natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, it is worth noting that the case law of the Court of Justice makes clear that there is no need to dissociate the purchasing activities ‘from the subsequent use to which they are put in order to determine the nature of that purchasing activity’ [101].
Podjetje NDLA tudi ne more sprejemati odločitev glede stroškov svojih zaposlenih ali svojega premoženja, ker okrajni organi (i) sprejemajo odločitve glede napotitve potrebnega osebja ter (ii) zagotovijo prostore in tehnično opremo.
Thus, to the extent that the NDLA's activities in terms of providing free digital learning material is considered to be non-economic in nature, it follows that any related purchasing activities will also be considered non-economic.
Podjetje NDLA ni pooblaščeno za zaračunavanje provizij končnim strankam (tj. učencem ali šolam), saj ga pravni okvir zavezuje k brezplačnemu izvajanju storitev.
Since the Articles of Association makes clear that the NDLA may only purchase goods or services that are necessary for the fulfilment of its goal (i.e. the provision of free digital learning material), such purchasing activities will necessarily be related to the non-economic activity.
Podjetje NDLA pri izvajanju svoje dejavnosti torej zgolj upošteva zakon in ne more vplivati na znesek prispevkov, uporabo premoženja ali določitev ravni ugodnosti na način, kot bi lahko gospodarski subjekt.
From the facts set out in Section I.4.6 above, it is apparent that the NDLA does not have any employees nor does it have its own premises or infrastructure.
Ravno nasprotno – podjetje NDLA je del javne uprave okrajnih organov, zato je mogoče trditi, da je pod nadzorom države.
Most of its workforce consists of county authority employees who are seconded (either part-time or full-time) to the NDLA for a certain period of time.
Kot je bilo pojasnjeno, podjetje NDLA ne more povečati obsega svojih dejavnosti.
The NDLA then simply reimburses the relevant county authority for the time its employee has spent working on NDLA projects.
Za to so dejansko pristojni okrajni organi, ki določijo dejavnosti podjetja NDLA prek resolucij ali nadzornega sveta [104].
The rest of the workforce consists of external consultants which have won bids in public procurement procedures that the NDLA finances through its budget.
Proračun določijo okrajni organi (na podlagi priporočila državnega odbora), podjetje NDLA pa lahko uporabi sredstva le v okviru postopka oddaje javnega naročila za storitve ali blago, ki so nujni za izvajanje njegovih dejavnosti.
On the one hand therefore, the NDLA has no control over the costs of the bulk of its staff and, on the other, the NDLA has limited decisional-making power in respect of the services it puts out for tender, as it is bound by its public tender strategy and its decisions are ultimately subject to the county authorities' control through the Supervisory Board.
Nazadnje, okrajni organi lahko vedno ovržejo sklep upravnega odbora, tj. podjetje NDLA ne more po lastni presoji povečati obsega svojih dejavnosti ali v imenu okrajnih organov sprejeti finančne obveznosti, ki presegajo dogovorjeni obseg dejavnosti.
Consequently, in matters of infrastructure and personnel, the NDLA has very little autonomy.
SKLEPNA UGOTOVITEV
In cases in which the activity in question is carried out by entities other than the State itself, one of the issues to be determined is whether the recipient of the funds (public or private) is subject to the control of the State and in particular whether the recipient merely applies the law and cannot influence the statutory conditions of the service (i.e. the amount of the contributions, the use of assets and the fixing of the level of benefits) [102].
Nadzorni organ je na podlagi navedenega sklenil, da podjetje NDLA ne opravlja gospodarskih dejavnosti in da zato financiranje podjetja ne vključuje državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP –
If, on the contrary, the recipient has significant discretion vis-a-vis the State as regards the commercial parameters of its activities (e.g. prices, costs, assets and employees), it would be more likely to constitute an undertaking.
SPREJEL NASLEDNJO ODLOČBO:
The complainant indicated that NDLA should be considered as an undertaking distinct from the State or the county authorities from which it received the funds in question.
Člen 1
However, based on the information provided to the Authority, it is clear that NDLA is an integrated part of the public administration and is — in any case — subject to strict State control.
