natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Article 23 on the declaration of origin explicitly refers to a region (e.g. Tirol or Bavaria) or a country (e.g. Austria, France) as the origin of the product, thereby indicating that any region/country could be named as the origin of the products.
Okvir o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 in smernice o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 2001 se uporabljajo za oglaševalske dejavnosti, ne pa za promocijske dejavnosti.
The claim that the quality label was available only to national (i.e. Austrian) products must be dismissed for the period after this date.
Pomoč za to zadnjo kategorijo je opredeljena kot tehnična pomoč, za katero se uporabljajo posebna pravila.
Furthermore, all provisions regarding the origin of the product contain the following definition of ‘native/national’ (heimisch): ‘In these guidelines the term “native/national” refers to the region specified as the origin of the product’ (‘Wird in diesen Richtlinien der Begriff “heimisch” verwendet, ist darunter die im Herkunftsanteil des Zeichens angeführte Region zu verstehen.’) [70] Again, this indicates that the reference to ‘national products’ used in the implementing acts does not refer only to Austrian products but any region could be used as origin.
V obravnavani zadevi je bila pomoč dodeljena za oglaševalske kampanje, pri katerih so se uporabljali različni mediji, in druge načine obveščanja javnosti.
A bio label does per se refer primarily to the special quality requirements of a product.
Oglaševalske kampanje so se nanašale na:
The respective labels under the scheme had the reference to BIO as their main message and were open to all products, irrespective of their origin.
znak bio in znak kakovosti,
The latter could only be mentioned as a subsidiary message.
splošne proizvode in
As regards the aid for quality products, this was awarded for the development of quality assurance schemes, quality controls and controls for organic products (recital 98).
oglaševanje zunaj Avstrije.
Such measures are also per se not limited to products of a particular national origin.
Na podlagi informacij, ki so jih predložili avstrijski organi, se lahko sklepa, da je bil namen ukrepov spodbuditi potrošnike k nakupu zadevnega proizvoda (glej uvodni izjavi 75 in 94).
Aid for generic advertising does not raise issues regarding the origin of those products, as the campaigns advertised or referred to a product in a purely generic matter making no reference whatsoever to origin.
Zato ti ukrepi spadajo na področje uporabe oglaševanja in jih je treba analizirati v skladu z veljavnimi pravili.
APPLICABLE RULES
POMOČ ZA OGLAŠEVANJE V OBDOBJU OD 1.
Under Article 107(3)(c) of the TFEU, aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas may be considered to be compatible with the common market, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
JANUARJA 1995 DO 31.
According to the Commission notice on the determination of the rules applicable to the assessment of unlawful aid [71], any unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 is to be appraised in accordance with the rules applicable at the time the aid was granted.
DECEMBRA 2001
Between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2006 the 2000-2006 Guidelines applied.
Pogoji za združljivost
With effect from 1 January 2007, the Community guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sector 2007-2013 [72] (hereafter: the 2007-2013 Guidelines) were applicable according to their point 194.
Združljivost pomoči, dodeljene pred 1. januarjem 2002, je treba oceniti glede na sporočilo iz leta 1986 in okvir o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 (uvodna izjava 176).
In this respect it is to be noted that according to point 196 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines, Member States had a transitional period until 31 December 2007 to bring existing aid schemes in line with the provisions of the Guidelines.
Splošni pogoji
The definition of existing aid is stipulated in Article 1(b) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999.
V točki 2.2 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 je prepovedana pomoč za oglaševanje, namenjena določenim podjetjem.
According to Article 1(b)(ii), which applies to the case at hand, existing aid shall mean authorised aid, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid which have been authorised by the Commission or by the Council.
V točki 3 je določeno, da bi se moralo oglaševanje nanašati na vsaj eno od naslednjih kategorij (pozitivna merila):
Aid scheme NN 34A/2000 was indeed approved by the Commission on 30 June 2004.
presežne kmetijske proizvode,
However, in September 2004 the decision was challenged by the complainants before the Court of First Instance (now General Court) which annulled the Commission decision by judgment of 18 November 2009.
nove ali nadomestne proizvode, ki še niso v presežku,
This judgment was appealed by Austria and the Court of Justice dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of the Court of First Instance on 27 October 2011.
razvoj določenih regij,
The Austrian authorities claim that the scheme at hand constituted existing aid and had to be assessed under the new 2007-2013 Guidelines only as of 1 January 2008.
razvoj malih in srednjih podjetij ali
In its submission of 14 September 2012, Austria also refers to the principle of legitimate expectations and argues that the Commission decision was only annulled in 2011.
oglaševanje visokokakovostnih proizvodov in zdrave hrane.
