natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, where the undertaking which is to discharge public service obligations, in a specific case, is not chosen pursuant to a public procurement procedure which would allow for the selection of the bidder capable of providing those services at the least cost to the community, the level of compensation must be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs which a typical undertaking, well run and adequately equipped so as to be able to meet the necessary public service requirements, would have incurred in discharging those obligations.
Nazadnje, če podjetje, ki naj bi opravljalo obveznosti javne službe, v določenem primeru ni izbrano na podlagi postopka za oddajo javnih naročil, ki bi omogočil izbiro ponudnika, sposobnega, da skupnosti ponudi storitve po najnižji ceni, je treba stopnjo nadomestila določiti na podlagi analize stroškov, ki bi v tipičnem podjetju z dobrim upravljanjem in ustrezno opremo, ki lahko izpolni zahteve glede izvajanja obveznosti javne službe, nastali med njegovim opravljanjem navedenih obveznosti.
To the extent that the funding fails to satisfy the above conditions, it would be considered as selectively favouring only certain broadcasters and thereby distorting or threatening to distort competition.
Če financiranje ne bi izpolnjevalo navedenih pogojev, bi se štelo, da selektivno daje prednost samo nekaterim radiotelevizijam in tako izkrivlja konkurenco oziroma bi jo lahko izkrivljalo.
Nature of the aid: existing aid as opposed to new aid
Značaj pomoči: obstoječe oblike pomoči v primerjavi z novo
The funding schemes currently in place in most of the EFTA States were introduced a long time ago.
Programi financiranja, ki se trenutno uporabljajo v večini držav Efte, so bili uvedeni že pred časom.
As a first step, therefore, the Authority must determine whether these schemes may be regarded as ‘existing aid’ within the meaning of Article 1(1) of Part I of Protocol 3.
Nadzorni organ mora zato najprej ugotoviti, ali se lahko te sheme obravnavajo kot „obstoječe pomoči“ v smislu člena 1(1) dela I Protokola 3.
In line with this provision, ‘the EFTA Surveillance Authority shall, in cooperation with the EFTA States, keep under constant review all systems of aid existing in those States. It shall propose to the latter any appropriate measures required by the progressive development or by the functioning of the EEA Agreement’.
V skladu s to določbo „Nadzorni organ Efte v sodelovanju z državami Efte redno preverja vse sisteme pomoči, ki obstajajo v teh državah. Tem državam predlaga vse ustrezne ukrepe, ki so potrebni zaradi postopnega razvoja ali delovanja Sporazuma EGP.“
Pursuant to Article 1(b)(i) of Part II of Protocol 3, existing aid includes ‘… all aid which existed prior to the entry into force of the EEA Agreement in the respective EFTA States, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the EEA Agreement’.
V skladu s členom 1(b)(i) dela II Protokola 3, obstoječa pomoč vključuje „… vso pomoč, ki je v zadevnih državah Efte obstajala pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP, to je programe pomoči in individualno pomoč, ki so začeli veljati pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP in se uporabljajo tudi po začetku njegove veljavnosti.“
Pursuant to Article 1(b)(v) of Part II of Protocol 3, existing aid also includes ‘aid which is deemed to be an existing aid because it can be established that at the time it was put into effect it did not constitute an aid, and subsequently became an aid due to the evolution of the European Economic Area and without having been altered by the EFTA State’.
V skladu s členom 1(b)(v) dela II Protokola 3 obstoječa pomoč vključuje tudi „pomoč, ki šteje za obstoječo pomoč, ker je mogoče ugotoviti, da v času, ko je začela veljati, ni pomenila pomoči in je naknadno postala pomoč zaradi razvoja Evropskega gospodarskega prostora in ne da bi jo država Efte spremenila“.
In accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice [26], the Authority must verify whether or not the legal framework under which the aid is granted has changed since its introduction.
Na podlagi sodne prakse Sodišča [26] mora Nadzorni organ preveriti, ali se je pravni okvir, po katerem je bila pomoč dodeljena, od njene uvedbe spremenil.
The Authority believes that a case-by-case approach is the most appropriate [27], taking into account all the elements related to the broadcasting system of a given EFTA State.
Nadzorni organ meni, da je najprimerneje ocenjevati vsak primer posebej [27] z upoštevanjem vseh prvin, povezanih s sistemom radiodifuzije zadevne države Efte.
According to the case-law in Gibraltar [28], not every alteration to existing aid should be regarded as changing the existing aid into new aid.
