natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It ruled that the institutions should not have taken the view that the price of the raw materials was not reasonably reflected in the records of the Argentinian and Indonesian exporting producers and should not have disregarded those records when constructing a normal value for biodiesel produced in Argentina and Indonesia.
Odločilo je, da institucije ne bi smele sprejeti stališča, da cena surovin ni bila ustrezno izražena v evidencah argentinskih in indonezijskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, in da bi se te evidence morale upoštevati pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti za biodizel, proizveden v Argentini in Indoneziji.
On 26 October 2016 the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted the panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report (‘the Argentina Reports’), in the European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Argentina dispute (DS473).
Organ STO za reševanje sporov je 26. oktobra 2016 sprejel poročilo odbora, kot je bilo spremenjeno s poročilom pritožbenega organa („poročili o Argentini“), v sporu Evropska unija – protidampinški ukrepi za biodizel iz Argentine (DS473).
On 28 February 2018, the DSB also adopted the panel report in the European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Indonesia dispute (DS480) (‘the Indonesia Report’).
Organ STO za reševanje sporov je 28. februarja 2018 sprejel tudi poročilo odbora v sporu „Evropska unija – protidampinški ukrepi za biodizel iz Indonezije (DS480)“ („poročilo o Indoneziji“).
Both Indonesia and the EU did not appeal that report.
Indonezija in EU se na navedeno poročilo nista pritožili.
In the Argentina and Indonesia Reports (‘the Reports’), it was found, inter alia, that the EU acted inconsistently with:
V poročilih o Argentini in Indoneziji („poročila“) je bilo med drugim ugotovljeno, da EU ni ravnala v skladu s:
Article 2.2.1.1 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (‘ADA’) by failing to calculate the cost of production of the product under investigation on the basis of the records kept by the producers;
členom 2.2.1.1 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO, ker ni izračunala stroškov proizvodnje izdelka v preiskavi na podlagi evidenc, ki jih vodijo proizvajalci,
Article 2.2 of the ADA and Article VI:1(b)(ii) of the GATT 1994 by not using the cost of production in Argentina and Indonesia when constructing the normal value of biodiesel;
členom 2.2 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO in členom VI:1(b)(ii) GATT iz leta 1994, ker pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti biodizla ni uporabila stroškov proizvodnje v Argentini in Indoneziji, ter
Article 9.3 of the ADA and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 by imposing anti-dumping duties in excess of the margin of dumping that should have been established under Article 2 of the ADA and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994, respectively.
členom 9.3 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO in členom VI:2 GATT iz leta 1994, ker je uvedla protidampinške dajatve, višje od stopnje dampinga, ki bi jo bilo treba določiti na podlagi člena 2 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO oziroma člena VI:1 GATT iz leta 1994.
In the Indonesia Report the panel found, in addition, that the EU had acted inconsistently with:
Poleg tega je odbor v poročilu o Indoneziji ugotovil, da EU ni ravnala v skladu s:
Articles 2.2.2(iii) and 2.2 of the ADA by failing to determine the profit normally realized by other exporters or producers on sales of products of the same general category in the domestic market of the country of origin;
členom 2.2.2(iii) in členom 2.2 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO, ker ni določila dobička, ki ga običajno dosežejo drugi izvozniki ali proizvajalci s prodajo izdelkov iste splošne kategorije na domačem trgu države porekla,
Article 2.3 of the ADA by failing to construct the export price of one Indonesian exporting producer, P.T.
členom 2.3 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO, ker ni konstruirala izvozne cene enega indonezijskega proizvajalca izvoznika, tj. družbe P.T.
Musim Mas, on the basis of the price at which the imported biodiesel produced by P.T.
Musim Mas, na podlagi cene, po kateri je bil uvoženi biodizel, ki ga proizvaja družba P.T.
Musim Mas was first resold to independent buyers in the EU;
Musim Mas, prvič nadalje prodan neodvisnim kupcem v EU,
Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the ADA, by failing to establish the existence of significant price undercutting with regard to Indonesian imports.
členom 3.1 in 3.2 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO, ker ni dokazala obstoja znatnega nelojalnega nižanja prodajnih cen v zvezi z uvozom iz Indonezije.
The Panel recommended that the DSB request the EU to bring its measures into conformity with the ADA and the GATT 1994.
Odbor je priporočil, naj Organ STO za reševanje sporov od EU zahteva, naj svoje ukrepe uskladi s Protidampinškim sporazumom STO in GATT iz leta 1994.
Following the Argentina Reports, the Commission had initiated a review under Article 1(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/476 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘the review’).