According to the jurisprudence [73] regarding legitimate expectations, ‘where an action for annulment has been brought, the recipient is not entitled to harbour such assurance so long as the Community court has not delivered a definitive ruling’.
Nazadnje, pomoč v skladu s točko 4 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 ne sme preseči zneska, ki ga je sektor sam dodelil za določeno oglaševalsko kampanjo, kar pomeni, da je lahko dovoljena največja intenzivnost pomoči v višini 100 %, vendar le, če je trgovina prispevala vsaj 50 % stroškov, bodisi s prostovoljnimi prispevki bodisi s pobiranjem parafiskalnih dajatev ali obveznih prispevkov.
Therefore, legitimate expectation cannot be invoked in the case at hand.
Zato je dovoljena največja intenzivnost pomoči v višini 100 %.
As a consequence, the aid scheme NN 34A/2000 could not be qualified as existing aid based on the Commission's decision of 30 June 2004 and therefore the transitional period of point 196 of the 2007-2013 Guidelines does not apply.
Kršitev člena 30 Pogodbe EGS
The aid scheme should have been brought in line with the 2007-2013 Guidelines as of 1 January 2007.
V točki 2 sporočila iz leta 1986 in točki 2.1 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 [81] je poudarjeno dejstvo, da se pomoč za oglaševanje ne more šteti kot združljiva s skupnim trgom, če se s promocijskim gradivom krši člen 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 34 PDEU).
AID FOR ADVERTISING MEASURES
V skladu s točko 2.1 sporočila iz leta 1986 splošne promocijske kampanje, ki se ne sklicujejo na poreklo proizvoda, izvozne promocijske kampanje, organizirane v drugi državi članici, ter kampanje na domačem trgu, v okviru katerih se promovirajo posebne lastnosti ali sorte proizvodov, ki ne vsebujejo posebnih sklicev na nacionalno poreklo proizvoda razen tistih, ki so lahko razvidni iz sklicev na zadevne lastnosti ali sorte ali običajno označbo proizvoda, ne kršijo člena 34 PDEU.
As regards advertising measures, the compatibility of the aid granted in the period 1 January 1995 to 31 December 2001 must be assessed in the light of the Commission communication concerning State involvement in the promotion of agricultural and fisheries products [74] (hereafter: the 1986 Communication) and the Framework for national aid for the advertising of agricultural products and certain products not listed in Annex II to the EEC Treaty, excluding fishery products [75] (hereafter: the 1987 Advertising Framework).
Nasprotno pa naslednje kampanje v skladu s točko 2.2 sporočila iz leta 1986 jasno kršijo člen 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 34 PDEU): promocijske kampanje, ki potrošnikom svetujejo nakup nacionalnih proizvodov zgolj zaradi njihovega nacionalnega porekla, ali promocijske kampanje, ki so namenjene odvračanju od nakupa proizvodov iz drugih držav članic ali razvrednotenju navedenih proizvodov v očeh potrošnikov (negativna promocija).
Aid granted as from 1 January 2002 is to be assessed in the light of the Community guidelines for State aid for advertising of products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty and of certain non-Annex I products (hereafter: the 2001 Advertising Guidelines) [76].
V točki 2.3 sporočila iz leta 1986 je nadalje navedeno, da je promocijskim kampanjam na domačem trgu držav članic zaradi sklicev na nacionalno poreklo proizvodov in v primeru neupoštevanja določenih omejitev mogoče ugovarjati v skladu s členom 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj členom 34 PDEU).
When assessing State aid for the advertising of agricultural products granted after 1 January 2007 the Commission applies Section VI.D of the 2007-2013 Guidelines.
V skladu s točko 2.3.1 sporočila iz leta 1986 promocijske kampanje, ki opozarjajo na sorte ali lastnosti proizvodov, proizvedenih v državi članici, v praksi niso omejene na nacionalne ali regionalne specialitete ter pogosto opozarjajo na posebne lastnosti proizvodov, proizvedenih v državi članici, in nacionalno poreklo proizvodov, čeprav so navedeni proizvodi in njihove lastnosti podobni proizvodom, proizvedenim drugje.
SCOPE OF ADVERTISING
Če se v taki promocijski kampanji pretirano poudarja nacionalno poreklo proizvoda, obstaja nevarnost kršitve člena 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člena 34 PDEU).
The 1987 Advertising Framework applies to advertising, defined as any operation using the media (such as press, radio, TV or posters) which is designed to induce consumers to buy the relevant product.
