport Schemes and the respective financing notice by VRR based on VRR’s Financing Guidelines).
V obravnavanem primeru je bila pooblastitev za obveznosti javne službe izvedena s tako imenovanim trojnim aktom o pooblastitvi (to pomeni z dovoljenji, načrti lokalnega prevoza in odločbo združenja VRR o financiranju na podlagi direktive o financiranju).
The Commission therefore concludes that Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 is complied with.
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da se upošteva člen 3 Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007.
Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 establishes the following mandatory content of public service contracts:
V členu 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 je določena ta obvezna vsebina pogodb o izvajanju javne službe:
Article 4(1)(a) – Clearly defined public service obligation: As indicated in Section 8.2.1, RBG and BSM were entrusted with a clearly defined public service obligation.
Člen 4(1)(a) – jasno opredeljene obveznosti javne službe: kot je navedeno v oddelku 8.2.1, so bile podjetjema RBG in BSM naložene jasno opredeljene obveznosti javne službe.
Article 4(1)(b) – The parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated has to be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner in a way that prevents overcompensation: As indicated in Section 9.2.2, the parameters for compensation are set out before discharging the public service obligation in the negative financing notice, in an objective and transparent manner, stating the maximum amount for each of the cost categories concerning each transport area.
Člen 4(1)(b) – parametri, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo, se določijo vnaprej ter objektivno in pregledno, tako da se prepreči čezmerna kompenzacija: kot je prikazano v oddelku 9.2.2, se parametri za nadomestila v zavrnilni odločbi o financiranju določijo objektivno in pregledno z navedbo najvišjega zneska za posamezno kategorijo stroškov glede na posamezni sektor obratovanja, preden se izpolnijo obveznosti javne službe.
Article 4(1)(c) and Article 4(2) – Arrangements with regard to the allocation of costs and revenues: On the basis of the parameters referred to above, there are clear arrangements with regard to the allocation of costs and revenues that relate to the four cost categories for which compensation is paid.
Člen 4(1)(c) in člen 4(2) – ureditve za razporeditev stroškov in prihodkov: na podlagi prej navedenih parametrov so podane jasne ureditve za razporeditev stroškov in prihodkov, ki se nanašajo na zadevne štiri kategorije stroškov, za katere se izplača nadomestilo.
For each of the four different categories of public service obligations costs and revenues are allocated separately, in separate accounts, using standard accounting principles applicable under German law, with an annual examination by certified public accountants and VRR.
Pri vsaki od štirih kategorij obveznosti javne službe se stroški in prihodki dodelijo ločenim kontom, pri čemer se uporabljajo računovodska načela, ki veljajo po nemškem pravu, letno kontrolo pa opravita nevtralni revizor in VRR.
Article 4(3) – Duration of public service contracts shall be limited to 10 years for bus and coach services and 15 years for passenger transport services by rail or other track-based modes: Originally, the public service obligations were imposed by the so-called threefold act of entrustment (i.e. by means of licences, the Local Public Transport Schemes and the respective financing notice by VRR based on VRR’s Financing Guidelines).
Člen 4(3) – trajanje pogodb o izvajanju javne službe je omejeno in ni daljše od 10 let za avtobusne storitve in 15 let za storitve potniškega prevoza po železnici in za druge vrste prevoza po tirih: prvotno je bila pooblastitev za obveznosti javne službe izvedena s tako imenovanim trojnim aktom o pooblastitvi (to pomeni z dovoljenji, načrti lokalnega prevoza in odločbo združenja VRR o financiranju na podlagi direktive o financiranju).
Following the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 they have been summarised in a single public service contract for each of the undertakings with a limited duration of 10 years.
Zaradi začetka veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 so bile obveznosti javne službe, naložene prevoznikom, povzete v enem samem aktu, ki je časovno omejen na 10 let.
For public service contracts which were already in place when Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 entered into force, transitional provisions apply.
Za pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe, ki so obstajale že pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007, se uporabljajo prehodna pravila.
According to Article 8(3)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007, public service contracts concluded as from 26 July 2000 and before 3 December 2009 on the basis of a procedure other than a fair competitive tendering procedure may continue until they expire, provided they are of limited duration comparable to the durations specified in Article 4.
V skladu s členom 8(3)(d) Uredbe (ES) št. 1370/2007 se lahko pogodbe o izvajanju javnih služb, sklenjene od 26. julija 2000 in pred 3. decembrom 2009 na podlagi postopka, ki ni bil pravičen in za javnost odprt razpis, izvajajo do izteka njihove veljavnosti, če imajo omejeno veljavnost, primerljivo z veljavnostmi, določenimi v členu 4.
In the present case, the contract was concluded in the period mentioned in Article 8(3)(d) without a tendering procedure.
V obravnavanem primeru je bila pogodba sklenjena v obdobju, določenem v členu 8(3)(d), ne da bi se izvedel razpisni postopek.
Therefore, the limited duration as set out in Article 4 applies.
Upoštevna je torej časovna omejenost v skladu s členom 4.
The duration of the contract is now limited to 10 years; it therefore complies with the requirements of Article 4(3).
Veljavnost pogodbe je tako omejena na 10 let in skladna s pravili iz člena 4(3).
Article 4(5) – The requirement to comply with certain social standards: The applicable collective agreements are indicated in the respective acts since RBG and BSM are obliged to apply the collective agreement concluded by the Municipal Employers Association of North Rhine-Westphalia.
Člen 4(5) – zahteva po izpolnjevanju določenih socialnih standardov: upoštevne kolektivne pogodbe so navedene v vsakokratnih aktih, saj morata podjetji RBG in BSM uporabljati kolektivno pogodbo, izpogajano z občinskim združenjem delodajalcev dežele Severno Porenje - Vestfalija.