natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On account of the 1996 Law, these resources were therefore greater than those at France Télécom’s disposal under the 1990 Law in its original wording.
Znesek teh sredstev je bil torej zaradi sprejetja zakona iz leta 1996 višji od sredstev, ki jih je podjetje France Télécom imelo na voljo na podlagi prvotne različice zakona iz leta 1990.
The telecommunications services markets on which France Télécom operated and operates throughout French territory and in other Member States have been gradually opened up to competition through the progressive disappearance of exclusive or special rights from 1988, then, with the exception of specific derogations, totally from 1998.
Vendar pa so se trgi za telekomunikacijske storitve, na katerih je delovalo in še vedno deluje podjetje France Télécom na celotnem ozemlju Francije in v drugih državah članicah, postopoma odpirali za konkurenco s postopnim ukinjanjem izključnih ali posebnih pravic od leta 1988, od leta 1998 pa so se z nekaterimi izjemami popolnoma odprli.
As a result, relieving the burden of France Télécom arising from the method of calculating the compensation to pay to the French State for funding the pensions of the civil service staff distorts or threatens to distort competition between France Télécom and these new operators in France and in the other Member States where France Télécom is present.
Iz tega izhaja, da zmanjšanje stroškov podjetja France Télécom, ki je posledica načina izračuna nadomestila, ki ga je treba plačati Francoski republiki za prevzem stroškov pokojnin za javne uslužbence, izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljalo konkurenco med podjetjem France Télécom in temi novimi operaterji na trgu v Franciji ter v drugih državah članicah, v katerih posluje podjetje France Télécom.
The markets on which France Télécom operates in France have been opened up gradually to competition since 1988 and, as a result, are largely open to trade between Member States.
Trgi, na katerih deluje podjetje France Télécom v Franciji, so se od leta 1988 postopno odpirali konkurenci, zato so široko odprti za trgovanje med državami članicami.
Some of these markets concern international communications between Member States.
Nekateri od teh trgov vključujejo mednarodne komunikacije med državami članicami.
Likewise, via subsidiaries, France Télécom provides electronic communications services in other Member States, and notably Spain, Belgium and the United Kingdom.
Poleg tega podjetje France Télécom prek svojih podružnic zagotavlja elektronske komunikacijske storitve v drugih državah članicah, zlasti v Španiji, Belgiji in Združenem kraljestvu.
Under these conditions, a measure which reduces the general operating costs of France Télécom, and thereby releases resources which become available to that undertaking to invest or to improve its commercial offers in France or to establish in other Member States, could affect trade between Member States.
Pod temi pogoji lahko ukrep, s katerim se zmanjšajo splošni operativni stroški ali stroški poslovanja podjetja France Télécom, s čimer se sprostijo sredstva, ki jih ima nato to podjetje na voljo za naložbe ali za izboljšanje svoje poslovne ponudbe v Franciji ali za začetek poslovanja v drugih državah članicah, vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
Conclusion on the existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU
Sklepne ugotovitve o obstoju pomoči v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU
It ensues from the above that, by reducing the compensation consisting of the employer’s contribution to be paid to the State for the retirement pension expenses provided for by the 1990 Law in its original wording and by substituting for this the compensation provided for by the 1996 Law, in so far as the latter compensation is lower than that previously applied, the French Republic, through its resources, has granted aid to France Télécom which distorts or threatens to distort competition and affects trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU at the time of the transfer of the costs instituted by the 1996 Law.
Iz navedenega izhaja, da je Francoska republika z znižanjem protidajatve, ki jo predstavlja prispevek delodajalca, ki ga je treba plačati državi za stroške za pokojnine iz prvotne različice zakona iz leta 1990, in z njegovo nadomestitvijo s protidajatvijo, določeno z zakonom iz leta 1996, v kolikor je ta protidajatev nižja od prejšnje protidajatve, iz lastnih sredstev odobrila pomoč podjetju France Télécom, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco in vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU, in sicer s prenosom stroškov, predvidenim z zakonom iz leta 1996.
Consequently, it is necessary to examine whether this aid can be declared compatible with the internal market.
Zato je treba preveriti, ali je mogoče zadevno pomoč razglasiti za združljivo z notranjim trgom.
Alternative legal bases for compatibility of the aid
Druge pravne podlage za združljivost pomoči
The Commission notes that France did not refer to Article 106(2) of the TFEU as a basis for the compatibility of the measures en question.