Na podlagi sodne prakse v Gibraltarju [28] ni treba vsake spremembe obstoječe pomoči obravnavati kot njeno spreminjanje v novo pomoč.
According to the General Court, ‘it is only where the alteration affects the actual substance of the original scheme that the latter is transformed into a new aid scheme. There can be no question of such a substantive alteration where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme.’
Splošno sodišče meni, da se prvotna shema spremeni v novo shemo pomoči samo takrat, ko sprememba vsebinsko vpliva na prvotno shemo. Vsebinske spremembe ni, ko se nova prvina lahko jasno loči od prvotne sheme.
In light of the above considerations, in its decision-making practice the Authority has generally examined: (a) whether the original financing regime for public service broadcasters is existing aid in line with the rules indicated in paragraphs 26 and 27 above; (b) whether subsequent modifications affect the actual substance of the original measure (i.e. the nature of the advantage or the source of financing, the purpose of the aid, the beneficiaries or the scope of activities of the beneficiaries) or whether these modifications are rather of a purely formal or administrative nature; and (c) in case subsequent modifications are substantial, whether they are severable from the original measure, in which case they can be assessed separately, or whether they are not severable from the original measure so that the original measure is as a whole transformed into a new aid.
Glede na navedeno je Nadzorni organ v svoji praksi sprejemanja odločitev na splošno ugotavljal: (a) ali so prvotne finančne ureditve za javne radiotelevizije obstoječa pomoč v skladu s pravili iz odstavkov 26 in 27 tega sporočila; (b) ali naknadne spremembe vsebinsko vplivajo na prvotni ukrep (tj. značaj prednosti ali vir financiranja, namen pomoči, prejemniki ali področje dejavnosti prejemnikov) oziroma ali so te spremembe izključno formalnega ali upravnega značaja; in (c) če so naknadne spremembe znatne, ali jih je mogoče ločiti od prvotnega ukrepa, tako da so bile ocenjene posamično, oziroma ali so te neločljive od prvotnega ukrepa, tako da se ta kot celota spremeni v novo pomoč.
Assessment of the compatibility of State aid under Article 61(3) of the EEA Agreement
Ocena združljivosti Državne pomoči v skladu s Členom 61(3) Sporazuma EGP
Although compensation for public service broadcasting is typically assessed under Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement, the derogations listed in Article 61(3) of the EEA Agreement may in principle also apply in the field of broadcasting, provided that the relevant conditions are met.
Čeprav se nadomestilo za opravljanje storitev javne radiodifuzije navadno ocenjuje na podlagi člena 59(2) Sporazuma EGP, se načeloma lahko odstopanja iz člena 61(3) Sporazuma EGP uporabijo tudi na področju radiodifuzije, če so izpolnjeni ustrezni pogoji.
The EEA Agreement does not contain a provision corresponding to Article 167(4) TFEU, which obliges the Commission to take cultural aspects into account in its actions under other provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures.
Sporazum EGP ne vsebuje določbe, ki bi ustrezala členu 167(4) PDEU, v skladu s katerim mora Komisija pri svojih ukrepih na podlagi določb Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije upoštevati kulturne vidike, zlasti za spoštovanje in spodbujanje kulturnih raznolikosti.
Nor does it contain a cultural exemption similar to Article 107(3)(d) TFEU, which allows the Commission to regard aid to promote culture as compatible with the common market where such aid does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent that is contrary to the common interest.
Spomin tuni ne vsebuje izjeme, podobne členu 107(3)(d) PDEU, na podlagi katere lahko Komisija šteje pomoč, namenjeno spodbujanju kulture, za združljivo s skupnim trgom, kadar taka pomoč ne vpliva na trgovinske pogoje in konkurenco v Skupnosti v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi.
This does not, however, mean that the application of the State aid rules does not leave any room for the consideration of cultural aspects.
Vendar pa to ne pomeni, da uporaba pravil o državni pomoči ne pušča nobenih možnosti za upoštevanje kulturnih vidikov.
The EEA Agreement recognises the need for strengthening cultural cooperation in Article 13 of Protocol 31.
Sporazum EGP priznava potrebo po okrepitvi kulturnega sodelovanja v členu 13 Protokola 31.
In this respect, it should be recalled that the Authority established in a decision-making practice regarding State aid for film production and film related activities that measures in favour of cinematographic and audiovisual production might be approved on cultural grounds under the application of Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, provided that this approach takes the criteria developed by the Commission sufficiently into account and that the approach does not deviate from the Commission’s practice prior to the adoption of Article 107(3)(d) TFEU [29].