V sporočilu iz leta 1986 se je od držav članic zato zahtevalo, da morajo zlasti zagotoviti, da se strogo upoštevajo naslednje smernice:
It excludes from its scope promotion operations in the broader sense, such as the dissemination to the general public of scientific knowledge, the organisation of trade fairs or exhibitions, participation in these and similar public relations exercises, including surveys and market research [77].
država proizvajalka se lahko opredeli z besedo ali znakom pod pogojem, da se ohrani ustrezno ravnotežje med sklici na lastnosti in sorte proizvoda na eni strani ter njegovim nacionalnim poreklom na drugi.
The scope of the 2001 Advertising Guidelines is in principle the same as the one of the 1987 Advertising Framework described above, however with some differences.
Sklici na nacionalno poreklo bi morali biti glede na glavno sporočilo, ki ga potrošnikom zagotavlja kampanja, stranskega pomena in ne bi smeli biti glavni razlog, zaradi katerega se potrošnikom svetuje nakup proizvoda.
The first substantive change concerns the fact that economic operators were added as potential addressees of advertising [78].
Lastnosti proizvoda, ki jih je bilo dovoljeno omeniti, so obsegale okus, vonj, svežost, zrelost, cenovno primernost, hranilno vrednost, razpoložljive sorte, uporabnost (recepti itd.).
The second change concerns the fact that the definition of advertising was enlarged to encompass advertising activities (such as the distribution of material for that purpose) aimed at consumers at the point of sale [79].
Izogibati pa se je bilo treba presežnikom, kot so „najboljši“, „najokusnejši“, „najfinejši“, ali izrazom, kot je „prava stvar“, ali promocijskim kampanjam, pri katerih se zaradi omembe nacionalnega porekla promovirani proizvod primerja s proizvodi iz drugih držav članic.
The scope of Section IV.D of the 2007-2013 Guidelines is identical with the scope of the 2001 Advertising Guidelines [80].
Sklice na nadzor kakovosti je treba navesti le, kadar je proizvod ocenjen v dejanskem in objektivnem sistemu nadzora svojih lastnosti.
Both the 1987 Advertising Framework and the 2001 Advertising Guidelines apply to advertising activities but not to promotion activities.
Ocena
Aid for the latter category is classified as technical aid for which specific rules apply.
Avstrijski organi so v pravnem mnenju, ki je bilo priloženo predloženim informacijam z dne 25. februarja 2015, trdili, da je kršitev člena 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 34 PDEU) treba oceniti z „zgodovinskega vidika“ ter da v obdobju med letoma 1995 in 2002 na Sodišču ni bilo zadeve, v kateri bi besedilo ali grafično sporočilo znaka domnevno kršilo člen 30 Pogodbe EGS.
In the present case aid was granted towards advertising campaigns using different media and other means of publicity.
Po mnenju Komisije so s to trditvijo zgrešili bistvo.
The advertising campaigns concerned
Kot je bilo prikazano, so v sporočilu iz leta 1986 [82] in okviru o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 navedene jasne in podrobne smernice za države članice o tem, kako morajo oblikovati ukrepe, da bi se izognile kršitvam člena 30 Pogodbe EGS.
the bio and quality labels,
Na podlagi informacij, ki so Komisiji na voljo za obdobje pred letom 2002, ob sprejetju sklepa o začetku postopka ni bilo mogoče oceniti združljivosti oglaševalskih ukrepov z navedenimi pravili.
generic products, and
Zato so bili avstrijski organi pozvani, naj zagotovijo potrebne informacije v zvezi z zgornjimi pogoji.
advertising outside Austria.
Odgovor avstrijskih organov z dne 14. septembra 2012 ni vseboval dovolj informacij za oceno združljivosti (avstrijski organi so navedli le letna poročila za leta od leta 1995 do leta 2001).
From the information submitted by the Austrian authorities, it can be concluded that the aim of the measures was to induce consumers to buy the relevant product (see recitals 75 and 94).
Zato je bila 19. februarja 2014 poslana še ena zahteva za informacije o teh točkah, na katero je Avstrija odgovorila 5. maja 2014.
Therefore, the above measures fall under the scope of advertising and have to be analysed in the light of the applicable rules.
Avstrijski organi so v tem odgovoru navedli, da so se oglaševalske kampanje nanašale na presežne kmetijske proizvode in/ali oglaševanje visokokakovostnih proizvodov.
ADVERTISING AID IN THE PERIOD 1 JANUARY 1995 TO 31 DECEMBER 2001
Zaradi tega so bila izpolnjena pozitivna merila iz točke 3 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987.
Conditions for compatibility
Na podlagi informacij avstrijskih organov se pri oglaševanju niso sklicevali na določena podjetja.
