natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Commission Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation, OJ C 384, 10.12.1998, paragraph 26.
Obvestilo Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka (UL C 384, 10.12.1998, odstavek 26).
Opinion of AG Bot (14 October 2008), Case C-42/07 Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional, [2009] ECR I-10447, paragraphs 41 ff.
Sklepni predlogi generalnega pravobranilca Bota (14. oktober 2008), Zadeva C-42/07, Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional, ZOdl. 2009, str. I-10447, točka 41 in naslednje.
Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, Study of Gambling Services in the Internal Market of the European Union, European Commission 2006.
Švicarski inštitut za primerjalno pravo, Študija o igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu Evropske unije, Evropska komisija 2006.
Ibid, p. 1403.
Iste pripombe, str. 1403.
Case T-308/00, Salzgitter AG v Commission of the European Communities, [2004] ECR II-1933, paragraph 81.
Zadeva T-308/00, Salzgitter AG proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, ZOdl. 2004, str. II-1933, točka 81.
Commission Decision of 14 March 2003, COMP/M.3109, Candover/Cinven/Gala, paragraph 16.
Odločba Komisije z dne 14. marca 2003, COMP/M.3109, Candover/Cinven/Gala, odstavek 16.
Autorité de la concurrence Avis no 11-A-02 du 20 janvier 2011 relatif au secteur des jeux d’argent et de hasard en ligne.
Autorité de la Concurrence Avis no 11-A-02 du 20 janvier 2011 relatif au secteur des jeux d’argent et de hasard en ligne.
Office of Fair Trading, Decision ME/1716-05 of 15 August 2005 regarding the acquisition by William Hill of the licensed betting offices of Stanley Plc.
Urad za varstvo konkurence, Odločba ME/1716-05 z dne 15. avgusta 2005 glede prevzema stavnic z dovoljenjem v lasti podjetja Stanley Plc. s stani podjetja William Hill.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, COM(2011) 128 final, p. 3.
[29] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, COM(2011) 128 konč., str. 3.
See paragraphs 15 and 16 above.
Glej uvodni izjavi 15 in 16.
Case 30/59 De Gezamenlijke Steenkolenmijnen in Limburg v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community [1961] ECR 3, p. 19.
Zadeva 30/59, De Gezamenlijke Steenkolenmijnen in Limburg proti Visoki oblasti Evropske skupnosti za premog in jeklo, Recueil 1961, št. 3, str. 19.
Case 173/73 Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities [1974] ECR 709, Summary No 3.
Zadeva C-173/73, Italijanska republika proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, Recueil 1974, str. 709, povzetek št. 3.
Case C-88/03 Portuguese Republic v Commission of the European Communities [2006] ECR I-7115, paragraph 54; Case C-172/03 Wolfgang Heiser v Finanzamt Innsbruck [2005] ECR I-1627, paragraph 40; Case C-169/08 Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri v Regione Sardegna [2009] ECR I-10821, paragraph 61.
Zadeva C-88/03, Portugalska republika proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, ZOdl. 2006, str. I-7115, točka 54; zadeva C-172/03 Wolfgang Heiser proti Finanzamt Innsbruck, ZOdl. 2005, str. I-1627, točka 40; zadeva C-169/08, Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri proti Regione Sardegna, ZOdl. 2009, str. I-10821, točka 61.
Case C-487/06 P British Aggregates Association v Commission, [2008] ECR-10515, paragraph 83.
Zadeva C-487/06 P, British Aggregates Association proti Komisiji, ZOdl. 2008, str. 10515, točka 83.
Case 173/73 Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities [1974] ECR 709, paragraph 15; Commission Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation, OJ C 384, 10.12.1998, paragraph 23.
Zadeva 173/73 Italijanska republika proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, Recueil 1974, str. 709, točka 15; Obvestilo Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka (UL C 384, 10.12.1998, odstavek 23).
Article 6 of the Gaming Duties Act.
Člen 6 zakona o davku od iger na srečo.
