natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The financing of the public service broadcaster Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española (RVTE), modified by Spain by Law 8/2009 on the financing of RTVE, is compatible with the internal market within the meaning of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Financiranje javne radiotelevizije Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española (RVTE), ki ga je Španija spremenila z Zakonom 8/2009 o financiranju RTVE, je združljivo z notranjim trgom v smislu člena 106(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije.
OJ C 115, 9.5.2008, p. 312.
UL C 115, 9.5.2008, str. 312.
OJ C 8, 14.1.2010, p. 31.
UL C 8, 14.1.2010, str. 31.
Official State Gazette [Boletín Oficial del Estado- BOE)] 210, 31.8.2009, p. 74003.
Uradni list Španije (Boletín Oficial del Estado – BOE) 210, 31.8.2009, str. 74003.
Official State Gazette 134, 6.6.2006, p. 21207.
Uradni list Španije 134, 6.6.2006, str. 21207.
OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 21; concerning the infringement procedure see Commission press release IP/10/322.
UL L 108, 24.4.2002, str. 21; glede postopka za ugotavljanje kršitev glej sporočilo Komisije za medije IP/10/322.
Cases E 8/2005, State aid in favour of the Spanish national broadcaster RTVE, and NN8/07, financing of workforce reduction measures of RTVE.
Zadevi E 8/2005, Državna pomoč za španskega izvajalca storitev javne radiodifuzije RTVE, in NN 8/07, Financiranje ukrepov zmanjšanja delovne sile RTVE.
Joined Cases C-261/01 and C-262/01, Belgische Staat v Eugene van Calster, Felix Cleeren and Openbaar Slachthuis, paragraphs 48 and 49; Case C-174/02 Streekgewest Westelijk Noord-Brabant, paragraph 26; Case C-333/07, Régie Networks, paragraphs 93 to 112).
Združeni zadevi C-261/01 in C-262/01, Belgische Staat proti Eugène van Calster, Felix Cleeren in Openbaar Slachthuis, točki 48 in 49; zadeva C-174/02, Streekgewest Westelijk Noord-Brabant, točka 26; zadeva C-333/07, Régie Networks, točke 93 do 112.
See paragraph 5 above.
Glej uvodno izjavo 5 zgoraj.
See Commission Decisions E 3/2005 of 24 April 2007, paragraphs 370 and 372; E 8/2006 of 27 February 2008, paragraph 230, and E 4/2005 of 27 February 2008, paragraph 121.
Glej odločbe Komisije E 3/2005 z dne 24. aprila 2007, odstavka 370 in 372; E 8/2006 z dne 27. februarja 2008, odstavek 230, in E 4/2005 z dne 27. februarja 2008, odstavek 121.
This case practice was adopted on the basis of the Communication from the Commission on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting (OJ C 320, 15.11.2001) (the 2001 Broadcasting Communication), and further clarified and consolidated in paragraph 88 of the Communication from the Commission on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting (OJ C 257, 27.10.2009, p. 1).
Ta praksa je bila sprejeta na podlagi Sporočila Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za storitve javne radiodifuzije (UL C 320, 15.11.2001) (Sporočilo o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001) ter nadalje pojasnjena in konsolidirana v odstavku 88 Sporočila Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za storitve javne radiotelevizije (UL C 257, 27.10.2009, str. 1).
See paragraph 6 above.
Glej uvodno izjavo 6 zgoraj.
Official State Gazette 79, 1.4.2010, p. 30157.
Uradni list Španije 79, 1.4.2010, str. 30157.
ECJ, judgment of 17 June 1999, Case C-75/97 Maribel bis/ter [1999] ECR I-3671, paragraph 47.
Sodišče Evropske unije, sodba z dne 17. junija 1999, zadeva C-75/97, Maribel bis/ter, Recueil, str. I- 3671, točka 47.
ECJ, judgment of 7 March 2002, case C-310/99 Italy v Commission [2002] ECR I-2289.
Sodišče Evropske unije, sodba z dne 7. marca 2002, zadeva C-310/99, Italija proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. I- 2289.