Financiranje podjetja NDLA ne vključuje državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
According to existing case law, an entity is subject to the control of the public authorities (and thus not independent from the State) if it was given its task by statute and if the public authorities determine both the costs and the revenues of its activities [103].
Formalni postopek preiskave te zadeve je s tem končan.
In that regard the Authority notes that the participating county authorities have — in view of a requirement laid down in the revised State budget for 2006 — established the NDLA as an inter-municipal cooperation and have given it its task by each adopting identical resolutions.
Člen 2
Furthermore, the county authorities control the cost parameters of the activities since these costs are limited to the contributions unilaterally fixed by the county authorities through the ordinary budget processes.
Ta odločba je naslovljena na Kraljevino Norveško.
Moreover, the NDLA cannot take decisions regarding the costs of its employees or its assets since it is the county authorities that (i) decide on the secondment of the necessary staff and (ii) provide the premises as well as technical equipment.
Člen 3
Finally, the NDLA does not have any powers to set fees to the end customers (i.e. pupils or schools) since the legal framework obliges the NDLA to provide its services free of charge.
Besedilo te odločbe v angleškem jeziku je edino verodostojno.
Thus, the NDLA — in carrying out its activity — merely complies with the law and cannot influence the amount of the contributions, the use of assets or the fixing of the level of benefits in the way a commercial operator could do.
V Bruslju, 26. junija 2014
On the contrary, the NDLA is an integrated part of the public administration of the county authorities and thus can be said to be subject to state control.
Za Nadzorni organ Efte
As illustrated above, the NDLA cannot expand the scope of its activities on its own.
Predsednica
The county authorities are ultimately responsible for this and they decide what the NDLA does either through resolutions or through the Supervisory Board [104].
Član kolegija
The budget is determined by the county authorities (following a recommendation from the Management Board) and the NDLA can only incur costs by following the public procurement procedure for services or goods which are necessary for the carrying out of its activities.
UL C 229, 8.8.2013, str. 31, in Dopolnilo EGP št. 44, 8.8.2013, str. 19.
Finally, the county authorities may always overrule the Management Board, i.e. the NDLA has no discretion to expand the scope of its activities and no possibility financially to bind the county authorities beyond the agreed scope of its activities.
UL C 92, 29.3.2012, str. 3, in Dopolnilo EGP št. 18, 29.3.2012, str. 3.
CONCLUSION
Sodba Sodišča Efte z dne 11. decembra 2012 v zadevi E-1/12, Den norske Forleggerforening proti Nadzornemu organu Efte, ZOdl., str. 1040.
On the basis of the above the Authority has concluded that the NDLA does not engage in economic activities and that the financing of it therefore does not involve state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
V norveškem jeziku: „Kunnskapsløftet“.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Dodatek št. 1 k predlogu parlamentu (St. prp) št. 1 (2005–2006) v zvezi s spremembami predlaganega državnega proračuna za leto 2006 (v norveškem jeziku: „For budsjettåret 2006 Om endring av St. prp. nr.
Article 1
1 om statsbudsjettet 2006“).
The financing of the NDLA does not involve state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Predlog št. 36 Odelstingu (spodnji zbornici norveškega parlamenta) (1996–1997), glej str. 171.
The formal investigation into this matter is hereby closed.
Zdaj razveljavljeni zakon LOV-1974-06-21-55 (Lov om videregående opplæring), glej pododdelek 3 oddelka 35.
Article 2
Glej predlog št. 36 Odelstingu (spodnji zbornici norveškega parlamenta) (1996–1997), str. 171 (v norveškem jeziku: „Regelen er ny, men tek ikkje sikte på å endre gjeldande rett.
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Norway.
Prinsippet om gratis opplæring går fram av lvgo. §35 tredje leddet om forbod mot å ta skolepengar.
Only the English language version of this Decision is authentic.
LOV-1998-07-17-61 (Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa (opplæringslova)), neuradni prevod norveških organov iz njihovega dopisa z dne 2. maja 2013 (ev. št. 691771) pododdelka 9 oddelka 3-1 Zakona o šolstvu, ki v norveškem jeziku določa „Opplæringa i offentleg vidaregåande skole eller i lærebedrift er gratis.
