natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finland replied by letter of 30 May 2008 that it was still prepared to amend its Fisheries Insurance Scheme as proposed in 2005 but not to the extent required by the appropriate measures.
Finska je v dopisu z dne 30. maja 2008 odgovorila, da je še vedno pripravljena spremeniti ribiško zavarovalno shemo, kot je bilo predlagano leta 2005, vendar ne v obsegu, ki se zahteva z ustreznimi ukrepi.
A new meeting was held on 6 March 2009 between the Commission and Finland.
Komisija in Finska sta se ponovno sestali 6. marca 2009.
A last request for information was sent by the Commission on 1 October 2009, indicating that, in case Finland does not accept the proposed appropriate measures, the Commission would be obliged to follow the procedure of Articles 19(2) and Article 4(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 [6] and initiate the formal investigation procedure laid down in Article 108(2) TFEU.
Komisija je zadnjo zahtevo za informacije poslala 1. oktobra 2009, pri čemer je navedla, da bo morala izvesti postopek iz členov 19(2) in 4(4) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 [6] ter začeti formalni postopek preiskave iz člena 108(2) PDEU, če Finska ne bo sprejela predlaganih ustreznih ukrepov.
Finland replied by letter of 18 November 2009.
Finska je odgovorila z dopisom z dne 18. novembra 2009.
As Finland has not accepted in its entirety the proposal for modification in respect of this scheme, the Commission decided to initiate that procedure.
Ker Finska predloga za spremembo zadevne sheme ni v celoti sprejela, se je Komisija odločila za začetek navedenega postopka.
That decision was notified by letter of 15 September 2010 which was published in the Official Journal [7].
Finsko je o tej odločitvi obvestila z dopisom z dne 15. septembra 2010, ki je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu [7].
As the Commission needed some clarification on the information contained in the letter sent by on 15 November 2010, a meeting was held with the Finnish authorities in the Commission premises on 4 April 2011.
Ker je Komisija potrebovala nekaj pojasnil v zvezi z informacijami iz dopisa z dne 15. novembra 2010, se je 4. aprila 2011 v svojih prostorih sestala s finskimi organi.
The Finnish authorities sent also additional information by messages of 13 April and 13 May 2011.
Finski organi so dodatne informacije predložili tudi v sporočilih z dne 13. aprila in 13. maja 2011.
Finally, as it stemmed from the information sent by Finland that it was ready to amend the scheme in such a way that it would bring it compatible with the internal market, the Commission requested Finland, by letter of 6 July 2011, to confirm its official commitment to amend the legislation which constitutes the legal basis of that scheme.
Nazadnje je Komisija na podlagi informacij Finske, da je pripravljena spremeniti shemo tako, da bo združljiva z notranjim trgom, Finsko v dopisu z dne 6. julija 2011 pozvala, naj potrdi svojo uradno zavezo o spremembi zakonodaje, ki predstavlja pravno podlago za zadevno shemo.
Finland replied positively by letter of 19 September 2011.
Finska je predložila pozitiven odgovor v dopisu z dne 19. septembra 2011.
Since then, this aid scheme has been deemed to be existing aid in the meaning of Article 88 of the EC Treaty (now Article 108(1) TFEU).
Od takrat ta shema pomoči velja za obstoječo pomoč v smislu člena 88 Pogodbe ES (zdaj člena 108(1) PDEU).
The beneficiaries of this insurance scheme are the fishing enterprises permanently exercising the fishing activity in Finland.
Upravičenci zadevne zavarovalne sheme so ribiška podjetja, ki stalno izvajajo ribolovno dejavnost na Finskem.
This insurance is provided by six fisheries insurance associations covering the whole of Finland.
To zavarovanje zagotavlja šest ribiških zavarovalnih družb, ki pokrivajo celo Finsko.
Each association covers a determined geographical area.
Vsaka družba pokriva določeno geografsko območje.
According to Article 7 of that law, an annual State aid payment is made to the fishery association amounting to a part of the claims which the association has paid out under insurance contracts covered by this law.
V skladu s členom 7 navedenega zakona se letno plačilo državne pomoči izvede za vsako ribiško družbo v višini dela zahtevkov, ki jih je družba plačala v skladu z zavarovalnimi pogodbami iz tega zakona.
According to Article 2, the claims may cover the following damages:
V skladu s členom 2 lahko zahtevki zajemajo naslednje vrste škode:
damages to nets, salmon-lines, longlines and to the anchors attached thereto, ropes and other ancillary gear,
poškodbe mrež, ribiških vrvic za losose, parangalov in sider, pritrjenih nanje, vrvi in druge pomožne opreme,
damages to fishing vessels registered in Finland,
poškodbe ribiških plovil, registriranih na Finskem,
damages to transport and haulage vehicles used for winter fishing on the ice, fishing huts and seine floating or trawling gear.
poškodbe transportnih in tovornih vozil, ki se uporabljajo za zimski ribolov na ledu, ribiških koč in opreme za plavajoče ali vlečne potegalke.