Komisija ugotavlja, da se Francija za utemeljitev zadevnih ukrepov kot združljivih ni sklicevala na člen 106(2) PDEU.
The derogations provided for in Article 107(2) of the TFEU concerning aid having a social character, granted to individual consumers, aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences and aid granted to certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany, are obviously irrelevant in the present case.
Odstopanja iz člena 107(2) PDEU, ki se nanašajo na pomoč socialnega značaja, dodeljeno posameznim potrošnikom, pomoč za povrnitev škode, ki so jo povzročile naravne nesreče ali izjemni dogodki, ter pomoč, dodeljeno nekaterim območjem Zvezne republike Nemčije, v tem primeru očitno niso primerna.
As for the derogations provided for in Article 107(3) of the TFEU, the Commission finds that the aid in question is not intended to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment, that it is not a project of common European interest and does not aim to remedy a serious disturbance in the French economy.
Komisija v zvezi z odstopanji iz člena 107(3) PDEU ugotavlja, da zadevna pomoč ni namenjena pospeševanju gospodarskega razvoja območij, kjer je življenjska raven izjemno nizka ali kjer je podzaposlenost velika, da ne pomeni pomembnega projekta skupnega evropskega interesa in da ne odpravlja resne motnje v francoskem gospodarstvu.
It is not intended either to promote culture and heritage conservation.
Pomoč tudi ni namenjena pospeševanju kulture in ohranjanju kulturne dediščine.
It therefore appears that only Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU could be applied to assess the compatibility of this measure.
Zato se zdi, da je mogoče združljivost tega ukrepa ocenjevati le na podlagi člena 107(3)(c) PDEU.
Compatibility of the aid in terms of Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU
Združljivost pomoči v skladu s členom 107(3)(c) PDEU
Under Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU: ‘The following may be considered to be compatible with the internal market: […] aid 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 […]’.
Člen 107(3)(c) PDEU določa: „Kot združljivo z notranjim trgom se lahko šteje naslednje: […] 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 […]“.
For aid to be considered compatible with the internal market on the grounds that it facilitates the development of economic activities or certain economic areas, it must improve the way in which the economic activity is carried out.
Da se lahko ukrep pomoči šteje za združljivega z notranjim trgom na podlagi dejstva, da pospešuje razvoj gospodarskih dejavnosti ali določenih gospodarskih območij, mora prispevati k izboljšanju načina izvajanja gospodarske dejavnosti.
Aid is compatible within the meaning of Article 107(3)(c) only if it does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
Pomoč je združljiva s členom 107(3)(c) le, če ne spreminja trgovinskih pogojev v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
In its assessment, the Commission puts particular emphasis on the criteria of necessity and proportionality [58].
Komisija je pri svoji oceni posebej pozorna na merila nujnosti in sorazmernosti [58].
By way of a preliminary remark and in view of the doubts raised by the Commission in its decision to initiate the procedure, it should be noted that the French Republic collected from France Télécom a satisfactory amount corresponding to the recovery of the aid required by the Commission in its decision on application of the business tax to France Télécom [59].
Ob upoštevanju pomislekov, ki jih je Komisija navedla v svojem sklepu o začetku postopka, je treba najprej opozoriti, da je Francoska republika od podjetja France Télécom zahtevala zadosten znesek, ki ustreza znesku vračila pomoči, ki ga zahteva Komisija v svoji odločbi o uporabi davka od dohodka za podjetje France Télécom [59].
The Commission considers, after confirmation of the judgment of the General Court dismissing the action for annulment of this decision by the Court of Justice [60], that the French Republic has taken the necessary measures to fulfil the obligations arising from this decision.
Po mnenju Komisije je Francoska republika po tem, ko je Sodišče potrdilo sodbo Splošnega sodišča, s katero je bila zavrnjena ničnostna tožba zoper zadevno odločbo [60], sprejela ukrepe, potrebne za izpolnitev obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz navedene odločbe.
Since the due recovery of the aid paid through the application of the business tax eliminates the economic advantage enjoyed by France Télécom in this respect, there is no need to examine the effects of any cumulation with the aid which is the subject of the present procedure.
Če se z ustreznim povračilom pomoči, ki so bile izplačane na podlagi davka od dohodka, odpravlja gospodarska prednost, ki bi jo imelo podjetje France Télécom iz tega naslova, preučitev posledic možnega prekrivanja s pomočjo, ki je predmet tega postopka, ni potrebna.