See paragraph 64 above.
Glej uvodno izjavo 64.
Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, Study of Gambling Services in the Internal Market of the European Union 2006.
Švicarski inštitut za primerjalno pravo, Študija o igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu Evropske unije, 2006.
See answers to request for information sent by the Danish authorities, 20 October 2010, paragraph 2.10; Observations sent by the Danish authorities, 14 January 2011, p. 9, paragraph 42.
Glej odgovore danskih organov na zahtevo po informacijah, 20. oktober 2010, odstavek 2.10; Pripombe danskih organov, 14. januar 2011, str. 9, odstavek 42.
See comments from the Danish Amusement Machine Industry Association and Royal Casino, sent on 18 February 2011, p. 1.
Glej pripombe danskega združenja proizvajalcev igralnih avtomatov in Royal Casino, poslane 18. februarja 2011, str. 1.
Study by the Socialforskningsinstituttet (National Centre for Social Research), 2007.
Študija, ki jo je izvedel Socialforskningsinstituttet (nacionalni center za socialne raziskave), 2007.
See for instance the observations sent by nine Greek casinos, 21 February 2011, p. 18.
Glej na primer pripombe, ki jih je poslalo devet grških igralnic, 21. februar 2011, str. 18.
Case 173/73 Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities [1974] ECR 709, paragraph 15.
Zadeva 173/73, Italijanska republika proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti, Recueil 1974, str. 709, točka 15.
Commission Notice on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation, OJ C 384, 10.12.1998, paragraph 23.
Obvestilo Komisije o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči za ukrepe, ki zadevajo neposredno obdavčitev ustvarjenega dohodka (UL C 384, 10.12.1998, odstavek 23).
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.
Združene zadeve T-127/99, T-129/99 in T-148/99, Diputación Foral de Álava in drugi proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. II-1275, točka 250.
In this regard, see State Aid Action Plan — Less and better targeted State aid: a roadmap for State aid reform 2005-2009, COM(2005) 107 final.
Glej „Akcijski načrt državnih pomoči – Manjša in bolje usmerjena državna pomoč: časovni načrt za reformo državnih pomoči 2005–2009“, COM(2005) 107 konč.
Case C-76/90 Säger [1991] ECR I-4221, paragraph 12; Case C-58/98 Corsten [2000] ECR I-7919, paragraph 33.
Zadeva C-76/90 Säger, Recueil 1991, str. I-4221, točka 12; zadeva C-58/98 Corsten, Recueil 2000, str. I-7919, točka 33.
Case C-243/01 Gambelli [2003] ECR I-13031, paragraph 54.
Zadeva C-243/01 Gambelli, Recueil 2003, str. I-13031, točka 54.
Joined Cases 286/82 and 26/83 Luisi and Carbone [1984] ECR 377, paragraph 16.
Združeni zadevi 286/82 in 26/83, Luisi in Carbone, Recueil 1984, str. 377, točka 16.
See Case C-243/01 Gambelli [2003] ECR I-13031, paragraphs 63 to 65 and Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04 Placanica and Others [2007] ECR I-1891, paragraphs 46 to 49.
Glej zadevo C-243/01, Gambelli, Recueil 2003, str. I-13031, točke 63 do 65, ter združene zadeve C-338/04, C-359/04 in C-360/04, Placanica in drugi, ZOdl. 2007, str. I-1891, točke 46 do 49.
Case C-446/03 Marks & Spencer [2005] ECR I-10837, paragraph 44; Case C-319/02 Manninen [2004] ECR I-7477, paragraph 49 and the case-law cited.
Zadeva C-446/03, Marks & Spencer, ZOdl. 2005, str. I-10837, točka 44; zadeva C-319/02, Manninen, ZOdl. 2004, str. I-7477, točka 49, in navedena sodna praksa.
In so far as restrictions on gambling activities are concerned, see Case C-243/01 Gambelli [2003] ECR I-13031, paragraphs 61 and 62.
