natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
BOE 310, 28.12.1995, p. 37072.
BOE 310 z dne 28.12.1995, str. 37072.
See also the judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 July 2003 in Case 280/00 Altmark [2003] ECR I-7747.
Glej tudi sodbo Sodišča z dne 24. julija 2003 v zadevi Altmark, C-280/00, Recueil 2003, str. I-7747.
COM(2004) 18 final of 23.2.2004.
COM(2004) 18 konč. z dne 23.2.2004.
Case C-303/88 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1433, paragraph 11, Case C-482/99 France v Commission [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraph 24, as well as Case C-126/01 GEMO [2003] I-13769, paragraph 24.
Zadeva C-303/88 Italija proti Komisiji, Recueil 1991, str. I-1433, uvodna izjava št. 11, zadeva C-482/99 Francija proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. I-4397, uvodna izjava št. 24, in zadeva C-126/01 GEMO, Recueil 2003, str. I-13769, uvodna izjava št. 24.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 January 1998 in Case T-67/94 Ladbroke Racing v Commission [1998] ECR II-1; see also judgment of the Court of Justice of 29 April 2004 in Case C-159-01 Netherlands v Commission [2004] ECR I-4461.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 27. januarja 1998 v zadevi Ladbroke Racing proti Komisiji, zadeva T-67/94, Recueil 1998, str. II-1: glej tudi sodbo Sodišča z dne 29. aprila 2004 v zadevi Nizozemska proti Komisiji, C-159/01, Recueil 2004, str. I-4461.
Case 730/79 Philip Morris Holland BV v Commission [1980] ECR 2671, paragraph 11.
Zadeva 730/79 Philip Morris Holland BV proti Komisiji, Recueil 1980, str. 2671, uvodna izjava 11.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 June 2006 in Joined Cases C-393/04 and C-41/05 Air Liquide Industries Belgium [2006] I-5293.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 15. junija 2006 v zadevi Air Liquide Industries Belgium, združeni zadevi C-393/04 in C-41/05, Zodl. 2006, str. I-5293.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 December 2006 in Case T -146/03 Asociación de Estaciones de Servicio de Madrid, Federación Catalana de Estaciones de Servicio v Commission [2003] ECR II-98.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 12. decembra 2006, T-146/03, Asociación de Estaciones de Servicio de Madrid et Federación Catalana de Estaciones de Servicio proti Komisiji, Zodl. 2006, str. II-98.
That is, the advantages cited supra in the first paragraph of recital 20, with the exception of the lower rate of 20 %, which only applies to transactions with cooperative members and which as a result, is not concerned by this Decision.
To so ugodnosti, navedene zgoraj v prvem odstavku točke 20, razen znižane, 20-odstotne stopnje, ki se uporablja samo za posle s člani zadruge in ki zato ne more biti predmet tega sklepa.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 September 2006 in Case T-210/02 British Aggregates [2006] ECR II-2789.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 13. septembra 2006, zadeva T-210/02, British Aggregates, Zodl. 2006, str. II-2789.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 January 2006 in Case C-222/04 Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze [2006] ECR II-289.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 10. januarja 2006 v zadevi Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze, C-222/04. Zodl. 2006, str. II-289.
Judgments of 6 September 2006 in Case C-88/03 Portugal v Commission [2006] ECR I-7115, paragraph 54, and of 29 April 2004 in Case C-308/01 GIL Insurance and Others [2004] ECR I-4777, paragraph 68.
Sodbi z dne 6. septembra 2006 v zadevi Portugalska proti Komisiji, C-88/03, ZOdl. 2006, str. I-7115, uvodna izjava 54; in z dne 29. aprila 2004 v zadevi GIL Insurance in drugi, C-308/01, Recueil 2004, str. I-4777, uvodna izjava 68.
See recital 20 of this Decision, and Articles 33(1) and 34(1) of Law No 20/1990 of 19 December 1990 on the tax arrangements applying to cooperatives.
Glej točko 20 tega sklepa ter člena 33.1 in 34.1 zakona 20/1990 z dne 19. decembra 1990 o davčni ureditvi za zadruge.