The law describes also the conditions required for the claims to be considered.
V zakonu so določeni tudi pogoji, ki morajo biti izpolnjeni za obravnavanje zahtevkov.
The following conditions are particularly relevant for the Commission’s assessment: the items insured must be sufficiently well-made and fully serviceable; the equipment must have been insured at application for its full value; the damage must be reliably shown.
Za oceno Komisije so pomembni predvsem naslednji pogoji: zavarovani elementi morajo biti dovolj dobro izdelani in v celoti delujoči; oprema mora biti ob uporabi zavarovana za svojo polno vrednost; škoda mora biti zanesljivo dokazana.
In its letter of 15 November 2004, Finland has explained how this aid scheme works in relation with the damages suffered by the fishing enterprises.
Finska je v dopisu z dne 15. novembra 2004 pojasnila, kako zadevna shema pomoči deluje v zvezi s škodo, ki jo imajo ribiška podjetja.
First, there is a franchise linked to the amount of the eligible claim, corresponding to 25 % in the case of damages not exceeding EUR 504,56 or a maximum of 5 % in the case of damages exceeding that figure; the subtraction of this franchise gives the amount of the compensation paid to the enterprise by the fisheries insurance association concerned.
Z zneskom upravičenega zahtevka je povezana franšiza v višini 25 %, če škoda ne presega 504,56 EUR, ali največ 5 %, če škoda presega navedeno vrednost; z odštetjem te franšize se izračuna znesek nadomestila, ki ga podjetju plača zadevna ribiška zavarovalna družba.
The reimbursement paid to the fisheries insurance association by the State is then equal to 40 % of the compensation paid out when the amount of damages is up to EUR 504,56 and 90 % when this amount is beyond EUR 504,56.
Povračilo, ki ga ribiški zavarovalni družbi plača država, je torej enako 40 % nadomestila, izplačanega v primeru zneska škode do 504,56 EUR, in 90 % v primeru zneska škode nad 504,56 EUR.
In its subsequent letter of 24 November 2005, Finland proposed that this scheme be amended so that State aid would be paid only to compensate for damages caused by the particular conditions pertaining in Finland, including the condition that the damage occurs north of the 59th parallel.
Finska je v naslednjem dopisu z dne 24. novembra 2005 predlagala, da se zadevna shema spremeni tako, da bi se državna pomoč plačala le za nadomestilo škode, povzročene zaradi posebnih pogojev, ki se nanašajo na Finsko, vključno s pogojem, da škoda nastane severno od 59. vzporednika.
Finland described in its letter of 15 November 2004 what it considers as specific conditions pertaining to Finland for the fishing activity.
Finska je v dopisu z dne 15. novembra 2004 opisala, kakšni so posebni pogoji za ribolovno dejavnost, ki se nanašajo na Finsko.
These conditions are caused by the climatic conditions with inter alia ice formation which can cause damage to both vessels and gear and freezing temperatures which can affect the engine of the vessel.
Ti pogoji so povezani s podnebnimi razmerami in med drugim vključujejo nastajanje ledu, ki lahko poškoduje plovila in opremo, ter temperature pod zmrziščem, ki lahko vplivajo na delovanje motorja plovila.
These specific conditions are aggravated by factors such as the marine topography of Finland with shallow waters and uneven sea bottom in a dense archipelago; in these conditions, the risks of shipwreck associated with storms and currents in icy conditions is rather high.
Te posebne pogoje dodatno otežujejo dejavniki, kot je morska topografija Finske s plitvim morjem in neravnim morskim dnom na območjih s številnimi otoki; v takšnih pogojih je tveganje brodoloma, povezano z nevihtami in tokovi ob ledenem mrazu, precej visoko.
In addition, there is a large seal population which cause significant losses to the fishing industry by damaging the gear; damages can also sometimes be caused to the gear (gill nets) by the cormorants.
Poleg tega na območju Finske živi velika populacija tjulnjev, ki s poškodovanjem opreme povzročajo velike izgube za ribiško industrijo; opremo (zabodne mreže) včasih poškodujejo tudi kormorani.