Glede omejitev dejavnosti iger na srečo glej zadevo C-243/01, Gambelli, Recueil 2003, str. I-13031, točki 61 in 62.
Case C-42/07 Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional [2009] ECR I-10447, paragraphs 57 ff.
Zadeva C-42/07 Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional, ZOdl. 2009, str. I-10447, točka 57 in naslednje.
Case C-46/08 Carmen Media Group [2009] not yet published, paragraph 103.
Zadeva C-46/08, Carmen Media Group, [2009], še ni objavljena, točka 103.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, COM(2011) 128 final, p. 8.
[60] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, COM(2011) 128 konč., str. 8.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, Commission Staff Working Paper SEC(2011) 321, p. 10.
[61] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, Delovni dokument služb Komisije, SEC(2011) 321, str. 10.
See footnote 60.
Glej opombo 60.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, Commission Staff Working Paper SEC(2011) 321, p. 9.
[63] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, Delovni dokument služb Komisije, SEC(2011) 321, str. 9.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, COM(2011) 128 final, p. 19.
[64] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, COM(2011) 128 konč., str. 19.
For further details on these studies, see European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, COM(2011) 128 final, pp. 19 ff.
Za podrobnosti o teh študijah glej Evropsko komisijo, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, COM(2011) 128 konč., str. 19 in naslednje.
European Commission, Green Paper on Online Gambling in the Internal Market, COM(2011) 128 final, p. 7.
[66] Evropska komisija, Zelena knjiga o spletnih igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu, COM(2011) 128 konč., str. 7.
Conclusion on the framework for gambling and betting in the EU Member States, adopted at the 3057th Competitiveness Council meeting, Brussels, 10 December 2010, Council document 16884/10.
Sklep o okviru za področje iger na srečo in stav v državah članicah EU, sprejet na 3057. srečanju Sveta za konkurenco v Bruslju 10. decembra 2010, dokument Sveta 16884/10.
These issues include advertising and marketing, under-age persons, fraud and criminal behaviour and integrity, social responsibility, consumer protection and taxation.
Ta vprašanja vključujejo oglaševanje in trženje, mladoletne osebe, goljufije in kazniva dejanja ter neoporečnost, socialno odgovornost, varstvo potrošnikov in obdavčevanje.
See paragraph 7 above.
Glej uvodno izjavo 7.
Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, Study of Gambling Services in the Internal Market of the European Union, European Commission 2006, p. 1108.
Švicarski inštitut za primerjalno pravo, Študija o igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu Evropske unije, Evropska komisija 2006, str. 1108.
Swiss Institute of Comparative Law, International Vergleichende Analyse des Glücksspielwesens, 2009, p. 18. http://mpk.rlp.de/mpkrlpde/sachthemen/studie-zum-gluecksspielwesen/
Švicarski inštitut za primerjalno pravo, International vergleichende Analyse des Glücksspielwesens, 2009, str. 18.: http://mpk.rlp.de/mpkrlpde/sachthemen/studie-zum-gluecksspielwesen/.
See paragraph 38 above.
Glej uvodno izjavo 38.
H2 Gambling Capital, An independent model assessment of various taxation/licensing models for regulating remote gambling in the Netherlands, February 2011.
Družba H2 Gambling Capital, An independent model assessment of various taxation/licensing models for regulating remote gambling in the Netherlands (neodvisna ocena modela različnih modelov obdavčitve/dovoljenj za urejanje spletnih iger na srečo na Nizozemskem), februar 2011.
On 6 July 2010, pursuant to Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) the Danish authorities notified the Legislative Proposal L 203 on Gaming Duties (the ‘Gaming Duties Act’ [2]), adopted on 25 June 2010, for the sake of legal certainty.
Danski organi so 6. julija 2010 v skladu s členom 108(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske Unije (PDEU) zaradi pravne varnosti priglasili zakonodajni predlog št. L 203 o davku od iger na srečo (v nadaljnjem besedilu: zakon o davku od iger na srečo [2]), ki je bil sprejet 25. junija 2010.