See recital 20 of this Decision.
Glej točko 20 tega sklepa.
Article 33(4)(a) of Law No 20/1990 of 19 December 1990 on the tax arrangements applying to cooperatives.
Člen 33(4)(a) zakona 20/1990 z dne 19. decembra 1990 o davčni ureditvi za zadruge.
Article 33(4)(b) of Law No 20/1990 of 19 December 1990 on the tax arrangements applying to cooperatives.
Člen 33(4)(b) zakona 20/1990 z dne 19. decembra 1990 o davčni ureditvi za zadruge.
See recitals 135 to 154 of this Decision on determining the existence of the advantages in question.
Glej uvodne izjave 135 do 154 tega sklepa o opredelitvi zadevnih ugodnosti.
For the concept of advantage, see recitals 135 to 154 of this Decision.
Za pojem ugodnosti glej uvodne izjave 135 do 154 tega sklepa.
Judgment of 6 September 2006 in Case C-88/03 Portugal v Commission [2006] ECR I-7115, paragraphs 80-81.
Sodba z dne 6. septembra 2006 v zadevi Portugalska proti Komisiji, C-88/03, ZOdl. 2006, str. I-7115, uvodni izjavi 80 in 81.
Judgment of 6 March 2002 in Joined Cases T-127/99, T-129/99 and T-148/99 Diputación Foral de Álava and Others v Commission [2002] ECR II-1275, paragraph 250.
Sodba z dne 6. marca 2002 v zadevi Diputación Foral de Álava in drugi proti Komisiji, T-127/99, T-129/99 in T-148/99, Recueil 2002, str. II-1275, uvodna izjava 250.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2006 in Case C-88/03 Açores – Republic of Portugal v Commission [2006] ECR I-7115.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 6. septembra 2006 v zadevi Azori - Portugalska republika proti Komisiji, C-88/03, ZOdl. 2006, str. I-7115.
See recitals 65 to 85 of this Decision.
Glej točke od 65 do 85 tega sklepa.
See footnote 41.
Glej opombo št. 41.
‘New aid’ is defined as all aid, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid, which is not existing aid, including alterations to existing aid ( OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1).
„Nova pomoč“ pomeni vsako pomoč, to je sheme pomoči ali individualno pomoč, ki ni veljavna pomoč, vključno s spremembami kake veljavne pomoči ( UL L 83 z dne 27.3.1999, str. 1).
OJ C 319, 27.12.2006, p. 1, points 89 to 94.
UL C 319, 27.12.2006, str. 1, točke 89 do 94.
Commission Decision 96/148/EC (OJ L 34, 13.2.1996, p. 38).
Odločba Komisije 96/148/ES z dne 26. julija 1995 (UL L 34, 13.2.1996, str. 38).
Commission Decision of 29 July 1999, SG(99) D/5879.
Odločba Komisije z dne 29. julija 1999, SG(99) D/5879.
COM(2006) 103 final of 9 March 2006, point 3.1.2 and COM(2008) 384 final of 13 June 2008, point 6.3.
COM(2006) 103 konč. z dne 9. marca 2006, točka 3.1.2, in COM(2008) 384 konč. z dne 13. junija 2008, točka 6.3.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance in Case T-268/06 Olympiaki Ypriresies AE v Commission [2008] II-1091, paragraphs 51 and 52.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje v zadevi Olympiaki Ypriresies AE proti Komisiji, T-268/06, Zodl. 2008, str. II-1091, uvodni izjavi 51 in 52.
Save concerning the reference to the constitution of producer groups in the guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013 and Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products, which also deals with the constitution of producer groups.
Razen v zvezi s sklicevanjem na oblikovanje skupin proizvajalcev v smernicah o državni pomoči v kmetijskem in gozdarskem sektorju 2007–2013 (UL C 319, 27.12.2006) in v členu 9 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1857/2006 z dne 15. decembra 2006 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe pri državni pomoči za majhna in srednje velika podjetja, ki se ukvarjajo s proizvodnjo kmetijskih proizvodov, ki prav tako obravnava skupine proizvajalcev.
