natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The exemption from registration charges according to Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 does constitute State aid.
Oprostitev plačila registracijskih taks v skladu s členom 11(1) Zakona št. 21/92 pomeni državno pomoč.
However, as referred to later in recitals 160 and 161 of this Decision, these exemptions would, in any event, be justified as a legitimate compensation for the costs of the provision of a service of general economic interest costs under Article 106(2) TFEU.
Vendar pa bi bile te oprostitve, kot je kasneje navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 160–161 tega sklepa, v vsakem primeru upravičene kot ustrezno nadomestilo za stroške opravljanja storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena na podlagi člena 106(2) PDEU.
Permanent exemption in accordance with Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92
Trajna oprostitev v skladu s členom 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92
However, the wording of Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92 covers all further inscription, registration or annotation acts which, in accordance with that Article, may be effectuated free of charge for an unlimited amount of time.
Vendar besedilo člena 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92 zajema vse nadaljnje vpise, registracije in zaznambe, ki se lahko v skladu s tem členom brezplačno izvedejo za neomejeno časovno obdobje.
Such a permanent exemption also confers an advantage on RTP by relieving it of charges which it otherwise would have to bear from its own budget.
Taka trajna oprostitev prav tako daje prednost javni televiziji RTP, saj le-ta tako ni imela stroškov, ki bi jih v nasprotnem primeru morala kriti iz lastnega proračuna.
The argument by Portugal that to its knowledge Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92 has never been applied and RTP paid all necessary charges, is evidence which is relevant in a potential recovery of State aid, but does not alter the finding on the provision’s wording.
Trditev Portugalske, da po njej znanih podatkih člen 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92 nikoli ni bil uporabljen in da je javna televizija RTP plačala vse potrebne stroške, je dokaz, ki je sicer pomemben v primeru morebitnega povračila državne pomoči, vendar ne spremeni ugotovitve glede besedila določbe.
That advantage is also selective, as Law No 21/92 refers to RTP.
Ta prednost je tudi selektivna, saj se Zakon št. 21/92 nanaša na javno televizijo RTP.
Portugal cannot claim that Law No 21/92 is the mere application of a general rule of Portuguese law.
Portugalska ne more trditi, da Zakon št. 21/92 pomeni zgolj izvajanje splošnega pravila portugalske zakonodaje.
In particular, Articles 1 and 2 of Decree-Law No 404/90 cannot be used in order to prove the absence of selectivity as the decree-law deals with acts of concentration and, thus, does not cover this Case which concerns the transformation of a public undertaking into a public limited company [67].
Zlasti za dokazovanje neobstoja selektivnosti ni mogoče uporabiti člena 1 in 2 Uredbe z zakonsko močjo št. 404/90, saj ta uredba z zakonsko močjo obravnava koncentracijo in zato ne zajema te zadeve, ki obravnava preoblikovanje javnega podjetja v javno delniško družbo [67].
However, the wide scope of Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92 does not preclude that exemptions from notarial requirements (and costs) would be possible for other situations than the 1992 transformation of RTP into a public limited company.
Vendar široko področje uporabe člena 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92 ne izključuje, da so oprostitve zahtev po notarskem zapisu (in plačila notarskih stroškov) možne tudi v drugih primerih in ne samo pri preoblikovanju javne televizije RTP v javno delniško družbo leta 1992.
It is sufficient to state that a permanent exemption in favour of one company (or one group of companies such as public limited companies) from various registration charges can never be within the nature and logic of a legal system [68].
Zadošča ugotovitev, da trajna oprostitev plačila registracijskih taks v korist enega podjetja (ali ene skupine podjetij, npr. javnih delniških družb) nikoli ne more biti v okviru narave in logike pravnega sistema [68].
Conclusion: It should be concluded that the permanent exemption for RTP resulting from Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92 constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Sklepna ugotovitev: skleniti je treba, da trajna oprostitev za javno televizijo RTP na podlagi člena 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92 pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Social security settlement (debt rescheduling and interest waiver): After considering the comments from third parties and Portugal, the Commission concludes that the initial agreement between the body responsible for the social security scheme and RTP cannot be regarded as representing typical behaviour of a private operator.
Dogovor glede socialne varnosti (odlog plačila dolga in odpoved zamudnim obrestim): Komisija je preučila pripombe tretjih strani in Portugalske ter ugotovila, da prvotnega dogovora med organom, pristojnim za shemo socialne varnosti, in javno televizijo RTP ni mogoče šteti za dogovor, ki predstavlja običajno ravnanje zasebnega operaterja.