The Commission requested further information by letters dated 11 August 2010 and 22 September 2010.
Komisija je zahtevala dodatne informacije z dopisoma z dne 11. avgusta 2010 in 22. septembra 2010.
The first was submitted by the Danish Amusement Machine Industry Association (‘DAB’) on 23 July 2010.
Prvo pritožbo je vložilo dansko združenje proizvajalcev igralnih avtomatov 23. julija 2010.
The second complaint was submitted by a land-based casino operator, ‘the Royal Casino’, on 6 August 2010.
Drugo pritožbo je vložil upravljavec klasične igralnice „the Royal Casino“6. avgusta 2010.
Both complaints were forwarded to the Danish authorities on 23 September 2010 for their comments.
Obe pritožbi je Komisija 23. septembra 2010 posredovala danskim organom, da so lahko predložili svoje pripombe.
During the meeting the Danish authorities submitted a note entitled ‘The dilemma created by the pending State aid case’ in which they also announced their intention to delay the entry into force of the notified Act until the Commission had adopted a decision [3].
Med sestankom so danski organi predložili sporočilo z naslovom „Precep zaradi nerešene zadeve o državni pomoči“, v katerem so navedli tudi svojo namero, da prestavijo začetek veljavnosti priglašenega zakona, dokler Komisija o tej zadevi ne sprejme odločitve [3].
In total, 17 interested third parties submitted comments between 11 February and 22 February 2011 [5].
Skupno je med 11. februarjem in 22. februarjem 2011 pripombe predložilo 17 zainteresiranih tretjih strani [5].
These comments were forwarded to Denmark on 16 March 2011, which was given the opportunity to respond.
Komisija je te pripombe 16. marca 2011 posredovala Danski, ki je imela možnost, da nanje odgovori.
It recalled that any assessment of the selectivity of a tax measure should involve examining whether a given measure favours certain undertakings in comparison with other undertakings whose legal and factual situation is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by the scheme in question [10].
Opozorila je, da je treba pri vsaki oceni selektivnosti davčnega ukrepa preveriti, ali zadevni ukrep ob upoštevanju ciljev zadevne sheme posameznim podjetjem v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji, ki so v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju, daje prednost [10].
In this regard, the Danish authorities referred to the ‘Study of Gambling Services in the Internal Market of the European Union’, according to which the costs of doing business onshore for suppliers should not exceed the costs of doing business offshore, in order to be more attractive for consumers and suppliers to operate within their jurisdictions than in other countries [13].
V zvezi s tem so se danski organi sklicevali na „Študijo o igrah na srečo na notranjem trgu Evropske unije“, v skladu s katero stroški poslovanja doma ne bi smeli presegati stroškov poslovanja v tujini, zato da bi se potrošniki in dobavitelji raje odločali za delovanje pod njihovo jurisdikcijo in ne pod jurisdikcijo drugih držav [13].
Support for this position can be found in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which held that ‘the offer of games of chance by the Internet may prove to be a source of risks of a different kind and a greater order in the area of consumer protection’ [18].
To stališče podpira sodna praksa Sodišča Evropske unije, ki je menilo, da „se ponujanja iger na srečo po spletu prav tako lahko izkažejo za vir drugačnih in večjih nevarnosti na področju varstva potrošnikov“ [18].
Reference is also made to the study on gambling published by the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale [19], according to which online gambling presents an actual risk of addiction that needs, however, to be addressed by a regulated market for online gambling.
Navedena je tudi študija o igrah na srečo, ki jo je objavil Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale [19], v skladu s katero spletne igre na srečo predstavljajo dejansko nevarnost zasvojenosti, ki jo mora obravnavati reguliran trg za spletne igre na srečo.