For the EFTA Surveillance Authority
Elevane kan ikkje påleggjast å dekkje nokon del av utgiftene til dette utover det som følgjer av forskrift. […]“.
President
Glej Prilogo 2 k pritožbi, dodatek k državnemu proračunu (predlog parlamentu št. 66 (2005–2006)), str. 21, poglavje 225, točka 62 (ev. št. 553728).
College Member
Glej Prilogo 3 (ev. št. 553729): dopis ministrstva za izobraževanje in raziskave z dne 19. junija 2006 z rokom za oddajo vloge za pridobitev nepovratnih sredstev dne 15. avgusta 2006.
OJ C 229, 8.8.2013, p. 31, and EEA Supplement No 44, 8.8.2013, p. 19.
Glej Prilogo 15 (ev. št. 553808) k pritožbi: sporočilo vodje uprave oddelka za izobraževanje in usposabljanje okrajnega organa v okraju Sogn og Fjordane, glej povezavo: http://www.sfj.no/sff/K2PUB.nsf/viewAttachments/C1256B3B0048DA1DC12576320029B7D6/$FILE/09039906.pdf.
OJ C 92, 29.3.2012, p. 3, and EEA Supplement No 18, 29.3.2012, p. 3.
Glej Prilogo 11 k pritožbi: Načrt projekta podjetja NDLA z dne 16. februarja 2007 (ev. št. 553952), str. 3.
Case E-1/12 Den norske Forleggerforening v EFTA Surveillance Authority EFTA Ct.
VGI se nanaša na „Videregående no.
Rep [2012], p. 1040.
1“ in pomeni prvega od treh letnikov srednje šole v skladu z novo reformo iz leta 2006 „Kunnskapsløftet“, glej informacije na spletišču norveškega direktorata za izobraževanje in usposabljanje http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Vitnemal-og-kompetansebevis/Artikler_vitnemal/Foring-av-vitnemal-og-kompetansebevis-for-videregaende-opplaring-i-Kunnskapsloftet-2014/12-Dispensasjoner-og-forsok-innvilget-av-Utdanningsdirektoratet-1/.
LOV-1992-09-25-107 (Lov om kommuner og fylkeskommuner (kommuneloven)).
Glej Prilogo 4 k pritožbi, dopis, ki ga je ministrstvo za izobraževanje in raziskave 20. aprila 2007 poslalo okrajnim organom (ev. št. 553730), glej tretji odstavek na str. 1 in četrti odstavek na str. 2.
LOV-2008-07-17-61 (Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa (Opplæringslova)).
Glej razdelek proračuna iz predloga parlamentu št. 1 (2006–2007) „rumena knjiga“ na povezavi: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fin/dok/regpubl/stprp/20062007/stprp-nr-1-2006-2007-/10/4.html?id=298021.
St. prp.
Glej predložitve norveških organov z dne 9. septembra 2010 (ev. št. 568942), str. 6–8, glej zlasti preglednico na str. 6.
No 1 Addition No 1 to the parliament (2005-2006) regarding amendments to the proposed State budget 2006 (In Norwegian: ‘For budsjettåret 2006 Om endring av St. prp. nr.
Glej uvodno izjavo 31.
1 om statsbudsjettet 2006’).
Nadzorni organ se zaveda, da se metoda dodelitve v zvezi z letoma 2013 in 2014 ni spremenila.
Proposition No 36 to the Odelsting (1996-1997), see p. 171.
Zneske so predložili norveški organi dne 9. septembra 2010 (ev. št. 568942), str. 8.
Now repealed LOV-1974-06-21-55 (Lov om videregående opplæring), see Section 35, sub-section 3.
Glej letno poročilo za leto 2011, točka 5.4.1 (ev. št. 672037).
See Proposition No 36 to the Odelsting (1996-1997) p. 171 (In Norwegian: ‘Regelen er ny, men tek ikkje sikte på å endre gjeldande rett.
Prav tam.
Prinsippet om gratis opplæring går fram av lvgo. §35 tredje leddet om forbod mot å ta skolepengar.
Glej letno poročilo za leto 2012, točka 6.1 (ev. št. 672038).
