natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the interests of legal certainty and the principle of sound administration, it is necessary to provide that the amendments to the Amended Regulation provided for in this Regulation are to apply as soon as possible to all new and to all pending investigations.
Zaradi pravne varnosti in načela dobrega upravljanja je treba zagotoviti, da se spremembe iz spremenjene uredbe, kakor jih določa ta uredba, začnejo čim prej uporabljati za vse nove in vse tekoče preiskave.
Regulation (EC) No 88/97 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Uredbo (ES) št. 88/97 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti –
Regulation (EC) No 88/97 is hereby amended as follows:
Uredba (ES) št. 88/97 se spremeni:
Requests shall be made in writing in one of the official languages of the Union and must be signed by a person authorised to represent the applicant.
Zahteve za izvzetje se predložijo v pisni obliki v enem od uradnih jezikov Unije in jih mora podpisati oseba, ki je pooblaščena za zastopanje vlagatelja.
The request must be sent to the following address:
Zahtevo je treba poslati na naslednji naslov:
E-mail: TRADE-bicycle-parts@ec.europa.eu’;
E-naslov: TRADE-bicycle-parts@ec.europa.eu“.
paragraph 1, points (a) and (b) are replaced by the following:
točki (a) in (b) odstavka 1 se nadomestita z naslednjim:
it contains evidence that the applicant is using essential bicycle parts for the production or assembly of bicycles in quantities above the threshold set out in Article 14(c);
vsebuje dokaze, da vlagatelj uporablja glavne dele za kolesa za proizvodnjo ali sestavljanje koles v količinah, ki so nad pragom, določenim v členu 14(c);
it provides prima facie evidence that the applicant’s assembly operations fall outside the scope of Article 13(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009; and
zagotavlja dokaze prima facie, da montažna dejavnost vlagatelja ne spada v področje uporabe člena 13(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009, in
Where a request is held inadmissible, it shall be rejected by a Decision in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.’;
Če se razsodi, da je zahteva nesprejemljiva, se z odločbo zavrne v skladu s postopkom iz člena 13(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009.“
As from the date of receipt of a request complying prima facie with the conditions set out in Article 4(1) and (2) and pending a decision on its merits pursuant to Articles 6 and 7, payment of the customs debt in respect of the extended duty pursuant to Article 2(1) of the Reference Regulation shall be suspended in respect of any imports of essential bicycle parts declared for free circulation by the party under examination.
Od dneva prejema zahteve, ki prima facie ustreza pogojem, določenim v členu 4(1) in 4(2), in do odločitve glede njene ustreznosti v skladu s členoma 6 in 7, se plačilo carinskega dolga v zvezi z razširjeno dajatvijo na podlagi člena 2(1) referenčne uredbe oprosti za vsak uvoz glavnih delov za kolesa, ki ga stranka v pregledu deklarira za prost promet.
A period of not less than 6 months prior to the receipt of the request is normally taken into consideration in order to establish prima facie compliance with the conditions set out in Article 4(1) and (2).’;
Običajno se upošteva obdobje najmanj 6 mesecev pred prejemom zahteve, da se ugotovi skladnost prima facie s pogoji iz člena 4(1) in 4(2).“
The Commission will identify an investigation period in order to decide whether to grant an exemption which will normally cover a period of 12, but not less than 6 months as of the date of suspension of payment of the extended duty on essential bicycle parts.
Komisija opredeli obdobje preiskave z namenom, da lahko sprejme odločitev, ali naj odobri oprostitev, ki običajno zajema obdobje dvanajstih mesecev, vendar najmanj šest mesecev od dneva oprostitve plačila razširjene dajatve na glavne dele za kolesa.