In this regard, they also refer to the Commission position adopted in merger proceedings, by virtue of which gambling machines (jackpot machines, token machines and all-cash or amusements with prizes (AWPs)) constitute a separate product market [26]. They also mention, among others, the decision adopted by the French Competition Authority, according to which land-based poker does not form part of the same market as online poker, since land-based poker requires personal self-control, observation of the other players, often higher costs and a limitation from a geographic point of view [27]. Reference is also made to a merger decision adopted by the British Office of Fair Trading, which draws a distinction between licensed betting offices on the one hand, and telephone or Internet betting, on the other hand [28].
S tem v zvezi so se sklicevali na stališče Komisije, ki ga je zavzela v postopkih združitev, v skladu s katerim igralni avtomati (avtomati za jackpot, avtomati na žetone in avtomati na denar ali plačljivi avtomati, namenjeni zabavi (amusements with prizes – AWP) oblikujejo ločen proizvodni trg [26]. Med drugim so navedli tudi odločitev, ki jo je sprejel francoski organ za konkurenco, v skladu s katero klasični poker ni del istega trga kot spletni poker, saj je pri klasičnem pokru potrebna osebna samokontrola, opazovanje drugih igralcev, stroški so pogosto višji, z geografskega vidika pa je omejen [27]. Navedli so tudi odločbo o združitvi britanskega urada za varstvo konkurence, ki razlikuje med stavnicami z dovoljenjem na eni strani in telefonskimi ali spletnimi stavami na drugi strani [28].
The notion of advantage covers not only positive benefits but also interventions which, in various forms, mitigate the charges normally borne by an undertaking’s budget [31].
Pojem prednosti ne obsega samo koristi, ampak tudi posredovanja, ki v različnih oblikah blažijo stroške, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetja [31].
According to existing case law, what has to be assessed is whether a given measure favours certain undertakings over other undertakings whose legal and factual situation is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by the scheme in question [33].
V skladu z obstoječo sodno prakso je treba oceniti, ali zadevni ukrep nekaterim podjetjem daje prednost pred drugimi podjetji, ki so ob upoštevanju ciljev zadevne sheme v dejansko in pravno primerljivem položaju [33].
It must therefore be subject to a strict interpretation [49].
Zato jo je treba razlagati ozko [49].
Moreover, the freedom to provide services is for the benefit of both providers and recipients of services [55].
Poleg tega je svoboda opravljanja storitev v korist tako ponudnikov kot prejemnikov storitev [55].
In so far as gambling activities are concerned, a certain number of reasons of overriding general interest have been recognised by the Court of Justice in its rulings, such as the objectives of consumer protection and the prevention of both fraud and incitement to squander on gaming, as well as the general need to preserve public order.
Glede iger na srečo je Sodišče v svojih sodbah priznalo nekatere razloge za upoštevanje prevlade splošnih interesov, kot so cilji v zvezi z varstvom potrošnikov ter preprečevanje goljufij in spodbujanja k prekomernemu zapravljanju pri igrah na srečo ter splošna potreba po ohranjanju javnega reda.
In that context, moral, religious and cultural factors, and the morally and financially harmful consequences for the individual and society associated with gaming and betting, could serve to justify the existence on the part of the national authorities of a margin of appreciation sufficient to enable them to determine what consumer protection and the preservation of public order require.
S tem v zvezi bi lahko moralne, verske ali kulturne posebnosti ter škodljive moralne in finančne posledice za posameznika in družbo, ki izhajajo iz iger ali stav, upravičile obstoj široke diskrecijske pravice nacionalnih organov, da lahko določijo zahteve glede varstva potrošnikov in družbenega reda.
They must also be applied without discrimination [56].
Prav tako jih je treba uporabljati brez diskriminacije [56].
This trend is confirmed by the European Commission’s Green Paper of March 2011 [60].
Ta trend potrjuje Zelena knjiga Evropske komisije iz marca 2011 [60].
The accompanying Commission Staff Working Paper cites a total Gross Gaming Revenue for Online Gambling in Denmark of EUR 250 m in 2008, of which 14 % (i.e. EUR 34 m) related to casino games and 22 per cent (i.e. EUR 56 m) to poker [61].
Priloženi delovni dokument služb Komisije navaja, da je na Danskem v letu 2008 bruto prihodek od spletnih iger na srečo znašal 250 milijonov EUR, od tega je bilo 14 % (tj. 34 milijonov EUR) povezanih z igrami na srečo v igralnicah in 22 % (tj. 56 milijonov EUR) s pokrom [61].
Second, the proportion of national gambling consumption attributable to online-gambling is estimated to be 21,9 per cent in Denmark, i.e. the second highest rate within the EU, which posts an average of 7,5 per cent [63].
Drugič, delež spletnih iger na Danskem glede na celotni segment iger na srečo znaša po ocenah 21,9 %, kar je druga najvišja stopnja v EU, kjer povprečje znaša 7,5 % [63].
Limiting the number of licences also raises questions regarding the criteria for determining the number of licences in a non-arbitrary manner, how and by which institutions the licensing requirements are monitored, and how illegal provision is dealt with, i.e. who takes what measures against illegally provided gambling services [71].
Pri omejevanju števila dovoljenj se pojavi tudi vprašanje glede meril za določanje števila dovoljenj na nesamovoljen način, glede tega, katere institucije bi nadzorovale zahteve za izdajo dovoljenja in na kakšen način, ter glede obravnavanja nezakonitega nudenja storitev, tj. kdo sprejme katere ukrepe proti nezakonitemu nudenju iger na srečo [71].
Infringement proceedings No 2003/4365.
Postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev št. 2003/4365.
See also IP/07/360.
Glej tudi IP/07/360.
European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2009 on the integrity of online gambling. (2008/22125(INI)), P6-2009-0097.
Resolucija Evropskega parlamenta z dne 10. marca 2009 o neoporečnosti spletnih iger na srečo, (2008/22125(INI)), P6-2009-0097.
In other words, the question is whether the measure concerned, which appears prima facie to be selective, is justified in the light of the logic of the tax system [35].
Z drugimi besedami, treba je ugotoviti, ali je zadevni ukrep, ki se zdi a priori selektiven, upravičen ob upoštevanju logike davčnega sistema [35].
Autorité de la concurrence française, Avis 11-A-02 du 20 janvier 2011.
Autorité de la Concurrence Française, Avis 11-A-02 z dne 20. januarja 2011.
The Danish authorities also relied on the Candover-Cinven-Gala decision [38], which held that gambling machines (jackpot machines, token machines and all-cash or AWPs) constituted an independent product market [39]. However, apart from the fact that this decision did not concern the application of State aid rules nor the issue of selectivity, it must be noted that although the decision states that ‘gaming machines (jackpot machines, token machines and all-cash or amusement with prize (AWP) machines) constitute a separate product market, it also states that they can be regarded as integrated in the gambling package at the respective sites where they are situated, i.e. in casinos, bingo clubs, arcades, pubs, betting shops etc.’ [40].
Danski organi so se sklicevali tudi na odločbo v zadevi Candover-Cinven-Gala [38], v kateri je bilo ugotovljeno, da igralni avtomati (avtomati za jackpot, avtomati na žetone in avtomati na denar ali plačljivi avtomati, namenjeni zabavi (amusements with prizes – AWP) oblikujejo ločen proizvodni trg [39]. Vendar pa je treba ob dejstvu, da se ta odločba ni nanašala na uporabo pravil o državni pomoči ali vprašanje selektivnosti, opozoriti, da čeprav odločba navaja, da „igralni avtomati (avtomati za jackpot, avtomati na žetone in avtomati na denar ali plačljivi avtomati, namenjeni zabavi) oblikujejo ločen proizvodni trg,“ navaja tudi, da „se lahko obravnavajo kot del sklopa iger na srečo na zadevnih mestih, kjer se nahajajo, tj. igralnicah, dvoranah za tombolo, igralnih salonih, pivnicah, stavnicah itd.“ [40].
of 6 March 2012
z dne 6. marca 2012