Ordninga med å påleggje elevar eller lærlingar å halde seg med undervisningsmateriell og utstyr til eige bruk er i dag ikkje særleg lovregulert.’) and also the Norwegian government's letter 19 June 2006 which sets out the conditions and reasons behind the grant of NOK 50 million to digital learning equipment: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/kd/dok/andre/brev/-utvalgte_brev/2006/digitale-laremidler-i-videregaende-oppla.html?id=91754.
Glej Prilogo 15 k pritožbi (ev. št. 553808); sporočilo vodje uprave oddelka za izobraževanje in usposabljanje okrajnega organa v okraju Sogn og Fjordane, glej naslov „Financing and expansion“ (Financiranje in širjenje) na str. 7.
LOV-1998-07-17-61 (Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa (opplæringslova)), the Norwegian authorities' unofficial translation provided in its letter of 2.5.2013 (Event No 691771) of the Education Act, Section 3-1, sub-section 9 which in Norwegian states ‘Opplæringa i offentleg vidaregåande skole eller i lærebedrift er gratis.
Glej odgovor norveških organov z dne 31. marca 2014 (ev. št. 703980 in 703991) in priloge 5–22 (ev. št. 703987).
Fylkeskommunen har ansvaret for å halde elevane med nødvendige trykte og digitale læremiddel og digitalt utstyr.
Rok za oddajo vloge za nepovratna sredstva s strani 18 okrajnih organov.
Elevane kan ikkje påleggjast å dekkje nokon del av utgiftene til dette utover det som følgjer av forskrift. (…)’.
Glej Prilogo 11 k pritožbi, načrt projekta podjetja NDLA z dne 16. februarja 2007 (ev. št. 553952), str. 14.
See Annex 2 to the Complaint, Addition to the State budget (St. prp.
V norveškem jeziku: „Forum for fylkesutdanningssjefer“.
No 66 (2005-2006)), p. 21, chapter 225, item 62 (Event No 553728).
Glej dopis norveških organov z dne 31. marca 2014 (ev. št. 703991), str. 7.
See Annex 15 (Event No 553808) to the complaint: Memo from the administrative head in the Department of Education and Training in Sogn og Fjordane county authority, see link http://www.sfj.no/sff/K2PUB.nsf/viewAttachments/C1256B3B0048DA1DC12576320029B7D6/$FILE/09039906.pdf
Načrt projekta podjetja NDLA, prva in druga alinea podnaslova 2.2.
See annual report of NDLA 2012 (Event No 672038), p. 5, attached to the submission of the Norwegian authorities 6 May 2013.
V sprejetem sklepu je bilo določeno: „Okrajni organ Hordalanda je v imenu drugih okrajnih organov, ki sodelujejo v projektu, pravno odgovoren za podjetje NDLA“ (neuradni prevod).
Original text in Norwegian ‘Akershus fylkeskommune meldte seg ut med bakgrunn i lave besøkstall fra egne skoler, (…)’.
Dopis norveških organov z dne 6. maja 2013 (ev. št. 672024), str. 6, od drugega do zadnjega odstavka.
See Annex 11 to the Complaint: NDLA Project plan dated 16 February 2007 (Event No 553952), p. 3.
Statut, glej Prilogo 10 k pritožbi (ev. št. 553953), ki 1. julij 2009 potrjuje kot datum začetka veljavnosti.
VGI stands for ‘Videregående No 1’ and relates to the first of the three secondary education school years according to the new ‘Kunnskapsløftet’ reform of 2006, see information on the website of the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Vitnemal-og-kompetansebevis/Artikler_vitnemal/Foring-av-vitnemal-og-kompetansebevis-for-videregaende-opplaring-i-Kunnskapsloftet-2014/12-Dispensasjoner-og-forsok-innvilget-av-Utdanningsdirektoratet-1/.
Glej dopis norveških organov z dne 31. marca 2014 (ev. št. 703991).
See Annex 4 to the Complaint, letter to the county authorities from the Ministry of Education and Research dated 20 April 2007 (Event No 553730), see third paragraph on p. 1 and fourth paragraph on p. 2.
Spremenjeni statut iz leta 2012 (glej ev. št. 703991 in 709565).
See submission from the Norwegian authorities dated 9 September 2010 (Event No 568942), p. 6-8, see especially table provided on p. 6.