OJ C 320, 15.11.2001, p. 5, paragraph 18; OJ C 257, 27.10.2009, p. 1, paragraph 22.
UL C 320, 15.11.2001, str. 5, odstavek 18; UL C 257, 27.10.2009, str. 1, odstavek 22.
ECJ, judgment of 8 October 2002 in joint cases T-185/00, T-216/00, T-299/00 and T-300/00 M6 and others v Commission [2002] ECR II-3805.
Sodišče Evropske unije, sodba z dne 8. oktobra 2002 v združenih zadevah T-185/00, T-216/00, T-299/00 in T-300/00, M6 in drugi proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. II- 3805.
Judgment of 24 July 2003, Case C-280/00 Altmark Trans [2003] ECR I-7747.
Sodba z dne 24. julija 2003, zadeva C-280/00, Altmark Trans, Recueil, str. I- 7747.
See footnote 18, paragraph 94.
Glej opombo 18, odstavek 94.
See the same conclusion in Case E 8/2005, footnote 7, paragraph 46.
Glej enak zaključek v zadevi E 8/2005, opomba 7, odstavek 46.
Opinion of Advocate General Trabucchi delivered on 23 January 1975, in Case C51/74 HULST [1975] ECR p. 79.
Sklepni predlogi generalnega pravobranilca Trabucchija z dne 23. januarja 1975, v zadevi C51/74, HULST, Recueil, str. 79.
Special Spanish edition, p. 27.
Posebna španska izdaja, str. 27.
Judgment of 30 April 2002 in joined Cases T-195/01 and T-207/01, Government of Gibraltar v Commission [2002] ECR II-2309, paragraph 109.
Sodba z dne 30. aprila 2002 v združenih zadevah T-195/01 in T-207/01, Vlada Gibraltarja proti Komisiji, Recueil, str. II- 2309, točka 109.
See footnote 22, paragraph 111.
Glej opombo 22, odstavek 111.
See paragraph 29 of the 2001 Broadcasting Communication.
Glej odstavek 29 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001.
See paragraph 31 of the 2001 Broadcasting Communication.
Glej odstavek 31 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001.
Judgment of 22 December 2008 in Case C-333/07 Regie Networks, paragraph 99.
Sodba z dne 22. decembra 2008 v zadevi C-333/07, Regie Networks, točka 99.
See, for instance, paragraph 281 of Decision E 3/2005 (‘a margin of 10 %’) and paragraph 147 of Commission Decision C 2/04 of 22 June 2006 (‘10 % of the total budget’).
Glej na primer odstavek 281 Odločbe E 3/2005 („10-odstotna stopnja“) in odstavek 147 Odločbe Komisije C 2/04 z dne 22. junija 2006 („10 % celotnega proračuna“).
This case practice was consolidated and clarified in paragraphs 73 and 74 of the 2009 Broadcasting Communication.
Ta praksa je bila konsolidirana in pojasnjena v odstavkih 73 in 74 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009.
The 2001 Broadcasting Communication, paragraph 41.
Sporočilo o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001, odstavek 41.
See Decisions E 3/2005, paragraph 282, and E 4/2005, paragraph 112.
Glej odločbi E 3/2005, odstavek 282, in E 4/2005, odstavek 112.
See Decisions E 3/2005, paragraphs 370 and 372; E 8/2006, paragraph 230 and E 4/2005, paragraph 121.
Glej odločbe E 3/2005, odstavka 370 in 372; E 8/2006, odstavek 230, ter E 4/2005, odstavek 121.
This case practice was adopted based on the 2001 Broadcasting Communication and further clarified and consolidated in paragraphs 84-89 of the 2009 Broadcasting Communication.
Ta praksa je bila sprejeta na podlagi Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001 ter nadalje pojasnjena in konsolidirana v odstavkih 84 do 89 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009.
See footnote 13 above.
Glej opombo 13 zgoraj.
Laid down in paragraph 85 of the 2009 Broadcasting Communication.
Predpisano v odstavku 85 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009.
The current system of financing public broadcasting in Spain by RTVE, as established by Law 17/2006, was approved by the Commission in decisions in 2005 and 2007 [7].