Cooperatives in Enterprise Europe.
Les coopératives dans l’Europe Entrepreneuriale.
Commission consultation document of 7 December 2001.
Posvetovalni dokument Komisije z dne 7.12.2001.
The major role of cooperatives in the agricultural sector is recalled in point 4 of the Commission communication on the promotion of cooperative societies in Europe, which states that ‘the multiple benefits of cooperatives to Europe’s economy make them an integral element in achieving the Lisbon objectives; in fact, cooperatives are an excellent example of company type which can simultaneously address entrepreneurial and social objectives in a mutually reinforcing way.
Na pomembno vlogo zadrug v kmetijskem sektorju opozarja točka 4 Sporočila Komisije o spodbujanju zadrug v Evropi, v skladu s katerim „so zadruge zaradi številnih ugodnosti, ki jih prinašajo evropskemu gospodarstvu, nujne za uresničitev lizbonskih ciljev; so namreč primer tiste vrste podjetja, ki lahko hkrati zasleduje socialne in podjetniške cilje, tako da se ti dopolnjujejo.
In addition to the entrepreneurship policy, cooperatives play an important role in the agricultural economy, for the development of regions with economic difficulties, while their structure is ideal to enhance employment and social cohesion.’
Zunaj podjetniške politike imajo zadruge pomembno vlogo v kmetijskem gospodarstvu in pri razvoju regij z gospodarskimi težavami, njihova struktura je idealna za povečevanje zaposlenosti in socialne kohezije.“
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 September 2007 in Case T-348/03 Koninklijke Friesland Foods NV [2007] ECR II-101.
Sodba Sodišča prve stopnje z dne 12. septembra 2007 v zadevi T-348/03, Koninklijke Friesland Foods NV, Zodl 2007, str. II-101.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 November 2005 in Case C-506/03 Germany v Commission, p. 58, not yet published in the ECR; judgment of 22 June 2006 in Joined Cases C-182/03 and 217/03 Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission [2006] ECR I-5479.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 24. novembra 2005 v zadevi Nemčija proti Komisiji, C-506/03, še ni objavljena v Zodl., str. 58; sodba z dne 22. junija 2006 v zadevi Belgija in Forum 187 ASBL proti Komisiji, zadevi C-182/03 in C-217/03, Zodl. 2006, str. I-5479.
Judgments of the Court of Justice of 20 September 1990 in Case C-5/89 Commission v Germany [1990] ECR I-3437, of 14 January 1997 in Case C-169/95 Kingdom of Spain v Commission [1997] I-135, of 20 March 1997 in Case C-24/95 Alcan Deutschland [1997] ECR I-1591 and of 11 November 2004 in Joined Cases C-183/02 and C-187/02 Daewoo Electronics Manufacturing España and Territorio Historico de Alava, Diputación Foral de Alava v Commission [2004] ECR I-10609.
Sodbe Sodišča z dne 20. septembra 1990 v zadevi Komisija proti Nemčiji, C-5/89, Recueil 1990, str. I-3437; z dne 14. januarja 1997 v zadevi Kraljevina Španija proti Komisiji, C-169/95, Recueil 1997, str. I-135, z dne 20. marca 1997 v zadevi Alcan Deutschland, C-24/95, Recueil 1997, str. I-1591 in z dne 11. novembra 2004 v zadevi Daewoo Electronics Manufacturing Espana in Territorio Historico de Alava, Diputación Foral de Alava proti Komisiji, C-183/02 in C-187/02, Zodl. 2004, str. I-10609.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 1 April 2004 in Case C-99/02 Commission v Italy [2004] ECR I-3353, paragraph 21, with particular reference to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 20 September 1990, cited above.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 1. aprila 2004 v zadevi C-99/02, v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji, Recueil 2004, str. I-3353, uvodna izjava 21, ki se med drugim sklicuje na zgoraj navedeno sodbo Sodišča z dne 20. septembra 1990.
Decision 2003/293/EC, cited above.