For the rest, it should be noted straight away that, contrary to investment costs, the social costs of an undertaking are recurrent operating costs and that aid reducing them is aid for the operation of the undertaking, the compatibility of which with the internal market must, according to the Court of Justice case-law, be assessed very restrictively by the Commission.
Poleg tega je treba opozoriti, da za razliko od investicijskih stroškov stroški za socialno varnost predstavljajo tekoče stroške poslovanja in da pomoč, zaradi katere so bili ti zmanjšani, pomeni pomoč za tekoče poslovanje podjetja, katere združljivost z notranjim trgom mora Komisija v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča presojati zelo ozko.
Conformity of the aid measure with an objective of common interest
Skladnost ukrepa pomoči s ciljem skupnega interesa
In the present case, the aid implemented since 1997 can be considered as being intended to facilitate the development of the economic activity of supplying electronic communications services, in the context of the full liberalisation of these markets.
V tem primeru se lahko šteje, da je pomoč, ki se izvaja od leta 1997, namenjena pospeševanju razvoja gospodarske dejavnosti, in sicer zagotavljanja elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev, v okviru popolne liberalizacije teh trgov.
In fact, the 1996 Law was adopted hand in hand with Law No 96-659 of 26 July 1996 on the regulation of telecommunications (loi no 96-659 du 26 juillet 1996 de réglementation des télécommunications), which transposed the obligations arising for France from Union law and, in particular from Directive 96/19/EC.
Dejansko je bil zakon iz leta 1996 sprejet v povezavi z zakonom št. 96-659 z dne 26. julija 1996 o ureditvi telekomunikacij, s katerim so bile prenesene obveznosti, ki jih ima Francija v skladu z zakonodajo Unije in zlasti Direktivo 96/19/ES.
In this respect, the general objective aimed for by the 1996 Law regarding the payment of financial compensation to the French State is to align the levels of wage-related social security contributions and tax payments, between France Télécom and the other undertakings in the telecommunications sector coming under the ordinary social security arrangements.
V zvezi s tem je glavni cilj zakona iz leta 1996, kar zadeva plačilo protidajatve Francoski republiki, uskladiti višino obveznih prispevkov za socialno varnost in davkov, ki jih plačujejo podjetje France Télécom in druga podjetja v telekomunikacijskem sektorju ter za katera velja splošno pravo dajatev za socialno varnost.
The means used, i.e. an aid measure targeting directly and exclusively the way in which the employer’s contributions of France Télécom are established seems an appropriate way of achieving the objective.
Zdi se, da je uporabljeno sredstvo, in sicer ukrep pomoči, ki je izključno in neposredno namenjen načinu določanja prispevkov delodajalca, ki jih mora plačati podjetje France Télécom, primerno za doseganje zastavljenega cilja.
An aid measure which aims to reduce the current social security costs of France Télécom, assumed at a time when the bulk of its activities were covered by a monopoly and the provision of a service did not require efficient economic behaviour, may contribute, in a different competitive environment, to improving the way in which the services formerly covered by the monopoly are supplied, provided that the allocation of the financial resources by the competing undertakings to their respective social security costs does not introduce any bias in a merit-based competition process.
Ukrep pomoči, katerega cilj je zmanjšanje tekočih prispevkov za socialno varnost, ki jih je podjetje France Télécom prevzelo v času, ko se za opravljanje storitev v okviru monopola za večji del njegovih dejavnosti ni zahtevalo ekonomsko učinkovito ravnanje, bi lahko v drugačnem konkurenčnem okolju prispeval k izboljšanju načina zagotavljanja storitev, ki so se nekdaj opravljale v okviru monopola, pod pogojem, da dodelitev finančnih sredstev konkurenčnih podjetij za njihove prispevke za socialno varnost ne pomeni pristranskosti v konkurenčnem postopku na podlagi lastnih zaslug.
Admittedly, reservations are expressed below on the appropriateness of certain provisions of the Law to achieve the objective it sets.
Seveda pa so v nadaljevanju navedeni pridržki v zvezi s primernostjo nekaterih določb zakona za doseganje zastavljenega cilja.
However, neither its legitimacy nor its conformity with the common interest objective of developing competitive electronic communications services markets, thereby contributing to technological progress and rapid economic growth in this activity, could be doubted.