The dispute was whether or not the interpretation of certain social security rules as laid down in Implementing Decree No 12/83 was legally correct.
Vprašanje je bilo, ali je razlaga nekaterih pravil socialne varnosti iz Izvedbene uredbe št. 12/83, pravno pravilna.
The agreement confirmed RTP’s interpretation, which was supported by the analysis of a tax expert who concluded that the Implementing Decree was unconstitutional.
Z dogovorom je bila potrjena razlaga javne televizije RTP, ki je bila podprta z analizo davčnega strokovnjaka, ki je ugotovil, da je bila Izvedbena uredba neustavna.
However, the Implementing Decree was not revoked following the agreement.
Vendar Izvedbena uredba po dogovoru ni bila razveljavljena.
Therefore, it must be concluded that the measure was selectively applied to RTP without affecting the applicability of the social security scheme’s interpretation in relation to other companies.
Zato je treba skleniti, da se je ukrep selektivno uporabljal za javno televizijo RTP, ne da bi pri tem vplival na uporabo razlage sheme socialne varnosti v zvezi z drugimi družbami.
The Commission cannot accept the Portugal’s claim that the authorisation for the debt rescheduling and for the waiver of fines and interest was given within the framework of a general system applicable to all undertakings in a similar situation on the basis of Decree-Law No 411/91 and therefore did not confer a specific advantage on RTP.
Komisija se ne more strinjati s trditvijo Portugalske, da sta bila odlog plačila dolga ter odpoved globam in zamudnim obrestim odobrena v okviru splošnega sistema, ki se na podlagi Uredbe z zakonsko močjo št. 411/91 uporablja za vsa podjetja v podobnem položaju, in zato ta odobritev javni televiziji RTP ni dodelila nobene posebne ugodnosti..
Without prejudging the selective or general nature of such a scheme, the purpose of this Decision is to determine whether the application of the scheme to RTP was selective.
Ne glede na selektivno ali splošno naravo take sheme je namen tega sklepa ugotoviti, ali je bila uporaba sheme za javno televizijo RTP selektivna.
In order to prove that the rescheduling is indispensable to ensure the viability of the company, Decree-Law No 411/91 requires a financial/economic study to be carried out.
V skladu z Uredbo z zakonsko močjo št. 411/91 je treba za dokazovanje, da je odlog plačila dolga nujen za zagotovitev uspešnega poslovanja družbe, izvesti finančno/ekonomsko študijo.
RTP never carried out such a study of its viability pursuant to Article 2(3) of Decree-Law No 411/91.
Javna televizija RTP ni nikdar izvedla take študije svojega uspešnega poslovanja v skladu s členom 2(3) Uredbe z zakonsko močjo št. 411/91.
Furthermore, the condition laid down in Article 2(1)(d) of Decree-Law No 411/91 was not applicable to RTP as the debt regularisation did not follow state intervention.
Poleg tega pogoj iz člena 2(1)(d) Uredbe z zakonsko močjo št. 411/91 ni veljal za javno televizijo RTP, ker reguliranje dolga ni potekalo po posredovanju države.
The Commission does not accept Portugal’s claim that the history of State intervention affected the operation of the debtor enterprise and that RTP was governed by statutory rules at the time of the State intervention.
Komisija se ne strinja s trditvijo Portugalske, da je zgodovina posredovanja države vplivala na delovanje dolžniškega podjetja in da so za javno televizijo RTP v času posredovanja države veljale zakonske določbe.
Therefore, the measure was applied in a selective manner to RTP.
Zato se je ta ukrep selektivno uporabil za javno televizijo RTP.
By granting the debt rescheduling, the Portugal should have acted in the same way as a public or private creditor that seeks to recover sums due to it and, to that end, concludes debt rescheduling agreements to facilitate payment [70].
Ob odobritvi odloga plačila dolga bi morala Portugalska ravnati enako kot javni ali zasebni upnik, ki si skuša povrniti dolgovane zneske in zato, da bi pospešil plačilo, sklene pogodbe o odlogu plačila dolga [70].
The rate of default interest applied by the State should be equal to the rate a private creditor would apply in similar circumstances.
Stopnja zamudnih obresti, ki jih je uporabila država, bi morala biti enaka stopnji, ki bi jo zasebni upnik uporabil v podobnih okoliščinah.
The Commission considers that a private creditor that pursued the recovery of the debt by legal means would obtain at least the statutory interest rate.