Komisija je na podlagi poročil o Argentini začela pregled v skladu s členom 1(3) Uredbe (EU) 2015/476 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta („pregled“).
At the initiation of the review, the Commission announced that it considered it appropriate to examine the consequences of the findings of the Argentina Reports also for the measures imposed on biodiesel from Indonesia, as the legal interpretations contained in the Argentina Reports appeared to be also relevant for the investigation concerning Indonesia.
Ob začetku pregleda je napovedala, da se ji zdi primerno preučiti posledice ugotovitev poročil o Argentini tudi za ukrepe, ki so bili uvedeni za biodizel iz Indonezije, saj se zdi, da so pravne razlage iz poročil o Argentini pomembne tudi za preiskavo v zvezi z Indonezijo.
However, during the review, the Commission received a number of comments from interested parties concerning, in particular, the applicability of the interpretation of the Argentina Reports to the measures on biodiesel from Indonesia.
Vendar je Komisija med pregledom prejela več pripomb zainteresiranih strani, ki so se nanašale zlasti na vprašanje, kako je mogoče razlago iz poročil o Argentini uporabiti za ukrepe v zvezi z biodizlom iz Indonezije.
The Commission considered that the analysis of the comments with regard to Indonesia required more time and decided not to include an examination of Indonesia in the amending Regulation, but instead to keep the review open as far as it concerned Indonesia.
Komisija je menila, da je za analizo pripomb v zvezi z Indonezijo potrebnega več časa, in se odločila, da v uredbo o spremembi ne bo vključila preučitve Indonezije, temveč bo pregled v delu, ki se nanaša na Indonezijo, ohranila odprt.
On 18 September 2017, the Commission adopted Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1578 amending the definitive Regulation (‘the amending Regulation’) in so far as Argentinian exporting producers were concerned.
Komisija je 18. septembra 2017 sprejela Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) 2017/1578 o spremembi dokončne uredbe („uredba o spremembi“), kolikor ta zadeva argentinske proizvajalce izvoznike.
The annulment by the General Court of the operative parts of the definitive Regulation with regard to the exporting producers concerned also affects the validity of the amending Regulation.
Razglasitev ničnosti izvedbenih delov dokončne uredbe, ki se nanašajo na zadevne proizvajalce izvoznike, s strani Splošnega sodišča, vpliva tudi na veljavnost uredbe o spremembi.
As the amending Regulation amended the Regulation of which the operative parts have been annulled, it has itself also become void and not applicable in respect of the exporting producers concerned.
Ker je bila z uredbo o spremembi spremenjena uredba, katere izvedbeni deli so bili razglašeni za nične, je tudi sama uredba o spremembi v zvezi z zadevnimi proizvajalci izvozniki postala nična in se zanje tudi ne uporablja.
On 28 May 2018 a Notice was published re-opening the original investigation concerning imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia that led to the adoption of the definitive Regulation (‘the Notice’).
Dne 28. maja 2018 je bilo objavljeno obvestilo o obnovi prvotne preiskave v zvezi z uvozom biodizla s poreklom iz Argentine in Indonezije, ki je privedla do sprejetja dokončne uredbe („obvestilo“).
At the same time the pending review with regard to Indonesia was closed.
Hkrati se je zaključil pregled, ki se je izvajal v zvezi z Indonezijo.
According to the case-law of the Court, the procedure for replacing an annulled act may be resumed at the very point at which the illegality occurred.
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča se lahko postopek za nadomestitev ničnega akta nadaljuje točno na tistem mestu, na katerem je prišlo do nezakonitosti.
The Union's institutions, in so complying with the judgments, have the possibility to remedy the aspects of the definitive Regulation which led to its annulment in respect of the exporting producers concerned.
Institucije Unije imajo pri upoštevanju sodb možnost odpraviti tiste vidike dokončne uredbe, ki so privedli do razglasitve njene ničnosti v zvezi z zadevnimi proizvajalci izvozniki.
The Commission should observe not only the operative part of the judgments but also the grounds which led to those judgments and constituted its essential basis, inasmuch as they were necessary to determine the exact meaning of what was stated in the operative part.
Komisija bi morala poleg izreka sodb upoštevati tudi razloge, ki so privedli do teh sodb in pomenijo njihovo bistveno podlago, kolikor so bili potrebni za določitev točnega pomena tega, kar je bilo navedeno v izreku.
Other findings reached in the definitive Regulation which were not contested within the time-limits for a challenge or which were contested but rejected by the General Court's judgments, and therefore did not lead to the annulment of the definitive Regulation, remain valid.