Vendar niti njegova legitimnost niti njegova skladnost s ciljem skupnega interesa, tj. razvojem trgov za elektronske komunikacijske storitve, za katere je značilna močna konkurenca, kar prispeva k tehnološkemu napredku in gospodarski rasti v tej dejavnosti, ne moreta biti vprašljiva.
Necessity for the aid measure
Nujnost ukrepa pomoči
The capping of the civil service staff working for France Télécom, brought about by the ban on recruitment after 1 January 2002 provided for by the 1996 Law, would have had the inevitable consequence of a considerable increase in the burden of retirement pensions imposed on France Télécom in proportion to the civil servant staff still working.
Z omejevanjem števila javnih uslužbencev, zaposlenih v podjetju France Télécom, ki je posledica prepovedi njihovega zaposlovanja po 1. januarju 2002 na podlagi zakona iz leta 1996, bi se zagotovo bistveno povečali stroški za pokojnine, ki bi jih imelo podjetje France Télécom glede na število zaposlenih javnih uslužbencev.
Deprived in this way of the possibility of recruiting civil servants, which is understandable for that matter given the henceforth competitive nature of the provision of the services in question, France Télécom would have had to shoulder an excessive burden to pay the retirement pensions for the staff concerned in relation to that which its competitors had and still have to pay.
Tako bi imelo podjetje France Télécom, ki ne more več zaposlovati javnih uslužbencev, ob upoštevanju konkurence na področju zagotavljanja zadevnih storitev razumljivo višje stroške za pokojnine za svoje zaposlene v primerjavi s stroški, ki so jih imeli in jih imajo njegovi konkurenti.
It should therefore be noted that the commitments in exchange to be paid to the French State provided for by the original provisions of the 1990 Law concerned not only the civil servant staff working on competitive markets in 1990 and afterwards, but also the civil servants of the Directorate-General of the Ministry of Postal and Telecommunications Services who had retired in 1990.
Prav tako je treba opozoriti, da se obveznost plačevanja protidajatve Francoski republiki, določena v prvotni različici določb zakona iz leta 1990, ni uporabljala le za zaposlene javne uslužbence na konkurenčnih trgih v letu 1990 in od tega leta naprej, ampak tudi za uslužbence generalnega direktorata ministrstva za pošto in telekomunikacije, upokojene leta 1990.
In absolute value, the difference would represent an additional cost of about EUR […] million per year in relation to the contribution rate ensuring the level playing field.
V absolutnem smislu bi dodatni letni stroški znašali približno […] milijonov EUR glede na stopnjo prispevka za zagotavljanje enakih konkurenčnih pogojev.
In addition, in the absence of including in the Law the fact that the employer’s contributions are henceforth in full discharge of liabilities, France Télécom would have had to continue to meet significantly higher provisioning needs in relation to the provisions of EUR 3,6 billion already set aside in 1996.
Če zakon ne bi določal, da je prispevek delodajalca odvezujoč, bi moralo podjetje France Télécom poleg tega še naprej pokrivati potrebe po rezervacijah, ki bi bile precej višje od rezervacij v višini 3,5 milijarde EUR, ki so bile že določene leta 1996.
In this respect, the considerations of the complainants concerning the fact that France Télécom was able to assume a far larger financial debt from 1996 than the burden from which the French State had relieved it are not relevant as they are unrelated to the question examined.
V zvezi s tem ugotovitve pritožnikov glede dejstva, da je podjetje France Télécom od leta 1996 lahko prevzelo finančni dolg, ki je veliko višji od stroškov, katerih plačila je bilo podjetje razbremenjeno na podlagi odločitve Francoske republike, niso pomembne, ker niso povezane z obravnavano zadevo.
Even if the increase in the financial debt assumed by France Télécom since 1996 and the amounts in question now seem to rule out the risk of bankruptcy of the undertaking referred to by the French Republic if the arrangements provided for by the 1990 Law had continued, the aid measure seems to be necessary in the future to allow France Télécom to be able to compete on the markets concerned on the basis of merit, without being handicapped by the burden of social security costs inherited from the past which its competitors do not have to bear.