V zvezi s tem je treba opomniti, da je Nadzorni organ v svoji praksi sprejemanja odločitev glede državne pomoči za filmsko produkcijo in s filmom povezane dejavnosti določil, da je zaradi kulturnih razlogov mogoče odobriti ukrepe v podporo filmu v skladu z uporabo člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, če ta pristop dovolj upošteva merila, ki jih je razvila Komisija, in če ta pristop ne odstopa od prakse Komisije pred sprejetjem člena 107(3)(d) PDEU [29].
It is for the Authority to decide on the actual application of any exemption provision in Article 61(3) of the EEA Agreement and how cultural aspects should be taken into account.
Nadzorni organ je tisti, ki odloča o dejanski uporabi kakršne koli določbe o izjemi iz člena 61(3) Sporazuma EGP in o tem, kako naj bi se upoštevali kulturni vidiki.
It should be recalled that the provisions granting exemption from the prohibition of State aid have to be applied strictly.
Opozoriti je treba, da je treba določbe, ki omogočajo izjeme glede prepovedi državnih pomoči, uporabljati dosledno.
Accordingly, the Authority considers that the cultural derogation may be applied in those cases where the cultural product is clearly identified or identifiable [30].
Zato Nadzorni organ meni, da se odstopanje glede kulture lahko uporabi, ko je kulturni proizvod jasno določen ali določljiv [30].
Moreover, the Authority takes the view that the notion of culture must be applied to the content and nature of the product in question, and not to the medium or its distribution per se [31].
Poleg tega je stališče Nadzornega organa, da je treba pojem kulture uporabljati v zvezi z vsebino in značajem zadevnega proizvoda ter ne v zvezi z medijem ali distribucijo proizvoda kot tako [31].
Furthermore, the educational and democratic needs of an EFTA State have to be regarded as distinct from the promotion of culture [32].
Izobraževalne in demokratične potrebe posamezne države Efte pa je treba šteti za ločene od spodbujanja kulture [32].
State aid to public service broadcasters usually does not differentiate between cultural, democratic and educational needs of society.
Državna pomoč javnim radiotelevizijam navadno ne ločuje med kulturnimi, demokratičnimi in izobraževalnimi potrebami družbe.
Unless a funding measure is specifically aimed at promoting cultural objectives, such aid cannot in principle be approved under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement as cultural aid.
Če ukrep financiranja ni posebej namenjen spodbujanju doseganja ciljev na področju kulture, potem se člen 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP na splošno ne upošteva kot pomoč na področju kulture.
State aid to public service broadcasters is generally provided in the form of compensation for the fulfilment of the public service mandate and is assessed under Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement, on the basis of the criteria set out in the present Chapter.
Državna pomoč javnim radiotelevizijam se navadno zagotavlja kot nadomestilo za izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe in se ocenjuje po členu 59(2) Sporazuma EGP na podlagi meril iz tega poglavja.
Assessment of the compatibility of State aid under Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement
Ocena združljivosti Državne pomoči v skladu s Členom 59(2) Sporazuma EGP
In accordance with Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement, ‘[u]ndertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest or having the character of a revenue-producing monopoly shall be subject to the rules contained in this Agreement, in particular to the rules on competition, in so far as the application of such rules does not obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to them. The development of trade must not be affected to such an extent as would be contrary to the interests of the Contracting Parties’.
V členu 59(2) Sporazuma EGP je navedeno: Podjetja, pooblaščena za opravljanje storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena, oziroma podjetja, ki imajo značaj dohodkovnega monopola, ravnajo po pravilih iz tega sporazuma, zlasti po pravilih o konkurenci, kolikor uporaba takih pravil pravno ali dejansko ne ovira izvajanja posebnih nalog, ki so jim dodeljene. Razvoj trgovine ne sme biti prizadet v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju z interesi pogodbenic.
The Court of Justice has consistently held that Article 106 TFEU (ex Article 86 of the EC Treaty), corresponding to Article 59 of the EEA Agreement, provides for a derogation and must therefore be interpreted restrictively.
Sodišče dosledno meni, da člen 106 PDEU (prej člen 86 Pogodbe ES), ki ustreza členu 59 Sporazuma EGP, predvideva odstopanje in ga je treba zato razlagati omejevalno.