Druge ugotovitve iz dokončne uredbe, ki v predpisanih rokih niso bile izpodbijane ali pa so bile izpodbijane, vendar je bilo izpodbijanje s sodbami Splošnega sodišča zavrnjeno, in tako niso privedle do razglasitve ničnosti dokončne uredbe, ostajajo veljavne.
In order to comply with its obligations, the Commission decided to resume the present anti-dumping proceeding at the very point at which the illegality occurred and thus to re-examine the methodology used for constructing a normal value.
Da bi Komisija izpolnila svoje obveznosti, se je odločila, da bo nadaljevala to protidampinško preiskavo točno na tistem mestu, na katerem je prišlo do nezakonitosti, in bo torej ponovno preučila metodologijo, uporabljeno za konstruiranje normalne vrednosti.
The Notice included in its scope the reasoning of the General Court's judgments for the exporting producers concerned and the possibility to extend the findings to all exporting producers from Argentina and Indonesia.
V obvestilo so bile vključene obrazložitve sodb Splošnega Sodišča za zadevne proizvajalce izvoznike in možnost, da se ugotovitve razširijo na vse proizvajalce izvoznike iz Argentine in Indonezije.
Furthermore, it took into account the findings of the WTO panels and Appellate Body, both in respect of Argentina and Indonesia, in order to bring the measures found WTO inconsistent into full compliance with the WTO Agreements, in accordance with Article 19.1 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
Poleg tega so se v njem upoštevale ugotovitve odborov STO in pritožbenega organa v zvezi z Argentino in Indonezijo, da bi se ukrepi, za katere je bilo ugotovljeno, da so nezdružljivi s STO, v celoti uskladili s sporazumi STO, v skladu s členom 19.1 dogovora o reševanju sporov.
In the Notice the Commission invited the exporting producers concerned and the Union industry to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the Notice.
Komisija je v obvestilu zadevne proizvajalce izvoznike in industrijo Unije pozvala, naj pisno izrazijo svoja stališča in zaprosijo za zaslišanje v roku iz obvestila.
All parties who so requested within that time limit, and who demonstrated that there were particular reasons why they should be heard, were granted the opportunity to be heard.
Vsem stranem, ki so v navedenem roku zahtevale zaslišanje in dokazale, da zanj obstajajo posebni razlogi, je bilo zaslišanje odobreno.
Representations were received from the European Biodiesel Board (EBB), five exporting producers in Indonesia and the authorities of Indonesia.
Pripombe so poslali Evropski odbor za biodizel (EBB), pet proizvajalcev izvoznikov iz Indonezije in indonezijski organi.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUDGMENTS OF THE GENERAL COURT AND OF THE FINDINGS OF THE WTO
IZVAJANJE SODB SPLOŠNEGA SODIŠČA IN UGOTOVITEV STO
The Commission has the possibility to remedy the aspects of the definitive Regulation which led to its annulment, while leaving unchanged the parts of the assessment which are not affected by the judgments.
Komisija ima možnost, da popravi tiste vidike dokončne uredbe, zaradi katerih je bila ta razglašena za nično, dele ocene, ki jih sodbe ne zadevajo, pa pusti nespremenjene.
As indicated in the Notice, in addition the Commission reassessed the definitive findings of the original investigation by taking into account the findings of the WTO panels and Appellate Body both in respect of Argentina and Indonesia.
Kot je navedeno v obvestilu, je Komisija poleg tega ponovno ocenila dokončne ugotovitve prvotne preiskave, tako da je upoštevala ugotovitve odborov STO in pritožbenega organa v zvezi z Argentino in Indonezijo.
The Commission decided to extend the findings to all exporting producers from Argentina and Indonesia.
Komisija se je odločila, da bo ugotovitve razširila na vse proizvajalce izvoznike iz Argentine in Indonezije.
That reassessment was based on information collected in the original investigation and the review, as well as on information received by interested parties after the publication of the Notice.
Navedena ponovna ocena je temeljila na informacijah, zbranih med prvotno preiskavo in pregledom, ter informacijah, ki so jih zainteresirane strani predložile po objavi obvestila.
One Indonesian exporting producer, Wilmar, has claimed, before and after disclosure, that there is no legal basis to reopen the investigation with regard to Wilmar as the General Court had annulled the definitive Regulation in its entirety for that company.
En indonezijski proizvajalec izvoznik, družba Wilmar, je pred razkritjem in po njem trdil, da ni pravne podlage za obnovo preiskave v zvezi z družbo Wilmar, saj je Splošno sodišče dokončno uredbo za zadevno družbo v celoti razveljavilo.
However, Article 266 TFEU provides that an institution whose act has been declared void must take the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgment.