Komisija meni, da bi zasebni upnik, ki bi si prizadeval za povračilo dolga s pravnimi sredstvi, prejel vsaj zakonsko določeno obrestno mero.
Therefore, by not requiring any interest payments at all, despite available enforcement mechanisms, Portugal did not act in the same way a private creditor would have acted in order to maximise the rate of interest.
Zato Portugalska, ki kljub razpoložljivim izvršilnim mehanizmom ni zahtevala nobenih plačil obresti, ni ravnala enako, kot bi ravnal zasebni upnik, ki bi obrestno mero čim bolj zvišal.
Therefore, it seems that the measure conferred a specific advantage on RTP.
Zato se zdi, da je bila z ukrepom javni televiziji RTP dodeljena posebna ugodnost.
Capital increases: After considering the comments from third parties and Portugal, the Commission concludes that the capital increases in the period from 1994 to 1997 provided a financial advantage for RTP.
Povečanja kapitala: Komisija je po presoji pripomb tretjih strank in Portugalske ugotovila, da so povečanja kapitala v obdobju 1994–1997 javni televiziji RTP zagotovila finančno ugodnost.
As can be seen from Table 3 in recital 40, considering the weak financial position of RTP in the period when the capital increases were made, no private investor would have injected capital into the company as no normal return could be expected from the company within a reasonable time.
Kot je razvidno iz preglednice 3 v uvodni izjavi 40 in ob upoštevanju slabega finančnega položaja javne televizije RTP v obdobju, ko so bila povečanja kapitala izvedena, noben zasebni vlagatelj ne bi vložil kapitala v družbo, pri kateri v razumnem času ne bi bilo mogoče pričakovati običajnega donosa.
In fact, despite the capital injections, RTP’s financial position deteriorated.
Dejansko se je finančni položaj javne televizije RTP kljub finančnim injekcijam poslabšal.
Neither Portugal nor third parties have alleged that Portugal acted as a private investor when injecting capital into the company.
Niti Portugalska niti tretje strani niso trdile, da je Portugalska z vložitvijo kapitala v družbo ravnala kot zasebni vlagatelj.
Loan 1998: The Commission cannot accept Portugal’s claim that the loan granted in 1998 was in conformity with market conditions.
Posojilo v letu 1998: Komisija se ne strinja s trditvijo Portugalske, da je bilo posojilo, odobreno v letu 1998, v skladu s tržnimi pogoji.
For the loan not to constitute State aid, the conditions attached to it (namely, the security sought and the interest rate) should reflect the inherent risk of lending to an undertaking [71].
Da posojilo ne bi pomenilo državne pomoči, bi morali priloženi pogoji (zahtevano jamstvo in obrestna mera) odražati dejansko tveganje posojila podjetju [71].
The risk, and consequently the interest rate, are higher when a company is in an economic and financial situation the soundness of which is below the level at which a financial institution would lend to it.
Tveganje in s tem obrestna mera sta višja, če je družba v gospodarskem in finančnem položaju, ki ni dovolj stabilen, da bi ji finančna ustanova odobrila posojilo.
As can be seen from Table 3 in recital 40, at the time the loan was agreed, RTP was in severe financial difficulties to the extent that its debts exceeded the value of its assets and its net equity was negative.
Kot je razvidno iz preglednice 3 v uvodni izjavi 40, je bila javna televizija RTP v času, ko je bilo posojilo odobreno, v tako hudih finančnih težavah, da so njeni dolgovi presegli vrednost njenega premoženja in je bil njen neto lastniški kapital negativen.
Firstly, it should be borne in mind that the loan was a subordinated loan, that is to say, it had no asset-based security and, in the case of bankruptcy, it ranked for repayment purposes after all creditors but before shareholders.
Prvič, upoštevati je treba, da je bilo posojilo podrejeno, torej ni imelo zavarovanja na podlagi premoženja, v primeru bankrota pa je bilo za poplačilo za vsemi upniki, vendar pred delničarji.
The absence of appropriate asset-based security was a clear indication that the loan was not granted at market conditions and that State aid was involved.
Odsotnost ustreznega zavarovanja na podlagi premoženja je bil jasen kazalnik, da posojilo ni bilo odobreno v skladu s tržnimi pogoji in da je bila prisotna državna pomoč.
In view of RTP’s technical bankruptcy at the time the loan was granted, no financial institution would have awarded a subordinated loan to it as there was little likelihood of RTP being able to repay it.