In conducting its examination, the Commission may request additional information from the applicant for the examination period and/or carry out on-the-spot verifications.’;
Komisija lahko pri vodenju pregleda zahteva od vlagatelja dodatne informacije za obdobje preiskave in/ali izvede preverjanja na kraju samem.“;
The examination of the merits of a request shall normally be concluded within 12 months after the receipt of all information as referred to in Article 6(1).’;
Pregled ustreznosti zahteve se običajno zaključi v dvanajstih mesecih po prejemu vseh informacij iz člena 6(1).“
Where the facts as finally ascertained show that the applicant’s assembly operations do not fall within the scope of Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, the applicant’s exemption from the extended duty shall be authorised in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.’;
Če dokončno ugotovljena dejstva kažejo, da montažni postopki stranke ne spadajo v področje uporabe člena 13(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009, se vlagatelju v skladu s postopkom iz člena 13(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009 izda dovoljenje za oprostitev plačila razširjene dajatve.“;
Where the criteria for exemption are not fulfilled, the request shall be rejected in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and the suspension of the payment of the extended duty referred to in Article 5 shall be lifted.’;
Če merila za izvzetje niso izpolnjena, se zahteva v skladu s postopkom iz člena 13(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009 zavrne in odpravi oprostitev plačila razširjene dajatve iz člena 5.“
Article 8(1)(a) is replaced by the following:
Člen 8(1)(a) se nadomesti z naslednjim:
its assembly operations remain outside the scope of Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009;’;
da njena montažna dejavnost ostaja zunaj področja uporabe člena 13(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009;“.
The Commission may on its own initiative review the situation of an exempted party to verify that its assembly operations remain outside the scope of Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.’;
Komisija lahko na lastno pobudo pregleda položaj izvzete stranke, da preveri, če njena montažna dejavnost ostaja zunaj področja uporabe člena 13(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009.“
Revocation of an exemption
Preklic izvzetja
An exemption shall be revoked in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, after the exempted party has been given an opportunity to comment:
Izvzetje se prekliče v skladu s postopkom iz člena 13(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009 po tem, ko se da izvzeti strani možnost pripomb:
where a review has shown that the exempted party’s assembly operations fall within the scope of Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009,
če je pregled pokazal, da sodi montažna dejavnost izvzete stranke v področje uporabe člena 13(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009,
in the event of breach of the party’s obligations pursuant to Article 8, or
če stranka krši obveznosti iz člena 8 ali
in the event of lack of cooperation after the adoption of the exemption decision.’;
v primeru nesodelovanja po sprejemu sklepa o izvzetju.“
The relevant provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 concerning:
Ustrezne določbe Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009 o:
the conduct of investigations (Article 6(2), (3), (4) and (5)),
vodenju preiskav (člen 6(2), (3), (4) in (5)),
verification visits (Article 16),
preveritvenih obiskih (člen 16),
non-cooperation (Article 18), and
nesodelovanju (člen 18) in
confidentiality (Article 19),
zaupnosti (člen 19)
shall apply to examinations pursuant to this Regulation.’;
se uporabljajo za preglede na podlagi te uredbe.“
Article 14(c) is replaced by the following:
Člen 14(c) se nadomesti z naslednjim:
on a monthly basis, less than 300 units per type of essential bicycle parts are either declared for free circulation by a party or are delivered to it.
na mesečni podlagi, če manj kot 300 enot na tip glavnih delov za kolesa bodisi stranka deklarira za prost promet bodisi so ji dobavljeni.
The number of parts declared by or delivered to any party shall be calculated by reference to the number of parts declared by or delivered to all parties which are associated with or have compensatory arrangements with that party; or’;
Število delov, ki jih stranka deklarira ali so ji dobavljeni, se izračuna glede na število delov, ki jih deklarirajo vse stranke oziroma so dobavljeni vsem strankam, ki so povezane s stranko ali imajo z njo sklenjene kompenzacijske dogovore, ali“.
in Article 14 the following subparagraph (d) is added:
V členu 14 se doda naslednji pododstavek (d):
the essential bicycle parts are for use in the assembly of cycles fitted with an auxiliary motor (TARIC additional code 8835).’;
glavni deli za kolesa se uporabljajo za sestavljanje koles s pomožnim motorjem (dodatna oznaka TARIC 8835).“
Article 16(3) is deleted.
Člen 16(3) se črta.
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and shall apply to all new and to all pending investigations as of its entry into force.
Ta uredba začne veljati dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije in se od začetka veljavnosti uporablja za vse nove preiskave in za vse preiskave, ki so v teku.
OJ L 153, 5.6.2013, p. 17.
UL L 153, 5.6.2013, str. 17.
OJ L 228, 9.9.1993, p. 1.
UL L 16, 18.1.1997, str. 55.