The compatibility of the aid granted prior to 1 January 2002 must be assessed in the light of the 1986 Communication and the 1987 Advertising Framework (recital 176).
Glede največje intenzivnosti pomoči se je s prispevki iz sektorja zagotavljalo več kot 50 % zneska pomoči (glej tudi uvodni izjavi 43 in 56).
General conditions
Zaradi tega je izpolnjeno merilo glede intenzivnosti pomoči iz točke 4 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987.
Point 2.2 of the 1987 Advertising Framework prohibits aid for advertising related to particular firms.
Komisija je v sklepu o začetku postopka izrazila pomisleke v zvezi z morebitno kršitvijo člena 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 34 PDEU).
Point 3 stipulates the condition that the advertising should concern at least one of the following categories (positive criteria):
Po predhodnem mnenju Komisije se zdi, da sklic na nacionalno poreklo na znaku kakovosti ni bil stranskega pomena (glej uvodno izjavo 65).
surplus agricultural products,
Poleg tega je Komisija navedla, da sklic na poreklo proizvoda v velikem številu reklamnega gradiva ni bil omejen na znak kakovosti, temveč se je pojavljal tudi drugod po oglasu (glej uvodno izjavo 83).
new products or replacement products not yet in surplus,
Zato so bili avstrijski organi v sklepu o začetku postopka pozvani, naj opišejo videz znaka kakovosti in znaka bio v obdobju 1995–2001 in pošljejo vzorčne primere promocijskega gradiva, na katerem so bili znaki uporabljeni.
the development of certain regions,
Ta ocena je bila poslana v odgovoru z dne 5. maja 2014.
the development of small and medium-sized undertakings, or
V nadaljevanju so analizirana posebna merila združljivosti za različne vrste oglaševanja.
the advertising of high-quality products and health foods.
Pomoč za splošno oglaševanje
Finally, according to point 4 of the 1987 Advertising Framework, aid granted under the abovementioned framework must not exceed the amount which the sector itself has committed to a given advertising campaign, which means that a maximum aid intensity of 100 % may be allowed but only if the trade has contributed at least 50 % of the cost, either through voluntary contributions or through the collection of parafiscal levies or compulsory contributions.
Komisija glede sklicevanja na določena podjetja v nekaterih oglaševalskih kampanjah (uvodna izjava 90) ugotavlja, da je pomoč za oglaševanje, namenjena določenim podjetjem, v skladu s točko 2.2 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 prepovedana.
Therefore, a maximum aid intensity of 100 % is allowed.
Avstrijski organi so v dopisu, predloženem 14. septembra 2012, trdili, da so navedena podjetja prispevala nekaj stroškov za kampanjo (Druck und Werbeeinschaltung).
Infringement of Article 30 of the EEC
Vseeno pa takih kampanj, ki se nanašajo na določena podjetja, v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči ni mogoče odobriti (točka 2.2 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987).
Both point 2 of the 1986 Communication and point 2.1 of the 1987 Advertising Framework [81] stress the fact that aid for advertising cannot be considered compatible with the common market if the promotion material infringes Article 30 of the EEC Treaty (now Article 34 TFEU).
Te ocene ne spremeni niti dejstvo, da so podjetja delno prispevala k stroškom v zvezi s kampanjo.
According to point 2.1 of the 1986 Communication, generic promotional campaigns making no reference to the origin of the product, export promotional campaigns organised in other Member States as well as campaigns on the home market promoting specific qualities or varieties of products which make no specific references to the national origin of the product other than which may be evident from the references made to the qualities or varieties concerned or to the normal designation of the product, do not infringe Article 34 TFEU.
Iz razpoložljivih informacij je razvidno, da so se nekatere splošne oglaševalske kampanje izrecno sklicevale na poreklo proizvoda (tj. Avstrija) (glej primere v uvodnih izjavah 84 in 90).
By contrast, according to point 2.2 of the 1986 Communication the following campaigns clearly infringe Article 30 of the EEC Treaty (now Article 34 TFEU): promotional campaigns which advise consumers to buy national products solely because of their national origin or promotional campaigns intended to discourage the purchase of products from other Member States or disparage those products in the eyes of the consumer (negative promotion).
Zato ukrepi niso bili skladni s točkama 2.1 [83] in 2.2 okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987 ter so kršili člen 30 Pogodbe EGS (zdaj člen 34 PDEU).
Further, point 2.3 of the 1986 Communication stipulates that promotional campaigns on a Member State's home market, because of the references made to the national origin of the products, and unless certain restraints are observed, may be open to objection under Article 30 of the EEC Treaty (now Article 34 TFEU).