Zaradi tehničnega bankrota javni televiziji RTP nobena finančna ustanova ne bi odobrila podrejenega posojila, ker je bila verjetnost, da bo javna televizija RTP lahko posojilo vrnila, majhna.
Indeed, the loan was not granted by a private financial institution but by the Public Debt Stabilisation Fund.
V resnici posojila ni odobrila zasebna finančna ustanova, ampak Sklad za stabilizacijo javnega dolga.
Secondly, it may be argued that the interest rate applied to the loan clearly does not reflect its intrinsic risk.
Drugič, mogoče je trditi, da obrestna mera, ki je veljala za posojilo, očitno ne odraža dejanskega tveganja posojila.
Not only is it below the reference rate that the Commission normally uses to calculate the State aid element in interest subsidy schemes for loans [72], but also a normal market operator would require, on the top of ‘sound’ guarantees, an interest rate that compensated for such a high risk of non-repayment.
Ne samo, da je bila pod referenčno mero, ki jo Komisija običajno uporablja za izračun elementa državne pomoči v shemah subvencioniranja obresti za posojila [72], temveč bi tudi običajen tržni operater poleg „dobrih“ jamstev zahteval obrestno mero, ki bi izravnala tako veliko tveganje nevračila.
Given that RTP’s financial position was such that it would not have been able to obtain a subordinated loan under normal circumstances, the loan effectively equates to the payment of a grant and constitutes an advantage for RTP.
Glede na to, da je bil finančni položaj javne televizije RTP tak, da v običajnih okoliščinah ne bi mogla pridobiti podrejenega posojila, se to posojilo enači z nepovratnimi sredstvi in pomeni prednost za javno televizijo RTP.
Accordingly, the Commission considers that the debt rescheduling with the social security scheme, the capital injections in the period from 1994 to 1997 and the loan granted in 1998 provided a financial and economic advantage as compared with competitors that did not receive the same funds.
V skladu s tem Komisija meni, da odlog plačila dolga shemi socialne varnosti, kapitalske injekcije v obdobju 1994–1997 in posojilo, odobreno v letu 1998, v primerjavi s konkurenti, ki niso prejeli enakih denarnih sredstev, predstavljajo finančno in gospodarsko prednost.
Since the Portuguese television market was open to competition by 1992 at the latest, there were competitors on the market during the period that RTP benefited from the different measures.
Ker je bil portugalski televizijski trg za konkurenco odprt najkasneje leta 1992, so bili v času, ko je imela javna televizija RTP korist od različnih ukrepov, na trgu prisotni konkurenčni ponudniki.
In February 1992, broadcasting licences were granted to the commercial broadcasters SIC and TVI and in October 1992 SIC started broadcasting in Portugal.
Februarja 1992 sta komercialni televiziji SIC in TVI pridobili licenci za oddajanje, oktobra 1992 pa je komercialna televizija SIC začela z oddajanjem programa na Portugalskem.
The Commission does not accept Portugal’s claim that the agreement on the debt with the social security scheme would fall outside the concept of State aid, as the debt itself had been created before the Portuguese broadcasting market was opened up to competition.
Komisija se ne strinja s trditvijo Portugalske, da dogovor glede odloga plačila dolga s shemo socialne varnosti ne spada v pojem državne pomoči, ker je dolg nastal, preden je bil portugalski radiodifuzijski trg odprt za konkurenco.
The financial advantage was granted to RTP in May 1993 after the opening-up of the broadcasting market and was therefore able to confer an economic advantage on RTP.
Finančna ugodnost je bila javni televiziji RTP dodeljena maja 1993, po odprtju radiodifuzijskega trga, in je zato javni televiziji RTP lahko dodelila gospodarsko prednost.
Accordingly, it should be concluded that the measures granted by Portugal were able to confer an economic and financial advantage on RTP compared with competitors not receiving the same funds and thereby to distort competition within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
V skladu s tem je treba skleniti, da so ukrepi, ki jih je odobrila Portugalska, javni televiziji RTP v primerjavi s konkurenčnimi ponudniki, ki niso prejeli enakih denarnih sredstev, lahko dodelili finančno in gospodarsko prednost in so zato lahko izkrivljali konkurenco v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
State measures fall within the scope of Article 107(1) TFEU in so far as they affect trade between Member States.
Državni ukrepi spadajo na področje uporabe člena 107(1) PDEU, če vplivajo na trgovino med državami članicami.
This is the case whenever the activities in question are subject to trade between Member States.