OJ L 16, 18.1.1997, p. 55.
UL L 228, 9.9.1993, str. 1.
OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.’;
UL L 343, 22.12.2009, str. 51.;“
Commission Regulation (EU) No 513/2013
Uredba Komisije (EU) št. 513/2013
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China and amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 making these imports originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China subject to registration
o uvedbi začasne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz fotonapetostnih modulov iz kristalnega silicija in njihovih ključnih sestavnih delov (tj. celic in rezin) s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske ali ki so od tam poslani ter o spremembi Uredbe (EU) št. 182/2013 ter o uvedbi registracije tega uvoza s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske ali ki je od tam poslan
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community [1] (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 7 and Article 14(5) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 z dne 30. novembra 2009 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti [1] („osnovna uredba“), ter zlasti člena 7 in člena 14(5) Uredbe,
On 6 September 2012, the European Commission (‘the Commission’) announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2] (‘Notice of Initiation’), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the European Union (‘the Union’) of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘the PRC’ or the ‘country concerned’).
Evropska komisija („Komisija“) je 6. septembra 2012 z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2] („obvestilo o začetku“), napovedala začetek protidampinškega postopka glede uvoza fotonapetostnih modulov in ključnih sestavnih delov na osnovi kristalnega silicija (tj. celice in rezine) s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske („LRK“ ali „zadevna država“) v Evropsko unijo („Unija“).
The investigation was initiated following a complaint lodged on 25 July 2012 by EU ProSun (‘the complainant’) on behalf of producers representing more than 25 % of the total Union production of crystalline silicon photovoltaic (‘PV’) modules and key components.
Preiskava je bila uvedena na podlagi pritožbe, ki jo je 25. julija 2012 vložilo združenje EU ProSun („pritožnik“) v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo več kot 25 % celotne proizvodnje Unije fotonapetostnih modulov in ključnih sestavnih delov na osnovi kristalnega silicija.
Following a request by the complainant supported by the required evidence the Commission adopted on 1 March 2013 Regulation (EU) No 182/2013 [3] making imports of crystalline silicon PV modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) originating in or consigned from the PRC subject to registration as of 6 March 2013.
Na podlagi zahtevka pritožnika, podprtega z zahtevanimi dokazili, je Komisija 1. marca 2013 sprejela Uredbo (EU) št. 182/2013 o registraciji uvoza fotonapetostnih modulov iz kristalnega silicija in njihovih ključnih sestavnih delov (tj. celic in rezin) s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske ali ki so od tam poslani [3], ki se uporablja od 6. marca 2013.
The Commission officially advised the complainant, other known Union producers, the known exporting producers, the PRC authorities and known importers of the initiation of the investigation.
Komisija je o začetku preiskave uradno obvestila pritožnika, druge znane proizvajalce Unije, znane proizvajalce izvoznike, organe LRK in znane uvoznike.
The Commission also advised producers in the USA, which was envisaged as a possible analogue country.
Komisija je obvestila tudi proizvajalce iz ZDA, ki je bila predvidena kot možna primerljiva država.
In view of the large number of exporting producers in the country concerned, unrelated importers and Union producers involved in the investigation, and in order to complete the investigation within the statutory time limits, the Commission announced in the Notice of Initiation that it had decided to limit to a reasonable number the exporting producers in the country concerned, unrelated importers and Union producers that would be investigated by selecting a sample in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation (this process is also referred to as ‘sampling’).
Zaradi velikega števila proizvajalcev izvoznikov v zadevni državi, nepovezanih uvoznikov in proizvajalcev Unije, vključenih v preiskavo, in da bi se preiskava zaključila v predpisanih rokih, je Komisija v obvestilu o začetku napovedala, da bo izbrala vzorec v skladu s členom 17 osnovne uredbe in tako smiselno omejila število proizvajalcev izvoznikov v zadevni državi, nepovezanih uvoznikov in proizvajalcev Unije, ki jih bo preiskala (postopek se imenuje „vzorčenje“).
The Commission announced in the Notice of Initiation that it had provisionally selected a sample of Union producers.
Komisija je v obvestilu o začetku sporočila, da je začasno izbrala vzorec proizvajalcev Unije.
All known Union producers and known producers’ association were informed about the selection of the provisional sample of Union producers.