Okrajni organ Hordalanda je spremenjeni statut sprejel prvi, tj. 16. januarja 2012, okrajni organ Østfolda pa zadnji, tj. 25. oktobra 2012; glej elektronsko sporočilo norveških organov z dne 2. junija 2014 (ev. št. 709742).
See the division of the budget St. prp.
V norveškem jeziku „representantskapet“ (ali „Styret“ v različici statuta iz leta 2012).
No 1 (2006-2007) ‘yellow book’ at link: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fin/dok/regpubl/stprp/20062007/stprp-nr-1-2006-2007-/10/4.html?id=298021
Glej opombo 327 pravnega komentarja o oddelku 27 Zakona o lokalni samoupravi, Gyldendals rettsdata, avtorja Jana Fridthjofa Berna, z dne 8. marca 2012.
See submission from the Norwegian authorities dated 9.9.2010 (Event No 568942), p. 6-8, see especially the table provided on p. 6.
V norveškem jeziku: „Driftsstyret“ (ali „Arbeidsutvalg“ v različici statuta iz leta 2012).
See paragraph 31 below.
Za dodatne podrobnosti v zvezi s finančnimi in proračunskimi zadevami podjetja NDLA glej uvodno izjavo 51.
The Authority understands that the allocation method has remained unchanged with regard to the years 2013 and 2014.
Glej odgovor norveških organov z dne 31. marca 2014 (ev. št. 703980 in 703991) in priloge 5–22 (ev. št. 703987).
Numbers are provided by the Norwegian government 9.9.2010 (Event No 568942), p.
Vir financiranja podjetja NDLA je podrobno opisan v oddelku 4.3.
8.
V norveškem jeziku: „fylkestinget“.
See Annual report 2011, item 5.4.1 (Event No 672037).
Glej predložitev norveških organov z dne 7. marca 2011 (ev. št. 589528), str. 54.
Ibid.
Ta omejena avtonomija, povezana z vsakodnevnimi dejavnostmi podjetja NDLA, je podrobneje analizirana v oddelku o oceni spodaj.
See Annual report 2012, item 6.1 (Event No 672038).
Okrajni organ Hordalanda deluje v imenu vseh sodelujočih okrajnih organov kot pravni subjekt, odgovoren za sklepanje pogodb.
See the response from the Norwegian authorities dated 31 March 2014 (Event No 703980 and 703991) and the attachments 5-22 (Event No 703987).
V skladu z informacijami, ki so jih predložili norveški organi, je bil statut leta 2012 nekoliko spremenjen (ev. št. 703991 in 709565).
The EFTA Court noted that, in the Articles of Association of the NDLA, the entry into force of the formalised cooperation was set for 1 July 2009 (Case E-1/12 Den norske Forleggerforening, paragraph 115 (cited above)).
V norveškem jeziku: „Buskerud, Telemark, og Vestfold“ – innkjøp.
In view of the above, and taking into account that the NDLA was already active as an ad hoc cooperation before it was formally established, the EFTA Court found that the Authority should have investigated the effects of the organisational changes and legal status of the NDLA on its decision-making process and sources of funding.
Ob predložitvi se okraj Akershus še ni ponovno pridružil podjetju NDLA.
Further, the EFTA Court found that the Authority should have investigated how the organisational and legal status of NDLA had changed over time (Case E-1/12 Den norske Forleggerforening, paragraph 117 (cited above)).
UL L 161, 13.6.2013, str. 12, in Dopolnilo EGP št. 34, 13.6.2013, str. 1.
The date of the application for the grant by the 18 county authorities.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 1. julija 2008 v zadevi C-49/07, MOTOE, ZOdl., str.
See Annex 11 to the Complaint, NDLA Project plan dated 16 February 2007 (Event No 553952) p. 14.
I-4863, točka 27.
The Norwegian wording is: ‘Forum for fylkesutdanningssjefer’.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 24. julija 2003 v zadevi C-280/00, Altmark Trans in Regierungsprasidium Magdeburg, Recueil, str.
See letter from the Norwegian authorities dated 31.3.2014 (Event No 703991), p. 7.
I-7747.