The Court of Justice has clarified that in order for a measure to benefit from such a derogation, it is necessary that all the following conditions be fulfilled:
Sodišče je pojasnilo, da ima ukrep lahko korist od takšnega odstopanja, če so izpolnjeni vsi naslednji pogoji:
the service in question must be a service of general economic interest and clearly defined as such by the Member State (definition) [33];
zadevna storitev mora biti storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena in jasno opredeljena kot takšna s strani države članice (opredelitev) [33];
the undertaking in question must be explicitly entrusted by the Member State with the provision of that service (entrustment) [34];
zadevnemu podjetju mora država članica izrecno zaupati izvajanje navedene storitve (pooblastilo) [34];
the application of the competition rules of the Treaty (in this case, the ban on State aid) must obstruct the performance of the particular tasks assigned to the undertaking and the exemption from such rules must not affect the development of trade to an extent that would be contrary to the interests of the Community (proportionality test) [35].
uporaba pravil o konkurenci iz Pogodbe (v tem primeru prepoved državnih pomoči) mora ovirati opravljanje posebnih nalog, dodeljenih podjetju, odstopanje od teh pravil pa ne sme vplivati na razvoj trgovine v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju z interesi Skupnosti (preskus sorazmernosti) [35].
In the specific case of public broadcasting the above approach has to be adapted in the light of the Resolution concerning public service broadcasting, which refers to the ‘public service remit as conferred, defined and organised by each Member State’ (definition and entrustment) and provides for a derogation from the Treaty rules in the case of the funding of public service broadcasting ‘in so far as such funding is granted to broadcasting organisations for the fulfilment of the public service remit (…) and (…) does not affect trading conditions and competition in the Community to an extent which would be contrary to the common interest, while the realisation of the remit of that public service shall be taken into account’ (proportionality).
V posebnem primeru storitev javne radiodifuzije je treba zgornji pristop prilagoditi glede na Resolucijo o javni radiodifuziji, ki se sklicuje na „odgovornost javne storitve, kakor jo naloži, opredeli in organizira vsaka država članica“ (opredelitev in pooblastilo) in predvideva odstopanje od pravil Pogodbe pri financiranju javne radiodifuzije, „če je takšno financiranje odobreno radiotelevizijam za izpolnjevanje odgovornosti javne storitve (…) in (…) ne vpliva toliko na trgovinske pogoje in konkurenco v Skupnosti, da bi bilo to v nasprotju s skupnim interesom, pri čemer je treba upoštevati uresničevanje odgovornosti te javne storitve“ (sorazmernost).
It is for the Authority to assess, on the basis of evidence provided by the EFTA States, whether these criteria are satisfied.
Na podlagi dokazil, ki jih zagotovijo države Efte, mora Nadzorni organ oceniti, ali so ta merila izpolnjena.
As regards the definition of the public service remit, the role of the Authority is to check for manifest errors (see section 6.1).
Glede opredelitve javne službe pa je naloga Nadzornega organa, da ugotavlja očitne napake (glej poglavje 6.1).
The Authority further verifies whether there is an explicit entrustment and effective supervision of the fulfilment of the public service obligations (see section 6.2).
Nadzorni organ nadalje preverja, ali obstajata izrecna pooblastitev in učinkovit nadzor izpolnjevanja obveznosti javne storitve (glej poglavje 6.2).
In carrying out the proportionality test, the Authority considers whether or not any distortion of competition arising from the public service compensation can be justified in terms of the need to perform the public service and to provide for its funding.
Nadzorni organ pri preskusu sorazmernosti preverja, ali se morebitno izkrivljanje konkurence, ki je nastalo zaradi nadomestila za opravljanje javne službe, lahko utemelji s potrebo po opravljanju javne službe in zagotavljanju njenega financiranja.
The Authority assesses, in particular on the basis of the evidence that EFTA States are bound to provide, whether there are sufficient guarantees to avoid disproportionate effects of public funding, overcompensation and cross-subsidisation, and to ensure that public service broadcasters respect market conditions in their commercial activities (see section 6.3 and following).
Nadzorni organ zlasti na podlagi dokazov, ki jih morajo države Efte zagotoviti, oceni, ali obstajajo zadostna jamstva za izogibanje nesorazmernim učinkom financiranja iz javnih sredstev, plačevanju prekomernega nadomestila in navzkrižnemu subvencioniranju ter za zagotavljanje, da javne radiotelevizije pri svojih komercialnih dejavnostih spoštujejo tržne pogoje (glej poglavje 6.3 in naslednje).