Zgoraj navedena Odločba Komisije 2003/293/ES.
See footnote 58.
Glej opombo št. 58.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 29 April 2004 in Case C-91/01 Commission v Italy [2004] ECR I-4355.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 29. aprila 2004 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji, C-91/01, Recueil 2004, str. I-4355.
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 (OJ L 379, 28.12.2006, p. 5).
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1998/2006 z dne 15. decembra 2006 o uporabi členov 87 in 88 Pogodbe pri pomoči de minimis (UL L 379, 28.12.2006, str. 5).
In other words, before Law No 27/1999 was amended, in order to sell B diesel to non-members, agricultural cooperatives had to set up a legal entity. Since the Law was changed, they are no longer required to set up a legal entity and so those transactions are subject to a lower rate of tax.
Od spremembe zakona št. 27/1999 ta obveznost zanje ne velja več, zadevni posli pa naj bi bili obdavčeni po ugodnejši davčni stopnji.
As an example, in 1999 Spain exported circa EUR 11,33 billion in agricultural products to the European Community and imported EUR 7,38 billion in products of the same nature. In 2007, Spain’s total exports of agricultural products to European Union countries amounted to approximately EUR 33,12 billion and its total imports amounted to approximately EUR 27,14 billion [26].
Španija je na primer leta 1999 v Evropsko skupnost izvozila za približno 11,33 milijarde EUR kmetijskih proizvodov in jih uvozila za približno 7,38 milijarde EUR. Španija je leta 2007 v države Evropske unije izvozila za približno 33,12 milijarde EUR kmetijskih proizvodov in jih uvozila za približno 27,14 milijarde EUR [26].
Nor is it intended to promote culture and heritage conservation within the meaning of Article 107(3)(d).
Tudi nista pomoč za pospeševanje kulture in ohranjanja kulturne dediščine v smislu člena 107(3)(d).
Article 107(3)(c) does however prescribe that aid intended to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest may be considered to be compatible with the internal market.
Vendar člen 107(3)(c) določa, da se pomoč za pospeševanje razvoja določenih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi, lahko šteje kot združljiva z notranjim trgom.
With regard to the measures provided for in Article 1 of Royal Decree-Law No 10/2000, they have been in force since 2000.
Ukrepi iz člena 1 kraljevega zakonodajnega odloka št. 10/2000 obstajajo od leta 2000.
There have never been guidelines or concrete rules at Community level regarding the award of State aid to agricultural cooperatives as they are, in principle, treated like any other business [51].
Na ravni Skupnosti nikdar niso obstajale smernice ali konkretna pravila za dodelitev državnih pomoči kmetijskim zadrugam, ker so se načeloma obravnavale kot vsa druga podjetja [51].
The concept of operating aid was already applied to the agricultural sector in Commission practice before the year 2000, and was then referred to in point 3.5 of the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector [55] and again in point 15 of the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013.
Pojem pomoči za tekoče poslovanje se je v praksi Komisije uporabljal za kmetijski sektor že pred letom 2000, nato je bil povzet v točki 3.5 Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem sektorju [55] in nato še v točki 15 Smernic Skupnosti o državni pomoči v kmetijskem in gozdarskem sektorju 2007–2013.
According to these rules, in order to be considered compatible with the internal market, any aid measure must contain some incentive element or require some counterpart on the part of the beneficiary.
Da se ukrep pomoči šteje za združljivega z notranjim trgom, mora vsebovati spodbujevalno prvino ali določati protistoritev upravičenca.
An independent and non-governmental association which unites, represents and serves cooperatives worldwide.
Neodvisno mednarodno združenje, ki povezuje, zastopa in pomaga zadrugam s celega sveta.
Founded in London in 1985, the ICA has 224 member organisations from 87 countries, representing all sector of the economy. http://www.ica.coop.