Sedanji sistem financiranja javne radiodifuzije v Španiji s strani RTVE, kakor je vzpostavljen z Zakonom 17/2006, je Komisija odobrila z odločbama leta 2005 in 2007 [7].
Law 17/2006 entrusts the RTVE with a public service mission.
Zakon 17/2006 pooblašča RTVE za opravljanje poslanstva javne storitve.
It adds further elements to the public service mission which were approved by the Commission in 2005.
Poslanstvu javne storitve dodaja nove elemente, ki jih je Komisija odobrila leta 2005.
In particular, it limits the acquisition of broadcasting rights for sports events of general interest or great interest for society, except for the Olympics and Paralympics, to 10 % of the total annual budget for external supplies, purchases and services (Article 9(1)(i)).
Zlasti omejuje pridobivanje pravic za televizijsko razširjanje športnih dogodkov, ki so v splošnem interesu ali velikem interesu družbe, razen olimpijskih in paraolimpijskih iger, in sicer na 10 % celotnega letnega proračuna za zunanje dobave, nakupe in storitve (člen 9(1)(i)).
The new law provides in particular that the use of advertising, teleshopping, sponsorship and pay-per-view services as sources of revenue will be discontinued by the end of 2009.
Novi zakon zlasti določa, da bodo storitve oglaševanja, televizijske prodaje, sponzorstva in plačila za ogled (pay per view) kot viri prihodka ukinjene do konca leta 2009.
These commercial revenues shall be replaced by funds generated by existing or new charges on commercial broadcasters and telecommunication operators.
Ti komercialni prihodki bodo nadomeščeni s sredstvi iz naslova obstoječih ali novih dajatev za komercialne radiotelevizije in telekomunikacijske operaterje.
A share of 80 %, up to a maximum amount of EUR 330 million, of the already existing levy on radio spectrum use as established by Law 32/2003 of 3 November 2003.
80-odstotnega deleža do najvišjega zneska 330 milijonov EUR, od že obstoječe dajatve za uporabo radijskega spektra, kot je določena z Zakonom 32/2002 z dne 3. novembra 2003.
The remainder will be attributed to the general budget.
Preostanek bo dodeljen splošnemu proračunu.
Comments from 15 interested parties were received. They came from commercial broadcasters (TF1 and ACT – Association of Commercial TV in Europe), pay TV operators (DTS, Canal Satélite), telephone and Internet service providers (redtel, ONO, AETIC) cable operators (Cable Europe) and advertisers.
Pripombe je poslalo 15 zainteresiranih strank, in sicer komercialne radiotelevizije (TF1 in ACT – Združenje komercialnih televizij v Evropi), operaterji plačljive televizije (DTS, Canal Satélite), ponudniki telefonskih in internetnih storitev (redtel, ONO, AETIC), operaterji kabelskih omrežij (Cable Europe) in oglaševalci.
They would be part of the existing scheme of financing RTVE as approved by the Commission in 2005 and 2007.
Ta vprašanja bi bila del obstoječe sheme financiranja RTVE, kot jo je Komisija odobrila leta 2005 in 2007.
The opening decision in the present procedure, however, is based on the definition of the reform of the financing system as new aid in the sense of Article 1(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty [12].
Odločitev o sprožitvi v tem postopku pa temelji na opredelitvi reforme sistema financiranja kot nove pomoči v smislu člena 1(c) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [12].
In accordance with the Commission notice on the determination of the applicable rules for the assessment of unlawful State aid and with paragraph 100 of the 2009 Broadcasting Communication, the latter applies in the case of non-notified new aid only if the new aid was granted after its publication on 27 October 2009.
V skladu s Sporočilom Komisije o določitvi pravil, ki se uporabljajo za ovrednotenje nezakonite državne pomoči, in odstavkom 100 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009 to velja samo v primeru nepriglašene nove pomoči, če je bila nova pomoč dodeljena po objavi Sporočila 27. oktobra 2009.
In the present case, however, the new aid system was introduced with the entry into force of the law on 1 September 2009.