Čeprav se zdi, da se je s povečanjem finančnega dolga, ki ga od leta 1996 krije podjetje France Télécom, in zneskov, obravnavanih v tem primeru, preprečilo tveganje za stečaj podjetja, na katerega se sklicuje Francoska republika, v primeru, da bi se ohranila ureditev, predvidena z zakonom iz leta 1990, se zdi, da bo treba v prihodnosti sprejeti ukrep pomoči, da bo lahko podjetje France Télécom na zadevnih trgih konkuriralo na podlagi svojih zaslug, ne da bi ga oviralo breme plačevanja socialnih prispevkov, ki jih je prevzelo podjetje in ki jih njegovim konkurentom ni treba plačevati.
The considerations of the complainants and the telecommunications operator on the relevance of an overall balance with a view to assessing the need for aid in the light of the other advantages derived by France Télécom from its past monopoly are unfounded in this case.
Ugotovitve pritožnikov in telekomunikacijskega operaterja glede ustreznosti celovite presoje za oceno potrebe po pomoči ob upoštevanju drugih prednosti podjetja France Télécom, ki izhajajo iz njegovega preteklega monopolnega položaja, v tem primeru niso utemeljene.
It is true that, since 1996, France Télécom’s position on a number of the services markets in which it operates in France remains dominant, especially on account of network effects inherent in the communications markets.
Res je, da ima podjetje France Télécom od leta 1996 na veliko trgih storitev, na katerih deluje v Franciji, še vedno prevladujoč položaj, predvsem zaradi mrežnih učinkov, ki so značilni za telekomunikacijske trge.
Likewise, France Télécom has increased its presence on the markets of other Member States by acquiring significant positions there, especially in Poland and Spain.
Prav tako je podjetje France Télécom povečalo svojo prisotnost na trgih v drugih državah članicah, kjer je pridobilo pomembnejši položaj, zlasti na Poljskem in v Španiji.
The fact remains that, as emphasised indirectly by the telecommunications operator in its comments, as a result of its dominant position within the meaning of Article 102 of the TFEU or its significant market power within the meaning of the regulations applicable to electronic communications in the Union [61], France Télécom is subject to specific asymmetric obligations which are not imposed on the competing undertakings with lesser market power.
Kot je posredno poudaril telekomunikacijski operater v svojih pripombah, je dejstvo, da ima podjetje France Télécom zaradi svojega prevladujočega položaja v smislu člena 102 PDEU oziroma svoje pomembne tržne moči v smislu veljavnih predpisov na področju elektronskih komunikacij v Uniji [61] posebne nesorazmerne obveznosti, ki jih njegovi konkurenti, katerih tržna moč je manjša, nimajo.
These obligations, for example regarding access to its network, cost-orientation of prices or refraining from commercial behaviour which would be permitted to a non-dominant undertaking, have as their object precisely to ensure that the position of France Télécom inherited from its former monopoly is not more damaging to competition.
S temi obveznostmi, na primer na področju dostopa do njegovega omrežja, stroškovne naravnanosti cen ali opustitve poslovnega ravnanja, ki bi bilo dovoljeno podjetju, ki ni v prevladujočem položaju, naj bi se torej zagotovilo, da položaj, v katerem je podjetje France Télécom zaradi svojega nekdanjega monopolnega položaja, ne bi pomenil večjega ogrožanja konkurence.
These ad hoc regulatory instruments, designed and applied consistently by the national regulatory and competition authorities and by the Commission [62], are a more targeted and effective remedy to the persisting effects of the advantages derived by France Télécom from its former monopoly, invoked by the complainants.
Ti začasni regulativni instrumenti, ki so jih pripravili in jih redno uporabljajo nacionalni regulativni organi ter nacionalni organi za konkurenco in Komisija [62], so bolj ciljno usmerjeni in učinkoviti pri ublažitvi negativnih posledic, ki jih ima podjetje France Télécom zaradi svojega nekdanjega monopolnega položaja in na katere se sklicujejo pritožniki.
Consequently the State aid which is the subject of the present procedure appears, in principle, necessary to attain an objective of common interest by improving the conditions of competition relating to the retirement costs and, therefore, the provision of electronic communications services.
Zdi se, da je tudi državna pomoč, ki je obravnavana v tem postopku, načeloma potrebna za doseganje cilja skupnega interesa z izboljšanjem konkurenčnih pogojev v zvezi s stroški za pokojnine in s tem tudi zagotavljanja elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev.
Proportionality of the aid measure
Sorazmernost ukrepa pomoči