Ustanovljeno v Londonu leta 1895, ima 224 članov v 87 državah in vseh gospodarskih sektorjih. http://www.ica.coop.
of 24 March 2010
z dne 24. marca 2010
on the State aid C 4/03 (ex NN 102/02) implemented by Italy for WAM SpA
o državni pomoči C 4/03 (ex NN 102/02) Italije za WAM SpA
(notified under document C(2010) 1711)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2010) 1711)
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof [1],
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti prvega pododstavka člena 108(2) Pogodbe [1],
Having regard to the decision by which the Commission decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in respect of the aid C 4/03 (ex NN 102/02) [2],
ob upoštevanju sklepa, s katerim je Komisija sklenila uvesti postopek iz člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije v zvezi s pomočjo C 4/2003 (ex NN 102/2002), [2],
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above, and having regard to their comments,
po pozivu vsem zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi določbami, in ob upoštevanju teh pripomb,
Procedure before the Commission
Postopek pred Komisijo
By letter dated 26 July 1999, the Commission received a complaint against WAM Engineering Ltd. It was alleged in the complaint that WAM SpA had been granted illegal public subsidies by Italy.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 26. julija 1999 prejela pritožbo zoper podjetje WAM Engineering Ltd, v kateri je bilo navedeno, da je podjetje WAM SpA od Italije prejelo nezakonite subvencije.
At the same time, a survey on national support schemes for foreign direct investment outside the EU (FDI) was being carried out which was expected to result in a Commission communication on the matter.
Komisija je sočasno izvajala raziskavo o nacionalnih shemah podpor za neposredne tuje naložbe zunaj EU, ob koncu katere naj bi izdala sporočilo o tej zadevi.
By letter dated 18 December 2001, the Commission asked Italy for further information, following renewed action by the complainant (two reminders were addressed to the Commission by letters of 31 March 2000 and of 11 October 2000), given that the FDI survey had been postponed by the Commission.
Komisija je z dopisom z dne 18. decembra 2001 zaradi obnovljene dejavnosti pritožnika (na Komisijo sta bila naslovljena dva opomina, in sicer z dopisoma z dne 31. marca 2000 in 11. oktobra 2000) in ker je Komisija raziskavo o zunanjih neposrednih tujih naložbah preložila, Italijo zaprosila za nadaljnje informacije.
In the light of the information provided by the letters of 20 February 2002 and of 27 March 2002, further questions were put to the Italian authorities by letter of 12 April 2002.
Ob upoštevanju informacij, ki so bile predložene z dopisoma z dne 20. februarja 2002 in z dne 27. marca 2002, so bila italijanskim oblastem z dopisom z dne 12. aprila 2002 zastavljena nadaljnja vprašanja.
As no reply was received, and in spite of a request from the Italian authorities by letter of 25 June 2002 for an extension of the deadline until 31 July 2002, an information order within the meaning of Article 10(3) 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 [3] (hereinafter: Regulation (EC) No 659/1999) was adopted by the Commission on 26 September 2002.
Ker italijanske oblasti, kljub temu, da so z dopisom z dne 25. junija 2002 zaprosile za podaljšanje predpisanega obdobja do 31. julija, odgovora niso predložile, je Komisija 26. septembra 2002 v skladu s členom 10(3) Uredbe Sveta (ES) 659/1999 z dne 22. marca 1999 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo člena 93 Pogodbe ES [3] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Uredba (ES) št. 659/1999) sprejela odredbo o predložitvi podatkov.
Meanwhile, the case was transferred into the non-notified aid register and was given the Number NN 102/02.
Med tem je bila zadeva vpisana v register nepriglašene pomoči pred številko NN 102/2002.
By letters of 26 June 2002 and 4 October 2002, the complainant was kept informed of the progress of the dossier.
Pritožnik je bil z dopisoma z dne 26. junija 2002 in 4. oktobra 2002 obveščen o napredku v zvezi z zadevo.
By letter of 31 October 2002, it asked to know the outcome of the order.
Z dopisom z dne 31. oktobra 2002 je želel izvedeti izid predložitve podatkov.
The Italian authorities submitted the requested information by letter of 16 October 2002 and supplied additional elements by letter of 24 October 2002.
Italijanske oblasti so zahtevane informacije predložile z dopisom z dne 16. oktobra 2002 in dodatne podatke z dopisom z dne 24. oktobra 2002.