Vendar člen 266 PDEU določa, da mora institucija, katere akt je bil razglašen za ničnega, sprejeti ukrepe, potrebne za upoštevanje sodbe Sodišča.
In addition, the EU must bring the anti-dumping measures imposed on imports of biodiesel from Indonesia into conformity with the recommendations and rulings contained in the WTO Reports.
Poleg tega mora EU protidampinške ukrepe, uvedene na uvoz biodizla iz Indonezije, uskladiti s priporočili in sklepi iz poročil STO.
In order to examine what measures should be taken to comply with the Court and WTO rulings, it was necessary to re-open the investigation at the time when the illegality was found for both countries and for all exporting producers concerned.
Da bi se preučilo, katere ukrepe bi bilo treba sprejeti za uskladitev s sodbami Sodišča in sklepi STO, je bilo treba za obe državi in vse zadevne proizvajalce izvoznike obnoviti preiskavo od trenutka, v katerem je bila ugotovljena nezakonitost.
Whether a measure is annulled in whole or in part is irrelevant for the purposes of determining whether the Commission must in consequence reinvestigate all the aspects of the investigation which preceded the annulled measure.
Dejstvo, ali je ukrep razglašen za ničnega v celoti ali delno, ni pomembno za ugotovitev, ali mora Komisija zato znova preučiti vse vidike preiskave, izvedene pred razveljavljenim ukrepom.
The original investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012 (‘investigation period’).
Prvotna preiskava dampinga in škode je zajemala obdobje od 1. julija 2011 do 30. junija 2012 („obdobje preiskave“).
With respect to the parameters relevant in the context of the injury assessment, data covering the period from 1 January 2009 to the end of the investigation period were analysed (‘period considered’).
V zvezi s parametri, ki so bili pomembni za oceno škode, so bili analizirani podatki za obdobje od 1. januarja 2009 do konca obdobja preiskave („obravnavano obdobje“).
Neither the Court's judgments nor the Reports affect the findings set out in recitals 16 to 27 of the definitive Regulation concerning the product concerned and the like product.
Sodbe Sodišča in poročila ne vplivajo na ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav 16 do 27 dokončne uredbe glede zadevnega in podobnega izdelka.
DETERMINATION OF THE NORMAL VALUE AND CALCULATION OF THE DUMPING MARGINS
DOLOČITEV NORMALNE VREDNOSTI IN IZRAČUN STOPENJ DAMPINGA
The Commission reassessed the findings of the original investigation on the issues of cost adjustment, profit cap and double counting.
Komisija je znova ocenila ugotovitve prvotne preiskave o vprašanjih prilagoditve stroškov, zgornje meje dobička in dvojnega upoštevanja.
Cost adjustment
Prilagoditev stroškov
The General Court judgments and the WTO findings mentioned in recital 8 all relate to the cost-adjustment done by the EU institutions in the definitive Regulation.
Sodbe Splošnega sodišča in ugotovitve STO iz uvodne izjave 8 se vse nanašajo na prilagoditev stroškov, ki so jo institucije EU izvedle v dokončni uredbi.
As mentioned in recital 28 of the definitive Regulation, the Commission had determined that the normal value had to be constructed as the domestic sales were considered not to be in the ordinary course of trade.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 28 dokončne uredbe, je Komisija ugotovila, da se za domačo prodajo šteje, da ni v skladu z običajnim potekom trgovine, zato je bilo treba normalno vrednost konstruirati.
No interested party contested this finding in the course of this review either.
Tudi med tem pregledom ni te ugotovitve izpodbijala nobena zainteresirana stran.
In recitals 29 to 34 of the definitive Regulation, the Commission established that the difference in the export taxes imposed by Indonesia on the main raw material input (crude palm oil in Indonesia and soybean oil and soya beans in Argentina) and those imposed on the finished product (biodiesel) depressed domestic prices in Indonesia and Argentina, and hence this should be taken into account in the construction of the normal value.
V uvodnih izjavah 29 do 34 dokončne uredbe je Komisija ugotovila, da so bile domače cene v Indoneziji in Argentini zaradi razlike v izvoznih dajatvah, ki jih je Indonezija naložila na glavne vhodne surovine (sojino olje in soja v Argentini ter surovo palmovo olje v Indoneziji), in izvoznih dajatvah, ki sta jih Indonezija in Argentina naložili na končni izdelek (biodizel), znižane, kar bi bilo treba upoštevati pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti.