The analysis of the compliance with the State aid requirements must be based on the specific characteristics of each national system.
Analiza izpolnjevanja zahtev o državnih pomočeh mora temeljiti na posebnih značilnostih posameznega nacionalnega sistema.
The Authority is aware of the differences in the national broadcasting systems and in the other characteristics of the EFTA States’ media markets.
Nadzorni organ se zaveda razlik v nacionalnih sistemih radiodifuzije in drugih značilnostih medijskih trgov v državah Efte.
Therefore, the assessment of the compatibility of State aid to public service broadcasters under Article 59(2) is made on a case-by-case basis, according to the Commission’s and the Authority’s practice [36], in line with the basic principles set out in the following sections.
Zato je treba oceniti združljivost državne pomoči za javne radiotelevizije po členu 59(2) za vsak primer posebej glede na prakso Komisije in Nadzornega organa [36] v skladu s temeljnimi načeli, določenimi v spodnjih poglavjih.
The Authority will also take into account the difficulty some EFTA States may have to collect the necessary funds, if costs per inhabitant of the public service are, ceteris paribus, higher [37] while equally considering potential concerns of other media in these EFTA States.
Nadzorni organ bo upošteval tudi težave, ki bi jih lahko imele nekatere države Efte pri zbiranju potrebnih sredstev, če so stroški opravljanja javne službe na prebivalca pod enakimi pogoji višji [37], obenem pa bo enako upošteval morebitne težave drugih medijev v teh državah Efte.
As the Commission’s and the Authority’s practice demonstrates, a measure which does not fulfil all of the Altmark criteria, will still have to be analysed according to Article 106(2) TFEU, respectively Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement [38].
Glede na prakso Komisije in Nadzornega organa bo treba ukrep, ki ne izpolnjuje vseh meril po Altmarku, še vedno analizirati v skladu s členom 106(2) PDEU oziroma členom 59(2) Sporazuma EGP [38].
Definition of public service remit
Opredelitev javne službe
In order to meet the condition mentioned in point 36(i) above for application of Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement, it is necessary to establish an official definition of the public service mandate.
Zaradi izpolnitve pogojev za uporabo člena 59(2) Sporazuma EGP, navedenih v točki 36(i) zgoraj, je treba določiti uradno opredelitev mandata javne službe.
Definition of the public service mandate falls within the competence of the EFTA States, which can decide at national, regional or local level, in accordance with their national legal order.
Za opredelitev javne službe so pristojne države Efte, ki se na podlagi nacionalnega pravnega reda lahko odločajo na nacionalni, regionalni ali lokalni ravni.
Generally speaking, in exercising that competence, account must be taken of the concept of ‘services of general economic interest’ (hereinafter referred to as SGEI).
Na splošno je treba pri uresničevanju te pristojnosti upoštevati koncept „storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena“.
The definition of the public service mandate by the EFTA States should be as precise as possible.
Država Efte mora čim natančneje opredeliti naloge javne službe.
It should leave no doubt as to whether a certain activity performed by the entrusted operator is intended by the EFTA State to be included in the public service remit or not.
Opredelitev ne sme puščati nobenega dvoma o tem, ali namerava država Efte določeno dejavnost, ki jo izvaja pooblaščeni operater, vključiti v odgovornost javne službe ali ne.
Without a clear and precise definition of the obligations imposed upon the public service broadcaster, the Authority would not be able to carry out its tasks under Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement and, therefore, could not grant any exemption under that provision.
Brez jasne in natančne opredelitve obveznosti, naloženih javni radioteleviziji, Nadzorni organ ne bi mogel opraviti svojih nalog v skladu s členom 59(2) Sporazuma EGP in zato ne bi mogel dodeliti nobenega izvzetja v skladu z navedeno določbo.
Clear identification of the activities covered by the public service remit is also important for non-public service operators, so that they can plan their activities.
Jasna določitev dejavnosti, ki spadajo v javno službo, je pomembna tudi za operaterje, ki ne opravljajo javne službe, ker jim to omogoča načrtovanje dejavnosti.
Moreover, the terms of the public service remit should be sufficiently precise, so that EFTA States’ authorities can effectively monitor compliance, as described in the following section.
Poleg tega morajo biti pogoji za opravljanje javne službe dovolj natančno določeni, da lahko organi držav Efte učinkovito nadzorujejo njihovo izpolnjevanje, kakor je opisano v naslednjem poglavju.