Zato Komisija meni, da pomoč za oglaševalske ukrepe za obdobje od 1. januarja 1995 do 31. decembra 1999, ki je vsebovala sklice na poreklo proizvoda ali določena podjetja, ni združljiva s skupnim trgom [84].
Pursuant to point 2.3.1 of the 1986 Communication, promotional campaigns drawing attention to the varieties or qualities of products produced within a Member State are not in practice limited to national or regional specialties and frequently draw attention to the particular qualities of products produced within a Member State and the national origin of the products, even though those products and their qualities are similar to products produced elsewhere.
V obdobju od 1. januarja 2000 do 31. decembra 2001 so oglaševalske kampanje vsebovale le sklice na posebne lastnosti ali sorte proizvodov, ne pa posebnih sklicev na njihovo nacionalno poreklo.
If undue emphasis is placed on the national origin of the product in such promotional campaigns, there is a danger of breach of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty (now Article 34 TFEU).
Pomoč za znak kakovosti
The 1986 Communication therefore requested Member States to ensure particularly that the following guidelines were strictly respected:
Avstrijski organi so v odgovoru z dne 14. septembra 2012 navedli, da so bili za znak kakovosti uporabljeni isti znaki, kot so bili odobreni z odločbo Komisije v zadevi N 589/2008.
the references to national origin should be subsidiary to the main message conveyed to consumers by the campaign and not constitute the principal reason why consumers are being advised to buy the product,
Komisija se z njihovimi pripombami ne strinja.
qualities of the products which it was permissible to mention included taste, aroma, freshness, maturity, value for money, nutritional value, varieties available, usefulness (recipes, etc.).
Kot je bilo navedeno (uvodna izjava 65), se je v obdobju med letoma 1995 in 1999 za znak kakovosti uporabljal drugačen logotip.
Conversely, to be avoided were superlatives such as ‘the best’, ‘the tastiest’, ‘the finest’ and expressions such as ‘the real thing’ or promotional campaigns which, because of the mentioning of the national origin, result in the product promoted being compared with the products of other Member States.
V tem logotipu pa sklici na poreklo niso stranskega pomena glede na sporočilo o kakovosti logotipa.
References to quality control should only be made where the product was subjected to a genuine and objective system of control of its qualities.
V vizualnem sporočilu (avstrijska zastava) in uporabljenem besedilu je kot glavno sporočilo navedena Avstrija.
Assessment
Zato se ni upoštevala točka 2.3.1 sporočila iz leta 1986, v skladu s katero bi morali biti sklici na nacionalno poreklo glede na glavno sporočilo, ki ga potrošnikom zagotavlja kampanja, stranskega pomena in ne bi smeli biti glavni razlog, zaradi katerega se potrošnikom svetuje nakup proizvoda.
In a legal opinion attached to the submission of information from 25 February 2015 the Austrian authorities claim that the infringement of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty (now Article 34 TFEU) needs to be assessed in a ‘historical perspective’ and that in the period 1995 to 2002 there was no Court case in which the text and the graphic message of a label was deemed to infringe Article 30 of the EEC Treaty.
Zato Komisija meni, da pomoč za znak kakovosti za obdobje od 1. januarja 1995 do 31. decembra 1999 ni združljiva s skupnim trgom.
In the Commission's view this argument misses the point.
Komisija glede obdobja od 1. januarja 2000 do 31. decembra 2001 meni, da so novi logotipi, ki so bili enaki kot logotipi, ki so se ocenjevali v odločbi Komisije v zadevi N 589/2008, skladni s pogoji okvira o državni pomoči za oglaševanje iz leta 1987, zaradi česar meni, da je povezana pomoč združljiva s skupim trgom.
As shown above, both the 1986 Communication [82] and the 1987 Advertising Framework contained express and detailed guidelines for Member States on how to design their measures in order to avoid breaches of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty.
Pomoč za znak bio
Based on the information available to the Commission for the period before 2002, it was not possible to assess the compatibility of the advertising measures with the above rules at the time of the opening decision.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 65, so se v oglaševalskih ukrepih za znak bio uporabljali enaki logotipi kot v obdobju po letu 2002.
Therefore, the Austrian authorities were invited to provide the necessary information in respect of the above conditions.
Ker se s tovrstnim oglaševanjem opozarja na sorte ali lastnosti proizvodov, proizvedenih v državi članici, spadajo pod točko 2.3.1 sporočila iz leta 1986, s katero se zahteva, da se nacionalno poreklo proizvoda ne sme pretirano poudarjati.