V zadevnem primeru pa je bil sistem nove pomoči uveden z začetkom veljavnosti zakona 1. septembra 2009.
Hence, the new financing scheme will be assessed on the basis of the 2001 Communication and of the Commission’s subsequent case practice [25].
Zato bo nova shema financiranja ocenjena na podlagi Sporočila iz leta 2001 in na podlagi kasnejše prakse odločanja Komisije [25].
A central feature of the changes in the financing of RTVE is the almost complete discontinuation of its commercial activities, the change from a ‘dual funding’ system, combining support by public funds and revenues from commercial activities, to ‘single funding’, where broadcasting is financed exclusively, or almost exclusively, through public funds, in line with the distinction drawn in paragraph 45 of the 2001 Broadcasting Communication.
Osrednja značilnost sprememb v financiranju RTVE je skoraj popolno prenehanje komercialnih dejavnosti, prehod s sistema „dvojnega financiranja“, ki je združeval javna sredstva in prihodke iz komercialnih dejavnosti, na sistem „enojnega financiranja“, kjer se radiodifuzija financira izključno oziroma skoraj izključno z javnimi sredstvi, v skladu z razlikovanjem iz odstavka 45 Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001.
Member States are free to choose whether and how to combine different sources of financing.
Države članice lahko same izberejo, ali in kako bodo združevale različne vire financiranja.
This mechanism to avoid undue overcompensation is in line with the Commission’s case practice [29].
Ta mehanizem za preprečevanje neupravičenega prekomernega nadomestila je v skladu s prakso Komisije [29].
This case practice was consolidated in the 2009 Broadcasting Communication.
Ta praksa je bila konsolidirana v Sporočilu o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009.
In practice, by complying with the 2009 Broadcasting Communication, Spain will therefore also comply with the Commission's 2001 Broadcasting Communication and the case practice developed on the basis of this Communication.
V praksi bo Španija hkrati z upoštevanjem Sporočila o radiodifuziji iz leta 2009 upoštevala tudi Sporočilo o radiodifuziji iz leta 2001 in prakso, razvito na podlagi tega sporočila.
The annual budgeted expenses for running RTVE were EUR 1177 million in 2007, EUR 1222 million in 2008, and EUR 1146 million in 2009.
Letni proračunski stroški za vodenje RTVE so znašali 1177 milijonov EUR leta 2007, 1222 milijonov EUR leta 2008 in 1146 milijonov EUR leta 2009.
During these last years RTVE received a public service compensation of around EUR 500 million per year (2006: EUR 575 million; 2007: EUR 433 million; 2008: EUR 500 million; 2009, however, with already reduced advertising revenues: EUR 726 million).
V teh zadnjih letih je RTVE prejela nadomestilo za opravljanje javne službe v višini okoli 500 milijonov EUR na leto (2006: 575 milijonov; 2007: 433 milijonov; 2008: 500 milijonov; 2009, z že zmanjšanimi prihodki iz oglaševanja: 726 milijonov EUR).
of 5 January 2011
z dne 5. januarja 2011
terminating the examination procedure concerning the measures imposed by Brazil affecting the import of textile products
o ustavitvi postopka preverjanja ukrepov, ki jih je uvedla Brazilija in vplivajo na uvoz tekstilnih izdelkov
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
OZADJE POSTOPKA PREVERJANJA
On 12 January 1998 Febeltex, (Fédération Belge du Textile) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94.
Febeltex (Fédération Belge du Textile) je 12. januarja 1998 vložil pritožbo v skladu s členom 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 3286/94.
The complainant alleged that European Community sales of textile products in Brazil were hindered by a number of obstacles to trade within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94, including a non-automatic import licensing system and the way this system is developed through, notably, compulsory import payment terms and minimum import prices.
Pritožnik je trdil, da je bila prodaja tekstilnih izdelkov Evropske skupnosti v Braziliji ovirana zaradi številnih trgovinskih ovir v smislu člena 2(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 3286/94, med drugim zaradi sistema neavtomatičnega izdajanja uvoznih dovoljenj in načina, kako ta sistem deluje predvsem prek pogojev obveznih uvoznih plačil in minimalnih uvoznih cen.