To velja vedno, ko so zadevne dejavnosti predmet trgovine med državami članicami.
In this case, the beneficiary, RTP, is itself active on the international market.
V tem primeru je upravičenka, javna televizija RTP, sama aktivna na mednarodnem trgu.
Indeed, through the European Broadcasting Union it exchanges television programmes and participates in the Eurovision system [73].
Dejansko preko Evropske radiodifuzijske unije izmenjuje televizijske programe in sodeluje v sistemu Evrovizije [73].
Furthermore, RTP is in direct competition with commercial broadcasters that are active on the international broadcasting market and have an international ownership structure [74].
Poleg tega javna televizija RTP neposredno konkurira zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa, ki so aktivni na mednarodnem radiodifuzijskem trgu in imajo mednarodno lastniško strukturo [74].
Accordingly, it can be concluded that the measures granted to RTP by Portugal affect trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
V skladu s tem se lahko sklene, da ukrepi, ki jih je Portugalska odobrila javni televiziji RTP, vplivajo na trgovino med državami članicami v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
Conclusion on the State aid nature of the ad hoc measures
Sklepna ugotovitev glede značaja državne pomoči, ki ga imajo začasni ukrepi
It transpires from the above that, leaving aside possible public service obligations imposed on RTP, the following measures involve State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU:
Brez upoštevanja morebitnih obveznosti opravljanja javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, iz zgoraj navedenega sledi, da državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU vključujejo naslednji ukrepi:
the debt rescheduling with the social security scheme,
odlog plačila dolga shemi socialne varnosti,
the capital injections during the period from 1994 to 1997, and
kapitalske injekcije med obdobjem 1994–1997 in
the loan granted in 1998.
posojilo iz leta 1998.
Likewise, the temporary exemption from registration charges in accordance with Article 11(1) of Law No 21/92 and the permanent exemption from registration and other charges in accordance with Article 11(2) of Law No 21/92 constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Prav tako začasna oprostitev plačila registracijskih taks v skladu s členom 11(1) Zakona št. 21/92 in trajna oprostitev plačila registracijskih taks in drugih stroškov v skladu s členom 11(2) Zakona št. 21/92 pomenita državno pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) PDEU.
However, as referred to in recitals 44-48 of this Decision, RTP is entrusted with a public service broadcasting obligation.
Vendar je, kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 44–48 tega sklepa, javna televizija RTP zadolžena za obveznosti javne službe.
In the Case of Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (‘the Altmark case’), the Court of Justice held that State measures compensating for public service costs do not qualify as State aid under Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, (now Article 107(1) TFEU) when the following four conditions are all satisfied [75]:
V zadevi Altmark Trans GmbH in Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg proti Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, in Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sodba v zadevi Altmark) je Sodišče odločilo, da državni ukrepi za nadomestilo stroškov javne službe ne pomenijo državne pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES (zdaj člena 107(1) PDEU), če so izpolnjeni naslednji štirje pogoji [75]:
the recipient undertaking must actually have public service obligations to discharge, and the obligations must be clearly defined;
podjetje, ki prejema nadomestilo, mora dejansko izvajati obveznosti javne službe in te obveznosti morajo biti jasno opredeljene;
the parameters on the basis of which the compensation is calculated must be established in advance in an objective and transparent manner;
merila, na podlagi katerih se izračuna nadomestilo, morajo biti določena vnaprej ter objektivno in pregledno;
the compensation cannot exceed what is necessary to cover all or some of the costs incurred in the discharge of public service obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit for discharging those obligations;
nadomestilo ne sme presegati tistega, kar je potrebno za kritje vseh ali nekaterih stroškov, ki so nastali z izpolnjevanjem obveznosti javne službe, ob upoštevanju realiziranih prejemkov in razumnega dobička;
when the company is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure, the level of compensation needed must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately equipped, would have incurred in discharging those obligations.
če podjetje ni izbrano s postopkom oddaje javnega naročila, je treba raven potrebnega nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi jih imelo povprečno, dobro vodeno in ustrezno opremljeno podjetje pri izvajanju teh obveznosti.
Leaving aside the conditions referred to the first and the third conditions, the ad hoc measures (see recital 143 of this Decision) do not seem to fulfil the second and fourth condition of the Altmark judgment for the following reasons:
Če pustimo prvi in tretji pogoj ob strani, začasni ukrepi (glej uvodno izjavo 143 tega sklepa) ne izpolnjujejo drugega in četrtega pogoja sodbe v zadevi Altmark, ker: