natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Several interested parties claimed that the investigation cannot cover two products with different physical, chemical and technical characteristics, and therefore modules and cells should be subject to two separate investigations.
Več zainteresiranih strani je trdilo, da preiskava ne more zajemati dveh izdelkov z različnimi fizikalnimi, kemičnimi in tehničnimi lastnostmi ter da bi zato morali biti moduli in celice obravnavani v dveh ločenih preiskavah.
Moreover, they claimed that it is unclear whether the investigation covers one single product or two separate products and therefore they have no full opportunity to defend their interests.
Poleg tega so trdile, da ni jasno, ali preiskava zajema en sam izdelek ali dva ločena izdelka, in da zato nimajo zadostne možnosti, da bi branile svoje interese.
The cell-module production is one single production process with different production steps.
Pri proizvodnji celic in modulov gre za en sam proizvodni proces z različnimi proizvodnimi stopnjami.
Cells determine the characteristics of the finished product (i.e. modules).
Celice določajo lastnosti končnega izdelka (tj. modulov).
The investigation showed that the cells production is directly and exclusively dedicated to produce modules; modules and cells share the same physical, chemical and technical characteristics (determined by the raw material used) and have the same basic end uses, i.e. are sold for integration into PV solar systems.
Preiskava je pokazala, da je proizvodnja celic namenjena neposredno in izključno proizvodnji modulov; moduli in celice imajo enake fizikalne, kemične in tehnične lastnosti (ki jih določajo uporabljene surovine) ter enako osnovno končno uporabo, in sicer se prodajajo za integracijo v fotonapetostne sisteme.
The modules performance is directly linked to the performance of the cells.
Delovanje modulov je neposredno povezano z delovanjem celic.
The Notice of Initiation clearly expressed that modules and cells constitute the product under investigation.
V obvestilu o začetku je jasno navedeno, da moduli in celice pomenijo izdelek v preiskavi.
Different nomenclature
Različna nomenklatura
It was further claimed that modules and cells could not be considered as a single product as they have several different eight-digit CN codes, six-digit subheading and four-digit HS heading.
Strani so nadalje trdile, da modulov in celic ni mogoče obravnavati kot en sam izdelek, saj imajo različne osemmestne oznake KN, šestmestne podštevilke in štirimestne številke HS.
In this respect it is noted that both cells and modules can be declared under customs heading 85414090, while the customs headings under heading 8501 are for electric generators in general and not in particular for solar products.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da se lahko celice in moduli navedejo pod carinsko oznako 8541 40 90, medtem ko carinske oznake pod oznako 8501 veljajo za električne generatorje na splošno in ne posebej za solarne izdelke.
However, it also showed that the two processing steps are linked to each other and the value added is not concentrated in a particular stage of the production process but is spread over the whole production process.
Vendar je pokazala tudi, da sta dve stopnji obdelave medsebojno povezani in da dodana vrednost ni koncentrirana v določeni stopnji proizvodnega procesa, ampak je porazdeljena po celotnem proizvodnem procesu.
Some interested parties claimed that modules and cells have separate merchant markets and therefore they should be treated as different products which would also be demonstrated by the fact that a large number of producers are not vertically integrated.
Nekaj zainteresiranih strani je trdilo, da imajo moduli in celice ločene prodajne trge in da bi jih morali zato obravnavati kot različna izdelka, na kar naj bi kazalo tudi dejstvo, da veliko proizvajalcev ni vertikalno integriranih.
Modules and cells cannot be considered as separate products whose prices fluctuate only depending on market factors.
Modulov in celic ni mogoče obravnavati kot ločena izdelka, katerih cene nihajo zgolj v odvisnosti od tržnih dejavnikov.
Likewise, as it has been explained above in recitals (49) above, the product concerned is produced in one single production process with different steps.
Prav tako, kot je bilo pojasnjeno v uvodni izjavi (49), je zadevni izdelek proizveden v enem samem proizvodnem procesu z različnimi stopnjami.
Several interested parties claimed that modules and cells must be treated as different products given that they have different end uses and they were not interchangeable.
Več zainteresiranih strani je trdilo, da je treba module in celice obravnavati kot različne izdelke, ker imajo različno končno uporabo in niso medsebojno zamenljivi.
As mentioned above the investigation showed that the cell-module production process is one single production process and therefore the question of interchangeability between different steps of a single production process is not applicable.
Kot je bilo navedeno, je preiskava pokazala, da je proizvodni proces celic in modulov en sam proizvodni proces, zato zanj ne velja vprašanje medsebojne zamenljivosti med različnimi stopnjami enega samega proizvodnega procesa.
Moreover, modules and cells have the same end use, converting sunlight into electricity and therefore cannot be used in other applications.
Poleg tega imajo moduli in celice enako končno uporabo, in sicer pretvarjanje sončne svetlobe v električno energijo, torej jih ni mogoče uporabljati v druge namene.
One interested party claimed that modules and cells do not share the same distribution channels and should therefore not be considered as one single product.
Ena zainteresirana stran je trdila, da moduli in celice nimajo istih distribucijskih poti in da jih zato ne bi smeli obravnavati kot en sam izdelek.
The investigation showed that modules and cells can be distributed within different or similar distribution channels.
Preiskava je pokazala, da se lahko moduli in celice distribuirajo po različnih ali podobnih distribucijskih poteh.
Considering recitals (47) to (49) above, it is concluded that therefore different distribution channels are not considered as a determining element.
Ob upoštevanju uvodnih izjav od (47) do (49) se zato sklene, da različne distribucijske poti niso odločilen element.
It was claimed that modules and cells differ substantially in terms of consumer perception and therefore they should not be considered as one single product.
Strani so trdile, da se moduli in celice v smislu dojemanja potrošnikov močno razlikujejo, zato se jih ne sme obravnavati kot en sam izdelek.
Likewise as above the main criteria to define a single product are the same physical, chemical and technical characteristics and end uses.
Kot je bilo že navedeno, so glavna merila za opredelitev enega samega izdelka enake fizikalne, kemične in tehnične lastnosti ter enaka končna uporaba.
Considering recitals (47) to (49) above it is concluded that therefore different consumer perception is not considered as a determining element.
Ob upoštevanju uvodnih izjav od (47) do (49) se zato sklene, da različno dojemanje potrošnikov ni odločilen element.
Interested parties reiterated that cells and modules are not a single product, and should therefore be assessed separately.
Zainteresirane strani so ponovile, da celice in moduli niso en sam izdelek in jih je zato treba oceniti ločeno.
Allegedly, they need to be integrated into modules to do so.
Za to jih je treba vgraditi v module.
While this power may be insufficient for most applications which require an assembly of multiple cells into modules, this does not mean that a cell by itself does not already have the capacity to generate electricity.
Čeprav je ta moč nezadostna za večino namenov, kjer se potrebuje sestava več celic v module, to ne pomeni, da celica sama po sebi nima zmogljivosti ustvarjanja elektrike.
Following final disclosure, one exporter further argued that cells are not just another type of module, but an entirely different product.
Po dokončnem razkritju je en izvoznik še naprej trdil, da celice niso le še ena vrsta modula, ampak popolnoma drug izdelek.
As a key component, a cell is clearly not ‘an entirely different product’, as modules and cells share the same basic characteristics of generating electricity from sunlight, as indicated in recital (60) above.
Kot ključni sestavni del, celica nedvomno ni „popolnoma drug izdelek“, saj imajo moduli in celice enako osnovno značilnost ustvarjanja elektrike iz sončne svetlobe, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (60).
In this respect, it is confirmed that the difference between modules and cells was indeed taken into account when sampling Union producers and Chinese exporters, as indicated in recitals (10) and (14) to the provisional anti-dumping Regulation.
V zvezi s tem je potrjeno, da se je pri vzorčenju proizvajalcev Unije in kitajskih proizvajalcev razlika med moduli in celicami dejansko upoštevala, kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah (10) in (14) začasne protidampinške uredbe.
Indeed, in order to ensure that the sample was representative for all product types, it was important to distinguish between cells and modules when selecting the sample.
Da se zagotovi, da je bil vzorec reprezentativen za vse vrste izdelka, je bilo ločevanje med celicami in moduli pri izbiri vzorca dejansko pomembno.
Therefore, it is necessary to define different prices to make the minimum import prices meaningful.
Zato je treba določiti različne cene, da bi bile minimalne uvozne cene smiselne.
For the definition of the product concerned, it is sufficient that the products share the same basic characteristics and end uses, which is the case for modules and cells as described in recitals (46) and (71) respectively.
Za opredelitev zadevnega izdelka zadostuje, da imajo izdelki skupne osnovne značilnosti in končne uporabe, kar za module in celice velja, kot je opisano v uvodni izjavi (46) oziroma (71).
The GOC argued that the assessment whether cells and modules are a single product concerned does not address a number of criteria defined by the Appellate Body in EC — Asbestos [7].
Kitajska vlada je trdila, da ocena v zvezi z določitvijo, ali so celice in moduli en sam izdelek, ne obravnava številnih meril, ki jih je opredelil pritožbeni organ v zadevi ES – azbest [7].
These criteria are used for the definition of the ‘like product’, not the product concerned.
Ta merila se uporabljajo za opredelitev „podobnega izdelka“ in ne zadevnega izdelka.
These criteria are therefore not pertinent when defining the product concerned.
Zato ta merila niso primerna za opredeljevanje zadevnega izdelka.
In any event, the Institutions observe that the application of the criteria used in EC — Asbestos to the definition of the product concerned in the present case would not lead to a different outcome.
Institucije v vsakem primeru ugotavljajo, da uporaba meril, uporabljenih v zadevi ES – azbest, pri opredelitvi zadevnega izdelka v zadevnem primeru ne bi vodila k drugačnemu izidu.
The first and the second criteria (properties, nature and quality respectively end-uses) are identical to the criteria physical, chemical and technical properties and end-uses used in the preceding recitals.
Prvo in drugo merilo (lastnosti, narava in kakovost oziroma končne uporabe) sta enaki merilu glede fizikalnih, kemičnih in tehničnih lastnosti ter končnih uporab iz prejšnjih uvodnih izjav.
The third criterion (consumers taste and habits) is not really useful for the present case, as cells are the key component of modules; as regards the fourth criterion, tariff classification, it is noted that both cells and modules can be declared under customs heading 8541 40 90, while the customs headings under heading 8501 are for electric generators in general and not in particular for solar products.
Tretje merilo (okus in navada potrošnikov) za zadevni primer ni uporabno, saj so celice ključni del modulov; glede četrtega merila (tarifna uvrstitev) je treba opozoriti, da se lahko tako celice kot tudi moduli navedejo pod carinsko oznako 8541 40 90, medtem ko carinske oznake pod oznako 8501 veljajo za električne generatorje na splošno in ne posebej za solarne izdelke.
Other interested parties argued that an objective application of the criteria developed by the Court of Justice in previous cases [8] allegedly leads to the conclusion that modules and cells are different products.
Druge zainteresirane strani so trdile, da naj bi objektivna uporaba meril, ki jih je razvilo Sodišče v prejšnjih zadevah [8], vodila k sklepu, da so moduli in celice različni izdelki.
In this respect, it is noted that the court only indicated a number of criteria which may be taken into account — there is no obligation to use all criteria in all cases, since not all of them may be relevant.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da je Sodišče le navedlo številna merila, ki se jih lahko upošteva, vendar vseh ni treba uporabljati v vseh zadevah, saj nekatera od njih ne bodo ustrezna.
These criteria were assessed in recitals (27) to (39) to the provisional anti-dumping Regulation, where it was found that a number of criteria are not relevant in the present case.
Ta merila so bila ocenjena v uvodnih izjavah od (27) do (39) začasne protidampinške uredbe, v kateri je bilo ugotovljeno, da številna merila niso ustrezna za zadevni primer.
The modules performance is directly linked to the performance of the cells, as indicated in recital (28) to the provisional anti-dumping Regulation.
Delovanje modulov je neposredno povezano z delovanjem celic, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (28) začasne protidampinške uredbe.
One interested party argued that with the exclusion of wafers from the product scope, and due to the significant processing involved to make modules from cells, the argument that cells and modules have the same end uses also stands refuted.
Ena zainteresirana stran je trdila, da se z izključitvijo rezin iz obsega izdelkov in zaradi precejšnje predelave, ki je potrebna, da iz celic nastanejo moduli, izpodbija argument, da imajo celice in moduli enake končne uporabe.
While both statements are indeed in the same recital (36) to the provisional anti-dumping Regulation, this does not mean that one conclusion is based on the other assumption.
Čeprav obe trditvi izhajata iz uvodne izjave (36) začasne protidampinške uredbe, to ne pomeni, da en sklep temelji na drugi domnevi.
In addition, the two statements are made to address separate issues under the heading ‘End use and interchangeability’.
Prav tako naj bi navedeni trditvi obravnavali ločena vprašanja pod naslovom „Končna uporaba in medsebojna zamenljivost“.
Thin film PV products are clearly excluded from the product definition (see recital (40) above).
Tankoslojni fotonapetostni izdelki so jasno izključeni iz opredelitve izdelka (glej uvodno izjavo (40)).
They are produced via a different production process and not from crystalline silicon which is the main raw material to produce modules and cells.
Proizvedeni so v drugačnem proizvodnem procesu in ne vsebujejo kristalnega silicija, ki je glavna surovina za proizvodnjo modulov in celic.
Furthermore it was claimed that cells should be considered as semi-finished feeder products while modules are end products, therefore they should not be considered as one single product.
Nadalje se je trdilo, da bi bilo treba celice obravnavati kot polizdelke, moduli pa so končni izdelki, zato se jih ne bi smelo obravnavati kot en sam izdelek.
As mentioned above, the main criteria to define a single product are the same physical, chemical and technical characteristics and end uses.
Kot je bilo že navedeno, so glavna merila za opredelitev enega samega izdelka enake fizikalne, kemične in tehnične lastnosti ter enaka končna uporaba.
Considering recitals (47) to (49) above it is concluded that therefore the difference between semi-finished or finished products is not considered as a determining element.
Ob upoštevanju uvodnih izjav od (47) do (49) se zato sklene, da razlike med polizdelki in končnimi izdelki niso odločilen element.
One interested party requested the exclusion of solar panels dedicated solely to 12V battery charging on the basis that they have a different end use than the modules for grid connection due to the fact that they generate much lower voltage and therefore are not suitable for grid connection.
Ena zainteresirana stran je zahtevala izključitev solarnih panelov, namenjenih izključno polnjenju baterij z napetostjo 12 V, ker imajo drugačno končno uporabo kot moduli za priključitev na omrežje, saj ustvarjajo veliko nižjo napetost in zato niso primerni za priključitev na omrežje.
According to the Notice of Initiation solar chargers that consist of less than six cells, are portable and supply electricity to devices or charge batteries are excluded from the product under investigation.
Glede na obvestilo o začetku so solarni napajalniki, ki so sestavljeni iz manj kot šestih celic, ki so prenosni in z električno energijo polnijo naprave ali polnilne baterije, izključeni iz opredelitve izdelka v preiskavi.
Interested parties also claimed that the definition of ‘solar chargers that consist of less than six cells’ is too narrow, and should be extended to products with a similar function which are not covered by this definition such as products with a similar size using a larger number of smaller cells.
Zainteresirane strani so tudi trdile, da je opredelitev „solarni napajalniki, ki so sestavljeni iz manj kot šestih celic“ preozka in jo je treba razširiti na izdelke s podobno funkcijo, ki niso vključeni v to opredelitev, kot so izdelki s podobno velikostjo, ki uporabljajo večje število manjših celic.
Indeed, an analysis of the arguments brought forward by the various interested parties showed that it is more appropriate to define the exclusion of such products on the basis of technical standards rather than the number of cells.
Dejansko je analiza argumentov, ki so jih predložile različne zainteresirane strani, pokazala, da je bolj primerno opredeliti izključitev teh izdelkov na podlagi tehničnih standardov kot pa na podlagi števila celic.
In particular, it was established that the definitions of standard ‘IEC 61730-1 Application Class C’ more appropriately define the products which should be excluded from the scope of the measures.
Zlasti je bilo ugotovljeno, da opredelitve standarda „IEC 61730-1 razreda C“ ustrezneje opredeljujejo izdelke, ki jih je treba izključiti iz obsega ukrepov.
It was argued that rather than referring to the standard, it would be more appropriate to define the exclusion on the basis of the output voltage and the power output as ‘modules or panels with a output voltage not exceeding 50 V DC and a power output not exceeding 50 W solely for direct use as battery chargers in systems with the same voltage and power characteristics’.
Trdilo se je, da bi bilo namesto sklicevanja na standard izključitev bolj primerno opredeliti na podlagi izhodne napetosti in izhodne moči, kot „module ali plošče z najvišjo izhodno napetostjo 50 V DC in z najvišjo izhodno močjo 50 W samo za neposredno uporabo kot polnilniki baterije v sistemih z enakimi lastnostmi napetosti in moči“.
As such, they are not directly interchangeable with a standard solar module.
Kot taki niso neposredno zamenljivi s standardnim solarnim modulom.
The investigation has, however, shown that both standard modules and the roof-integrated solar module have to comply with the same electrical standards.
Vendar pa je preiskava pokazala, da morajo tako standardni moduli kot strešno integrirani solarni modul izpolnjevati iste električne standarde.
And while the roof-integrated solar module cannot be simply replaced with a standard module, it can be replaced by a standard module plus roof tiles or slate.
In čeprav strešno integriranega solarnega modula ni mogoče enostavno nadomestiti s standardnim modulom, ga je mogoče nadomestiti s standardnim modulom in strešnikom ali skrilavcem.
The added functionality (which is otherwise provided by roofing material) is not considered substantial and does not warrant an exclusion of roof-integrated solar modules from the product scope.
Dodana funkcionalnost (ki je sicer zagotovljena s strešnim materialom) se ne šteje za bistveno in ne zadostuje za izločitev strešno integriranih solarnih modulov iz obsega izdelka.
Following definitive disclosure, the same interested party argued that the absence of dual-interchangeability between roof-integrated solar modules and standard solar modules is an indication that roof-integrated solar modules should be excluded from the scope of the measures, referring to the footware [9] case in general and special technology athletics footwear ‘STAF’ in particular.
Po dokončnem razkritju je ista zainteresirana stran trdila, da odsotnost dvojne zamenljivosti med strešno integriranimi solarnimi moduli in standardni solarnimi moduli pomeni, da je treba strešno integrirane solarne module izključiti iz obsega ukrepov, in se pri tem sklicevala na primer v zvezi z obutvijo [9] na splošno ter zlasti na obutev STAF.
However, the reasons for the exclusion of STAF were numerous, and the absence of dual interchangeability by itself was not considered a sufficient ground by the General Court in the Brosmann [10] case, which confirmed that very different product such as city trotters and hiking boots can indeed be considered product concerned in a single anti-dumping investigation despite their differences.
Vendar so bili razlogi za izključitev obutve STAF številni in odsotnost dvojne zamenljivosti same po sebi za Splošno sodišče v zadevi Brosmann [10] ni bil zadosten razlog, kar potrjuje, da se lahko zelo različni izdelki, na primer mestni in pohodniški čevlji, kljub razlikam štejejo za zadevni izdelek v eni sami protidampinški preiskavi.
In addition, the interested party argued that the absence of production in the EU and the fact that the interested party holds intellectual property rights is allegedly a confirmation that roof-integrated solar modules are innovative and different from any other product.
Zainteresirana stran je trdila, da naj bi odsotnost proizvodnje v EU in dejstvo, da ima zainteresirana stran pravice intelektualne lastnine, potrjevala inovativnost in drugačnost strešno integriranih solarnih modulov.
However, referring again to the footwear case mentioned by the interested party, the General Court held in Brosmann that ‘the absence of Community production of that type of footwear and the existence of a patent are not conclusive.’ [11].
Glede primera v zvezi z obutvijo, ki jo je omenila zainteresirana stran, pa je Splošno sodišče v zadevi Brosmann navedlo, da „odsotnost proizvodnje Skupnosti navedene vrste obutve in obstoj patenta nista odločilna dejavnika“ [11].
In this respect, it is noted that a roof-integrated solar module does combine the functionality of a solar module and roof tile or slate, as indicated in recital (83).
V zvezi s tem je bilo ugotovljeno, da strešno integrirani solarni modul združuje funkcionalnost solarnega modula in funkcionalnost strešnika ali skrilavca, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (83).
However, it appears that the Chinese exporter did not co-operate in the investigation, and as a non-cooperating party is not eligible to participate in the undertaking.
Vendar pa je videti, da kitajski izvoznik ni sodeloval v preiskavi in kot nesodelujoča stran ni upravičen do sodelovanja v zavezi.
These requests can therefore not be accepted.
Teh zahtev zato ni mogoče sprejeti.
One interested party claimed that there was no production of mono crystalline cells in the Union, and that its exports of mono crystalline cells were not competing with the EU industry.
Ena zainteresirana stran je trdila, da v Uniji ni bilo proizvodnje monokristalnih celic in da njen izvoz monokristalnih celic ni konkuriral industriji EU.
Investigation showed however that there was indeed production of mono crystalline cells in the Union.
Preiskava je pokazala, da je proizvodnja monokristalnih celic v Uniji dejansko obstajala.
In any event, the General Court held in Brosmann that the absence of Community production of a particular product type is not decisive.
V vsakem primeru je Splošno sodišče v zadevi Brosmann navedlo, da odsotnost proizvodnje Skupnosti določene vrste izdelka ni odločilnega pomena.