Vsi znani proizvajalci Unije in znana združenja proizvajalcev so bili obveščeni o izboru začasnega vzorca proizvajalcev Unije.
This provisional sample consisted of 9 Union producers out of the around 220 Union producers that were known prior to the initiation of the investigation to produce the like product (see recital 26 below), selected on the basis of the largest representative volume of production, taking into account the sales volume and the geographical location that could reasonably be investigated within the time available.
Ta začasni vzorec je bil sestavljen iz devetih proizvajalcev Unije od približno 220 proizvajalcev Unije, za katere je bilo pred začetkom preiskave znano, da proizvajajo podobni izdelek (glej uvodno izjavo 26), ki so bili izbrani na podlagi največjega reprezentativnega obsega proizvodnje ob upoštevanju obsega prodaje in zemljepisne lege ter jih je bilo mogoče ustrezno preiskati v razpoložljivem času.
It was ensured that the sample covers both vertically integrated and non-integrated Union producers.
Zagotovljeno je bilo, da je vzorec zajemal vertikalno integrirane in neintegrirane proizvajalce Unije.
Interested parties were also invited to make their views known on the provisional sample.
Zainteresirane strani so bile tudi pozvane, naj izrazijo svoja stališča o začasnem vzorcu.
A number of interested parties commented on the provisional sample and one party requested a hearing with the Hearing Officer.
Več zainteresiranih strani je predložilo pripombe o začasnem vzorcu, ena stran pa je zahtevala zaslišanje pri pooblaščencu za zaslišanje.
Several interested parties raised the following objections concerning the provisional sample of Union producers:
Več zainteresiranih strani je podalo naslednje ugovore glede začasnega vzorca proizvajalcev Unije:
Some parties submitted that the limited information provided with regard to the provisionally selected sample was insufficient and prevented them from making any meaningful comments on the proposed sample.
Nekaj strani je pripomnilo, da so omejene informacije v zvezi z začasno izbranim vzorcem nezadostne in da zato ne morejo podati smiselnih pripomb o predlaganem vzorcu.
In particular, they criticised that the identity of the Union producers was kept confidential and requested that the Member States where the sampled Union producers were located should be disclosed, as well as the selected Union producers’ share of production in the total production volume of PV modules, cells and wafers and the percentage of production and sales represented by the sampled companies individually and by the sample as a whole.
Zlasti so očitale, da je identiteta proizvajalcev Unije zaupna, ter zahtevale, naj se razkrijejo države članice, v katerih so sedeži proizvajalcev Unije, in deleži proizvodnje izbranih proizvajalcev Unije glede na celotni obseg proizvodnje fotonapetostnih modulov, celic in rezin ter odstotki proizvodnje in prodaje za posamezne vzorčene družbe in za vzorec kot celoto.
The method used for selection of the sample was contested on the grounds that it ‘confuses three different steps’, namely the support for the initiation of the investigation, definition of the Union industry and sampling.
Izpodbijale so metodo za izbor vzorca, saj naj bi „zamešala tri različne korake“, in sicer podporo za začetek preiskave, opredelitev industrije Unije in vzorčenje.
Therefore, it was claimed that it was unclear whether the Union industry was already defined at the time of the selection of the sample, and therefore whether the sample could be considered as representative.
Zato so trdile, da ni jasno, ali je bila industrija Unije ob izboru vzorca že opredeljena in ali se vzorec lahko šteje za reprezentativnega.
Without defining the Union industry at sampling stage, interested parties were prevented from verifying whether the provisional sample was representative, and thus whether on the basis of the sample, the situation of the Union industry during the investigation period as defined in recital 19 below could be correctly assessed.
Brez opredelitve industrije Unije v fazi vzorčenja zainteresirane strani niso mogle preveriti, ali je začasni vzorec reprezentativen in ali je na podlagi vzorca mogoče pravilno oceniti stanje industrije Unije v obdobju preiskave, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 19.
Furthermore, it was claimed that it was inappropriate to select the provisional sample on the basis of the replies of the Union producers to the examination of the support for the initiation of the investigation.
Poleg tega so trdile, da je neprimerno izbrati začasni vzorec na podlagi odgovorov proizvajalcev Unije na proučitev podpore za začetek preiskave.