The Commission further based its conclusions in the original investigation on the interpretation that Article 2.2.1.1 of the ADA allows the investigating authority to decline to use the records of the exporting producers if it determines that they are either (i) inconsistent with GAAP or (ii) do not reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of the product under consideration (recitals 42 and 72 of the definitive Regulation).
Komisija je svoje sklepe v prvotni preiskavi utemeljila tudi z razlago, da lahko v skladu s členom 2.2.1.1 Protidampinškega sporazuma STO preiskovalni organ zavrne uporabo evidenc proizvajalcev izvoznikov, če ugotovi, da (i) niso skladne s splošno sprejetimi računovodskimi načeli ali (ii) ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov, ki so povezani s proizvodnjo in prodajo obravnavanega izdelka (uvodni izjavi 42 in 72 dokončne uredbe).
The Panel and Appellate Body, in the Reports for both Argentina and Indonesia, are of the opinion that the Commission did not provide a legally sufficient basis under Article 2.2.1.1 for concluding that the Indonesian and Argentinian producers' records did not reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of biodiesel, or for disregarding the relevant costs in those records when constructing the normal value of biodiesel.
Odbor in pritožbeni organ v poročilih za Argentino in Indonezijo menita, da Komisija ni zagotovila zadostne pravne podlage na podlagi člena 2.2.1.1 za sklep, da evidence indonezijskih in argentinskih proizvajalcev ne izražajo ustrezno stroškov, povezanih s proizvodnjo in prodajo biodizla, ali za neupoštevanje ustreznih stroškov iz navedenih evidenc pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti biodizla.
Following the Argentina Reports, the Commission had recalculated the normal value for exporting producers in Argentina using the methodology explained in recitals 40 to 49 for Argentina of the provisional Regulation.
Po poročilih o Argentini je Komisija znova izračunala normalno vrednost za proizvajalce izvoznike v Argentini z uporabo metodologije, ki je bila za Argentino pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 40 do 49 začasne uredbe.
As explained above in recital 11 and 12, the Commission had initially also recalculated the normal value for exporting producers in Indonesia, using the methodology explained in recitals 60 to 65 for Indonesia of the provisional RegulationOJ L 141, 28.5.2013, p. 6.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno zgoraj v uvodnih izjavah 11 in 12, je Komisija prvotno znova izračunala tudi normalno vrednost za proizvajalce izvoznike v Indoneziji, pri čemer je uporabila metodologijo, ki je bila za Indonezijo pojasnjena v uvodnih izjavah 60 do 65 začasne uredbeUL L 141, 28.5.2013, str. 6.
The Commission now re-applied this methodology for both countries.
Komisija je zdaj to metodologijo znova uporabila za obe državi.
In its submissions made after the re-opening of this case, EBB claimed that the Reports do not preclude recourse to a cost adjustment to the raw material costs when constructing the normal value, provided it is properly explained.
EBB je v pripombah, predloženih po ponovnem odprtju te zadeve, trdil, da poročila ne preprečujejo prilagoditve stroškov stroškom surovin pri konstruiranju normalne vrednosti, če je prilagoditev ustrezno utemeljena.
The same claim was made during the Review following the Argentina Reports, and rejected by the Commission as accepting it would not be in line with the findings of the Reports, as explained in recitals 43 to 53 of the amending Regulation.
Enaka trditev je bila podana med pregledom po poročilih o Argentini, Komisija pa jo je zavrnila, saj njeno sprejetje ne bi bilo v skladu z ugotovitvami poročil, kot je pojasnjeno v uvodnih izjavah 43 do 53 uredbe o spremembi.
As that explanation remains valid after the Indonesia Report, the Commission continued to reject this claim.
Ker ta razlaga ostaja veljavna po poročilu o Indoneziji, je Komisija to trditev znova zavrnila.
For reasons explained in recitals 44 and 64 of the provisional Regulation, the domestic sales in either country were not considered as being made in the ordinary course of trade and the normal value of the like product had to be constructed under Article 2(3) and (6) of the basic Regulation.
Iz razlogov, pojasnjenih v uvodnih izjavah 44 in 64 začasne uredbe, se ni štelo, da se domača prodaja v kateri od teh dveh držav izvaja v običajnem poteku trgovine, zato je bilo treba normalno vrednost podobnega izdelka konstruirati v skladu s členom 2(3) in (6) osnovne uredbe.
This was done by adding to the adjusted production costs during the investigation period, the selling, general and administrative expenses incurred (‘SG&A’) and a reasonable profit margin.
To je bilo storjeno tako, da so se prilagojenim proizvodnim stroškom v obdobju preiskave prišteli nastali prodajni, splošni in administrativni stroški (PSA) ter razumna stopnja dobička.