From the year 2004 to the year 2009, the annual number of events which have resulted in compensation, the global annual compensation paid by the fisheries insurance associations and the part reimbursed by the State are as follows:
V obdobju 2004–2009 je letno število dogodkov, v zvezi s katerimi je bilo izplačano nadomestilo, globalno letno nadomestilo, ki ga plačajo ribiške zavarovalne družbe, in del, ki ga povrne država, naslednje:
Enterprises covered
Zajeta podjetja
Compensation paid (EUR)
Izplačano nadomestilo (v EUR)
Reimbursement by the State (EUR)
Povračilo države (v EUR)
The payments made by the associations are related around 50 % to the gear, 45 % to the vessels and 5 % to the other equipment.
Plačila, ki so jih izvedle zavarovalne družbe, so povezana z opremo (približno 50 %), plovili (45 %) in drugo opremo (5 %).
As indicated above [9], this aid scheme was notified to the Commission in 1995 on the basis of Article 144 (a) of the Treaty of Accession of the Republic of Finland to the European Union and subsequently was deemed to be existing aid within the meaning of Article 88(1) of the EC Treaty.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj [9], je bila Komisija o tej shemi pomoči obveščena leta 1995 na podlagi člena 144(a) Pogodbe o pristopu Republike Finske k Evropski uniji, zato je shema pozneje veljala za obstoječo pomoč v smislu člena 88(1) Pogodbe ES.
The Guidelines which were applying until the 2004 revision contained a specific provision on aid for insurance premiums and it was on that basis that this aid scheme was considered compatible with the internal market.
Smernice, ki so se uporabljale do sprememb leta 2004, so vsebovale posebno določbo o pomoči za zavarovalne premije, na podlagi česar je zadevna shema pomoči veljala za združljivo z notranjim trgom.
That provision was taken out with the 2004 revision.
Ta določba je bila črtana s spremembo leta 2004.
The Commission considered in the initiating of this procedure that the damages covered by the Fisheries Insurance Scheme cannot be considered caused by an exceptional occurrence or a natural disaster but rather caused by a permanent and structural situation, that is to say the permanent and structural context within which fishing activity is exercised in Finnish waters.
Komisija je ob začetku tega postopka menila, da se za škodo, ki jo krije ribiška zavarovalna shema, ne more šteti, da je bila povzročena zaradi izjemnega dogodka ali naravne nesreče, ampak se šteje, da je bila povzročena zaradi stalnih in strukturnih razmer, tj. stalnega in strukturnega položaja, v katerem se izvaja ribolovna dejavnost v finskih vodah.
For that reason, in accordance with the Guidelines [10], the Commission considered that this aid was an operating aid which is in principle incompatible since it has the effect to increase the business liquidity of the enterprises which benefit from it and was granted without imposing any obligation on the part of recipients.
Zato je Komisija v skladu s Smernicami [10] menila, da je ta pomoč operativna pomoč, ki je načeloma nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, ker je njen učinek povečevanje poslovne likvidnosti podjetij, ki to pomoč prejmejo, in je bila dodeljena brez uvedbe obveznosti za prejemnike.
The Commission did not agree with the argumentation of the Finnish authorities which justified this aid scheme by qualifying it as a service of general economic interest in the sense of Article 106(2) of the TFEU.
Komisija se ni strinjala z utemeljitvijo finskih organov, ki so shemo pomoči upravičevali tako, da so jo opredelili kot storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 106(2) PDEU.
Finland did not provide any specific argument justifying that the provision of insurance to fisheries undertakings could be qualified as a service of that kind and the Commission did not find, with regard to the characteristics of that scheme, that it could be qualified as such.
Finska ni predložila nobene posebne utemeljitve, na podlagi katere bi se lahko zagotovitev zavarovanja ribiškim podjetjem štela za takšno storitev, pri čemer Komisija glede na značilnosti zadevne sheme ni menila, da bi se ta lahko štela za takšno storitev.
In particular, the Commission observed that the fisheries insurance associations provide insurance services to only a specific group of enterprises having an economic activity consisting in the production of goods sold on the market, those active in the fishing sector.
Komisija je zlasti ugotovila, da ribiške zavarovalne družbe opravljajo zavarovalniške storitve le za posebno skupino podjetij, katerih gospodarska dejavnost vključuje proizvodnjo blaga, prodajanega na trgu, in ki so dejavna v ribiškem sektorju.
The Commission had therefore strong doubts that the providing of commercial insurance to a selected group of economic undertakings might qualify as a service of general economic interest.
Zato Komisija močno dvomi, da se lahko zagotavljanje komercialnega zavarovanja izbrani skupini gospodarskih podjetij šteje kot storitev splošnega gospodarskega interesa.
COMMENTS FROM THE FINNISH AUTHORITIES AND FROM THE THIRD PARTIES INTERESTED
PRIPOMBE FINSKIH ORGANOV IN ZAINTERESIRANIH TRETJIH STRANI
Comments from the Finnish authorities
Pripombe finskih organov
The Finnish authorities have reminded the main characteristics of the functioning of this insurance system.
Finski organi so opozorili na glavne značilnosti delovanja zadevnega zavarovalnega sistema.
They have also brought a thorough description of the specific conditions that the fishing industry is facing in Finland: specific climatic conditions with ice and darkness in winter, the topography of the coastal waters with shallow waters and uneven sea-bottom, the existence of a large seal population.
Prav tako so podrobno opisali posebne pogoje, s katerimi se srečuje ribiška industrija na Finskem: posebne podnebne razmere z ledom in temo pozimi, topografija obalnih voda s plitvo vodo in neravnim morskim dnom, velika populacija tjulnjev.
They have also brought information on the lack of offer for coverage insurance from the private insurance sector to the fishing industry with the same level of coverage for this kind of damages.
Predložili so tudi podatke o pomanjkanju ponudbe za kritje zavarovanja za ribiško industrijo iz zasebnega zavarovalniškega sektorja z enako stopnjo kritja za navedene vrste škode.
To support their position, they have attached to their reply a letter from the Finnish Confederation of the Financial Sector Finanssialan Keskusliitto.
V podporo svojemu stališču so odgovoru priložili dopis Finske konfederacije finančnega sektorja Finanssialan Keskusliitto.
In addition, they have indicated that the value of the imports corresponds to 6,8 times the value of the exports.
Poleg tega so navedli, da je bila vrednost uvoza 6,8-krat večja od vrednosti izvoza.
The annual consumption of Finnish fish has decreased between 2000 and 2009 from 6,1 to 4,5 kg while the one of imported fish has increased from 6,6 to 11,2 kg.
Letna poraba finskih rib se je med letoma 2000 in 2009 s zmanjšala 6,1 kg na 4,5 kg, medtem ko se je poraba uvoženih rib povečala s 6,6 kg na 11,2 kg.
According to the Finnish authorities, this shows that this State aid scheme cannot have any negative effect on competition.
Po mnenju finskih organov to kaže, da zadevna shema državne pomoči ne more negativno vplivati na konkurenco.
The Finnish authorities remind that the Commission, in its decision for the initiating of the procedure, observed that the deletion of the provision on aid for insurance premiums in the Guidelines 2004 meant that this kind of State aid was not anymore allowed.
Finski organi opozarjajo, da je Komisija v odločitvi o začetku postopka ugotovila, da črtanje določbe o pomoči za zavarovalne premije v Smernicah iz leta 2004 pomeni, da takšna državna pomoč ni več dovoljena.
The Finnish authorities do not agree with that position.
Finski organi se s tem stališčem ne strinjajo.
First of all, this insurance scheme remains fully justified by the specific climatic and geographic conditions occurring to Finnish waters.
Ta zavarovalna shema je še vedno v celoti upravičena zaradi posebnih podnebnih in geografskih pogojev, ki so značilni za finske vode.
In addition, this scheme was considered compatible in 2000, although such aid was not among those listed as allowed to be considered compatible by the Guidelines 1997 [11] which were applying at that time, in a context which is similar to the one existing from 2004 with the Guidelines 2004 and 2008.
Poleg tega je shema veljala za združljivo leta 2000, čeprav takšna pomoč ni bila navedena med vrstami pomoči, ki so veljale za združljive s Smernicami iz leta 1997 [11], ki so se takrat uporabljale, in sicer v podobnem okviru, kot je okvir od leta 2004 s Smernicami iz let 2004 in 2008.
However, in these comments, Finland indicates that it is ready to modify its scheme as follows:
Finska v pripombah vseeno navaja, da je pripravljena svojo shemo spremeniti v skladu z naslednjimi točkami:
exclusion of the vessels exercising fishing in open sea, which means in practice the exclusion of the vessels over 12 metres long,
izključitev plovil, ki izvajajo ribolov na odprtem morju, kar v praksi pomeni izključitev plovil, daljših od 12 m,
eligibility only for damages suffered in territorial waters of Finland or in its economic exclusive zone,
upravičenost le za škodo, nastalo v teritorialnih vodah Finske ali njeni izključni ekonomski coni,
coverage of the damages which are caused only by the specific conditions of Finland and thus caused by the adverse climatic or geographical conditions (ice, snow, strong storms, reefs in shallow waters) or by the seals and cormorants, and suffered by the vessels and fishing gear as well as transport and haulage vehicles and other specific equipment used for winter fishing.
kritje le za škode, ki nastanejo zaradi posebnih pogojev na Finskem in so torej posledica slabih podnebnih ali geografskih pogojev (led, sneg, hude nevihte, grebeni v plitvih vodah) ali jih povzročijo tjulnji in kormorani, na plovilih ali ribiški opremi, transportnih in tovornih vozilih ter drugi posebni opremi, ki se uporablja za zimski ribolov.