The Commission informed Italy by letter of 24 January 2003 that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, now Article 108(2) of the TFEU, in respect of the aid in question [4].
Komisija je Italijo z dopisom z dne 24. januarja 2003 obvestila, da je sklenila uvesti postopek iz člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES, zdaj člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, v zvezi z zadevno pomočjo [4].
By letter of 29 January 2003, the complainant was informed accordingly.
Pritožnik je bil z dopisom z dne 29. januarja 2003 obveščen o uvedbi postopka.
Having not yet received the abovementioned letter, the complainant sent the Commission a reminder by letter of 10 February 2003.
Ker v tem času še ni prejel zgoraj navedenega dopisa, je pritožnik z dopisom z dne 10. februarja 2003 Komisiji poslal opomin.
Further to the communication to the Italian authorities, concerning the opening of the procedure, WAM SpA immediately sent a letter to the Commission (letter of 10 February 2003).
Na podlagi sporočila italijanskim oblastem v zvezi z začetkom postopka je podjetje WAM SpA takoj poslalo dopis Komisiji (dopis z dne 10. februarja 2003).
By letter of 27 February 2003, Italy asked for an extension, until 7 March 2003, of the fifteen-day deadline for presentation of observations on confidentiality, as laid down in the Commission’s decision.
Italija je z dopisom z dne 27. februarja 2003 zaprosila za podaljšanje 15-dnevnega roka za predložitev pripomb v zvezi z zaupnostjo, kakor je določeno v sklepu Komisije, in sicer do 7. marca 2003.
By letter of 10 March 2003, Italy asked the Commission not to publish the decision, given the willingness of the beneficiary to repay the aid, as also stated by WAM SpA itself in a letter of 13 March 2003 sent directly to the Commission.
Italija je z dopisom z dne 10. marca 2003 zaprosila Komisijo, naj sklepa ne objavi, saj je bil upravičenec pripravljen pomoč povrniti, kar je izjavilo tudi samo podjetje WAM SpA v dopisu z dne 13. aprila 2003, ki je bil predložen neposredno Komisiji.
By letter of 18 March 2003, the Commission pointed out that, in order to avoid publication, a final decision closing the case was necessary, which was conditional on proof being submitted that the two tranches of aid, plus interest calculated in a way acceptable to the Commission, had actually been recovered.
Komisija je v dopisu z dne 18. marca 2003 navedla, da je v izogib objavi potreben končni sklep o zaključku zadeve, ki je odvisen od predhodno predloženih dokazov, da sta bila dva obroka pomoči skupaj z obrestmi, izračunanimi na Komisiji sprejemljiv način, dejansko povrnjena.
As the amount proposed by the Italian Government, by letter of 13 May 2003, was significantly lower than the first estimate of the grant equivalent of the aid calculated by the Commission on the basis of the elements available at the time of the opening of the procedure, the Commission informed Italy, by letter of 22 May 2003 that, since the proposed amount to be repaid was considered not to satisfy its criteria, publication would go ahead shortly.
Ker je bil znesek, ki ga je italijanska vlada predlagala v dopisu z dne 13. maja 2003, občutno nižji od prve ocene ekvivalenta dotacije pomoči, ki ga je izračunala Komisija na podlagi elementov, ki jih je imela na voljo na začetku postopka, je Komisija Italijo z dopisom z dne 22. maja 2003 obvestila, da predlagani znesek, ki naj bi bil povrnjen, ne zadostuje njenim merilom in da bo sklep v kratkem objavljen.
By letter of 13 June 2003, the complainant asked for information about the publication of the decision.
Pritožnik je z dopisom z dne 13. junija 2003 zaprosil za informacije v zvezi z objavo sklepa.
The Commission replied by letter of 18 June 2003. A further communication was sent that same day, via e-mail to the complainant informing it promptly that publication had just taken place.
Komisija je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 18. junija 2003, na isti dan pa je bilo pritožniku po elektronski pošti poslano tudi sporočilo, da je pravkar prišlo do objave.