The Commission decided, after consultation of the Advisory Committee established by Regulation (EC) No 3286/94, that there was sufficient evidence to justify initiating an examination procedure for the purpose of considering the legal and factual issues involved.
Komisija je po posvetovanju s Svetovalnim odborom, ustanovljenim z Uredbo (ES) št. 3286/94, sklenila, da obstajajo zadostni dokazi za uvedbo postopka preverjanja za preučitev pravnih in dejanskih vprašanj.
Consequently, an examination procedure was initiated on 27 February 1998 [2].
Zato se je 27. februarja 1998 [2] začel postopek preverjanja.
THE FINDINGS OF THE EXAMINATION PROCEDURE
UGOTOVITVE POSTOPKA PREVERJANJA
The final report on the investigation procedure was circulated to EU Member States at the 9 November 1998 meeting of the Advisory Committee.
Končno poročilo o preiskovalnem postopku je bilo predloženo državam članicam EU na seji Svetovalnega odbora 9. novembra 1998.
The report concluded that the Brazilian non-automatic import licensing system, as applied with a minimum price requirement, appeared to be in breach of:
V poročilu je bilo ugotovljeno, da brazilski sistem neavtomatičnega izdajanja uvoznih dovoljenj, ki nalaga minimalne cene, kot kaže, krši:
Articles X.1 and X.3 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, as the non-automatic import licensing system was not published and was not administered in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner;
člene X.1 in X.3 Splošnega sporazuma o carinah in trgovini (GATT) iz leta 1994, ker sistem neavtomatičnega izdajanja uvoznih dovoljenj ni bil objavljen in se ni uporabljal enotno, nepristransko in primerno;
Article XI.1 of GATT (1994) as the minimum price system was a restriction other than duties, taxes or other charges made effective through import licenses on the importation of any product of the territory of any other contracting party, without any WTO compatible justification.
člen XI.1 sporazuma GATT (1994), ker je bil sistem minimalnih cen dodatna omejitev poleg dajatev, davkov ali drugih taks v okviru uvoznih dovoljenj za uvoz katerega koli izdelka na ozemlje katere koli pogodbenice, kar se ne da upravičiti z nobeno določbo STO.
DEVELOPMENTS AFTER THE INVESTIGATION
RAZVOJ DOGODKOV PO KONCU PREISKAVE
On 17 March 1999 [3], the Commission decided to initiate a WTO Dispute Settlement procedure.
Komisija je 17. marca 1999 [3] sklenila, da začne postopek za reševanje sporov pri STO.
WTO consultations were held on 19 November 1999.
Posvetovanja pri STO so potekala 19. novembra 1999.
On this occasion, while denying all allegations relative to minimum pricing practices both at import licensing or customs valuation levels, Brazil admitted that it did not comply with several of its WTO obligations concerning notification in relation with its import licensing system.
Ob tej priložnosti je Brazilija zanikala vse navedbe v zvezi s prakso minimalnih cen na ravni izdajanja uvoznih dovoljenj ali carinskega vrednotenja, vendar je priznala, da ni izpolnila več obveznosti STO v zvezi z obveščanjem o sistemu izdajanja uvoznih dovoljenj.
Following these consultations, the Brazilian import licensing and customs valuation systems underwent significant changes and the Community industry’s access to the Brazilian market for textile products improved.
Po teh posvetovanjih sta bila brazilska sistema za izdajanje uvoznih dovoljenj in carinsko vrednotenje korenito spremenjena, dostop industrije Skupnosti do brazilskega trga za tekstilne izdelke pa se je izboljšal.
However there were still several aspects of the Brazilian import licensing and customs valuation systems that needed to be modified in order to ensure Brazil’s full compliance with its obligations under the relevant WTO Agreements.
Vendar je bilo več vidikov brazilskih sistemov za izdajanje uvoznih dovoljenj in carinsko vrednotenje še vedno treba spremeniti, da bi Brazilija v celoti izpolnjevala svoje obveznosti iz ustreznih sporazumov STO.