The new Fisheries Insurance Scheme would then enter into force on 1 January 2013.
Nova ribiška zavarovalna shema bi potem začela veljati 1. januarja 2013.
As indicated above [12], the Finnish authorities confirmed by letter of 19 September 2011 their commitment to amend the legislation which constitutes the legal basis of that scheme.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj [12], so finski organi v dopisu z dne 19. septembra 2011 potrdili svojo zavezo za spremembo zakonodaje, ki je pravna podlaga za zadevno shemo.
For that purpose, they consider that these changes in these contracts could be done by 1 January 2014 and the amended conditions be applied to the aid granted to the insurers from that date onwards.
Zato menijo, da bodo spremembe teh pogodb lahko izvedene do 1. januarja 2014, spremenjeni pogoji pa se bodo za pomoč, odobreno zavarovateljem, uporabljali od tega datuma naprej.
Two fishermen’s associations sent comments to the Commission: Suoman Ammattikalastajaliitto and Katatalouden Keskuliitto.
Komisiji sta pripombe predložili dve združenji ribičev: Suoman Ammattikalastajaliitto in Katatalouden Keskuliitto.
On the same line than the Finnish authorities, both associations put the emphasis on the specific conditions of fishing in Finland and the unavailability of insurance offer for the damages covered.
Enako kot finski organi obe združenji poudarjata posebne pogoje za ribolov na Finskem in nerazpoložljivost ponudb zavarovanja za zajeto škodo.
One of them (Suoman Ammattikalastajaliitto) observed that the Commission has not provided any evidence that this aid scheme is likely to affect competition between Member States, noting in particular that professional fishing is currently the source of only 7 % of the fish consumed in the country and Finland’s fishing industry and fish market are therefore dependent on imported fish.
Eno od združenj (Suoman Ammattikalastajaliitto) je ugotovilo, da Komisija ni predložila dokazov, da bo ta shema pomoči verjetno vplivala na konkurenco med državami članicami, pri čemer je zlasti navedlo, da je poklicno ribištvo trenutno vir le za 7 % porabljenih rib v državi, zato sta ribiška industrija in trg za ribiške proizvode na Finskem odvisna od uvoženih rib.
For that reason, this association regards the preliminary conclusion expressed in the initiating of the procedure as unfounded.
Zato to združenje meni, da je predhodna ugotovitev, izražena ob začetku postopka, neutemeljena.
The Fisheries Insurance Associations support also the position expressed by the Finnish authorities.
Ribiške zavarovalne družbe podpirajo tudi stališče finskih organov.
They point out that fishing industry in Finnish waters is facing very specific climatic and geographic conditions.
Poudarjajo, da se ribiška industrija v finskih vodah srečuje z zelo posebnimi podnebnimi in geografskimi pogoji.
They indicate that this insurance system was established because of the lack of offer from the private insurance sector which was not ready to cover such risks for the fishing activity which is an activity of marginal importance.
Navajajo, da je bil zadevni zavarovalni sistem vzpostavljen zaradi pomanjkanja ponudbe zasebnega zavarovalniškega sektorja, ki ni bil pripravljen kriti takšnih tveganj za ribolovno dejavnost, ki spada med manj pomembne dejavnosti.
In addition, the Fisheries Insurance Associations are obliged to insure all fishermen established in the region of their competence.
Poleg tega so ribiške zavarovalne družbe obvezane, da zavarujejo vse ribiče iz regije svoje pristojnosti.
Article 107(1) of the TFEU states that ‘Save as otherwise provided in the Treaties, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market’.
Člen 107(1) PDEU določa, da „...razen če Pogodbi ne določata drugače, je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva z notranjim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The compensation paid to the fishing enterprises by the fisheries insurance associations comes partly from monies granted to these associations by the State.
Nadomestilo, ki ga ribiške zavarovalne družbe plačajo ribiškim podjetjem, delno izhaja iz sredstev, ki jih tem družbam odobri država.
These monies come from the State budget.
Ta sredstva se črpajo iz državnega proračuna.
As this compensation brings a financial advantage to the enterprises of the fishing sector, it is a sectorial advantage granted through State resources.
Ker to nadomestilo za podjetja v ribiškem sektorju pomeni finančno prednost, je to sektorska prednost, zagotovljena z državnimi viri.