It was also claimed that the provisional sample was selected merely on the basis of companies which have expressed their support to the present investigation.
Trdile so tudi, da je bil začasni vzorec izbran zgolj na podlagi družb, ki so izrazile svojo podporo sedanji preiskavi.
One party claimed that since vertically integrated companies are included in the provisional sample, the production volume of wafers and cells may be double or triple counted which casts doubts on the overall representativity of the sample.
Ena stran je trdila, da bi lahko bil obseg proizvodnje rezin in celic glede na to, da začasni vzorec vključuje vertikalno integrirane družbe, štet dvakrat ali trikrat, kar vzbuja dvom o splošni reprezentativnosti vzorca.
It was requested that for vertically integrated producers only the production volume of modules should be counted, but not the volume of cells and wafers.
Zahtevala je, naj se za vertikalno integrirane proizvajalce šteje samo obseg proizvodnje modulov, ne pa obseg proizvodnje celic in rezin.
The same party alleged that the data on which the selection of the sample was based were at least partly unreliable which could have an impact on the representativity of the provisional sample as a whole.
Ista stran je trdila, da so podatki, na katerih je temeljila izbira vzorca, vsaj delno nezanesljivi, kar bi lahko vplivalo na reprezentativnost začasnega vzorca kot celote.
One party provided a list containing allegedly around 150 additional Union producers of the like product, claiming that they should have been taken into consideration for the purposes of selecting a sample of Union producers.
Ena stran je predložila seznam, v katerem naj bi bilo navedenih približno 150 dodatnih proizvajalcev podobnega izdelka v Uniji, in trdila, da bi se morali ti upoštevati pri izboru vzorca proizvajalcev Unije.
The arguments raised by the parties were addressed as follows:
Argumenti strani so bili obravnavani na naslednji način:
The Union producers requested that their names be kept confidential due to the risk of retaliation.
Proizvajalci Unije so zahtevali, naj njihova imena ostanejo zaupna zaradi nevarnosti povračilnih ukrepov.
There were indeed real threats against Union producers to harm their business both in the Union and outside.
Res so obstajale grožnje proizvajalcem Unije, ki bi lahko ogrozile njihovo poslovanje v Uniji in zunaj nje.
The Commission considered that these requests were sufficiently substantiated to be granted.
Komisija je menila, da so te zahteve dovolj utemeljene za odobritev.
The disclosure of the location or share in production and sales of individual Union producers selected in the sample could easily reveal the identity of the producer concerned and the requests in this regard had to be rejected.
Razkritje lokacije ali proizvodnega in prodajnega deleža posameznih izbranih proizvajalcev Unije v vzorcu bi lahko razkrilo identiteto zadevnega proizvajalca, zato je bilo treba zahtevke v zvezi s tem zavrniti.
The Commission did not ‘confuse’ the determination of the support for the initiation of the investigation, the determination of the Union industry and the selection of provisional sample as these steps remained independent from each other and were decided upon separately.
Komisija ni „zamešala“ določitve podpore za začetek preiskave, določitve industrije Unije in izbora začasnega vzorca, saj so ti koraki ostali medsebojno neodvisni in se je o njih odločalo ločeno.
It was not demonstrated to what extent the use of production and sales data provided by the Union producers in the context of the examination of the support for the initiation of the investigation had affected the representativity of the sample.
Ni bilo prikazano, v kolikšni meri naj bi uporaba podatkov o proizvodnji in prodaji, ki so jih predložili proizvajalci Unije zaradi proučitve podpore za začetek preiskave, vplivala na reprezentativnost vzorca.
At initiation the Union industry had indeed been provisionally defined.
Na začetku je bila industrija Unije res začasno opredeljena.
All available information concerning the Union producers, including information provided in the complaint and data collected from Union producers and other parties before the initiation of the investigation, was used in order to provisionally establish the total Union production for the investigation period, as defined in recital 19 below.
Vse razpoložljive informacije o proizvajalcih Unije, vključno z informacijami iz pritožbe in podatki, pridobljenimi od proizvajalcev Unije in drugih strani pred začetkom preiskave, so se uporabile za začasno določitev celotne proizvodnje Unije v obdobju preiskave, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 19.