The Commission therefore decided, by Decision 2001/429/EC [4], to suspend the abovementioned examination procedure for a period of 6 months, while monitoring the effect of the changes in the Brazilian system.
Komisija je zato v Odločbi 2001/429/ES [4] sklenila, da za obdobje šestih mesecev ustavi navedeni postopek preverjanja in spremlja učinek sprememb brazilskega sistema.
During the first quarter of 2002, several contacts with the Brazilian authorities took place with the aim of finding a mutually acceptable solution.
V prvi četrtini leta 2002 je potekalo več pogovorov z brazilskimi organi, da bi našli rešitev, sprejemljivo za obe strani.
The European Community and Brazil signed a Memorandum of Understanding on arrangements in the area of market access for textiles and clothing products on 6 November 2002, under which both parties agreed to refrain from applying non-tariff barriers.
Evropska skupnost in Brazilija sta 6. novembra 2002 podpisali memorandum o soglasju glede ureditve na področju dostopa tekstilnih izdelkov in oblačil na trg, pri čemer sta se obe strani dogovorili, da bosta opustili uporabo necarinskih ovir.
In addition the Memorandum of Understanding addressed also the problem concerning customs valuation.
Poleg tega je memorandum o soglasju obravnaval vprašanje carinskega vrednotenja.
In the more than 7 years since the signature of the Memorandum of Understanding, the Commission has not been notified of any particular problems or new obstacles related to market access in Brazil for textile products.
V več kot sedmih letih od podpisa memoranduma o soglasju Komisija ni bila obveščena o nobenih posebnih težavah ali novih ovirah pri dostopu tekstilnih izdelkov na trg v Braziliji.
In view of the above analysis, it is considered that the examination procedure has led to a satisfactory situation with regard to the obstacles identified in the complaint lodged by Febeltex.
Na podlagi zgornje analize se šteje, da je izid postopka preverjanja zadovoljiv v zvezi z ovirami, opredeljenimi v pritožbi, ki jo je vložil Febeltex.
The examination procedure should therefore be terminated in accordance with Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94.
Postopek preverjanja je zato treba ustaviti v skladu s členom 11(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 3286/94.
The examination procedure concerning the measures imposed by Brazil affecting the import of textile products is hereby terminated.
Postopek preverjanja ukrepov, ki jih je uvedla Brazilija in vplivajo na uvoz tekstilnih izdelkov, se ustavi.
Done at Brussels, 5 January 2011.
V Bruslju, 5. januarja 2011
OJ C 63, 27.2.1998, p. 2.
UL C 63, 27.2.1998, str. 2.
OJ L 86, 30.3.1999, p. 22.
UL L 86, 30.3.1999, str. 22.
OJ L 153, 8.6.2001, p. 30.
UL L 153, 8.6.2001, str. 30.
Articles 1, 3 and 5 of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures, as: (a) it was not neutral in application; (b) it was not administered in a fair and equitable manner; (c) it did not implement any WTO compatible restrictions and therefore was not limited in scope and duration to a measure it implemented; and (d) it had additional trade-restrictive and distortive effects on imports.
člene 1, 3 in 5 Sporazuma STO o postopkih za izdajanje uvoznih dovoljenj, ker: (a) pri uporabi ni bil nevtralen; (b) se ni izvajal na pravičen in enakopraven način; (c) ni izvajal omejitev, združljivih z STO, in zato v obsegu in trajanju ni bil omejen na ukrep, ki ga je izvajal, ter (d) je imel dodatne izkrivljajoče učinke na uvoz, ki so omejevali trgovino.
In addition, the list of products submitted to non-automatic licensing was not published and the applications for licenses for imports under the minimum price were left without official reply for several months;
Poleg tega seznam izdelkov, za katere je veljalo neavtomatično izdajanje dovoljenj, ni bil objavljen, vloge za uvozna dovoljenja, vezana na minimalne cene, pa so ostala brez uradnega odgovora po več mesecev;
Having given interested parties notice to submit their comments in accordance with those Articles [2],
po pozivu zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenima členoma [2],