Submission by Norwegian authorities dated 6.5.2013 (Event No 672024).
Direktiva o preglednosti (Direktiva Komisije 2006/111/ES z dne 16. novembra 2006 o preglednosti finančnih odnosov med državami članicami in javnimi podjetji ter o finančni preglednosti znotraj določenih podjetij (UL L 318, 17.11.2006, str. 17), vključena v točko 1a Priloge XV k Sporazumu EGP (UL L 266, 11.10.2007, str. 15), in Dopolnilo EGP št. 48, 11.10.2007, str. 12, začetek veljavnosti 9.6.2007).
NDLA Project plan, bullet points one and two under sub heading 2.2.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 23. aprila 1991 v zadevi C-41/90, Höfner in Elser, Recueil, str.
The adopted decision stated the following: ‘The county authority of Hordaland is legally responsible for NDLA, on behalf of the other county authorities that take part in the project’ (unofficial translation).
I-1979, točka 21.
Letter from the Norwegian authorities dated 6.5.2013 (Event No 672024), p. 6, second to last para.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 18. junija 1998 v zadevi C-35/96, Komisija proti Italiji (CNSD), Recueil, str.
Articles of Association, see Annex 10 to the complaint (Event No 553953), which confirm that entry into force was 1.7.2009
I-3851, točka 36.
See letter from the Norwegian authorities dated 31.3.2014 (Event No 703991).
Sodba Sodišča z dne 17. februarja 1993 v združenih zadevah C-159/91 in C-160/91, Poucet in Pistre, Recueil, str.
Amended Articles of Association from 2012 (see Event Nos 703991 and 709565).
I-637.
Hordaland was the first county authority to adopt the amended Articles of Association on 16.1.2012 and Østfold the last having adopted the amendments on 25.10.2012; see e-mail from the Norwegian authorities 2.6.2014 (Event No 709742).
Prav tam, točka 80.
In Norwegian ‘representantskapet’ (or ‘Styret’ in the 2012 version of the Articles of Association).
Sodba Sodišča z dne 17. februarja 1993 v zadevi C-160/91, Poucet, Recueil, str.
In Norwegian: ‘Driftsstyret’ (or ‘Arbeidsutvalg’ in the 2012 version of the Articles of Association).
Sodba Sodišča z dne 12. septembra 2000 v zadevi C-180/98, Pavlov, Recueil, str.
See paragraph 51 below for further details regarding the NDLA's financial and budgetary matters.
I-6497.
See reply from the Norwegian authorities dated 31.3.2014 (Event No 703980 and 703991) and the attachments 5-22 (Event No 703987).
Sodba Sodišča Efte v zadevi E-5/07, Private Barnehagers Landsforbund (navedena zgoraj).
In the reply from Norway dated 31.3.2014 (Event No 703991), it is specified that the two county authorities Sogn og Fjordane and Telemark mistakenly refer to the date 1.1.2010 in their respective resolutions.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 27. septembra 1988 v zadevi 263/86, Humbel, Recueil, str. 5383, točke 14–21.
The Norwegian authorities also state that even though Troms county authority, for practical reasons, states in its decision that the entry into force of the cooperation was 1.1.2010, the correct date should have been 1.7.2009.
Sodba Sodišča z dne 11. septembra 2007 v zadevi C-318/05, Komisija proti Nemčiji, ZOdl., str.
The source of the NDLA's funding has been set out in detail in section 4.3 above.
I-6957.
In Norwegian: ‘fylkestinget’.
Prav tam, točka 68.
LOV-1999-07-16-69 (Lov om offentlige anskaffelser (anskaffelsesloven)).
Sodba Sodišča v zadevi 263/86, Humbel, (navedena zgoraj), točka 18.
Hordaland county authority acts, on behalf of all participating county authorities, as the legal entity responsible for contract signings.
I-691, točka 31.
See the response from Norway dated 31.3.2014 (Event No 703991).
Glej pripombe pritožnika na odločbo o začetku postopka, točka 46 (ev. št. 679680).
According to the information provided by Norwegian authorities the Articles of Association were slightly amended in 2012 (Event Nos 703991 and 709565).
Glej pripombe pritožnika na odločbo o začetku postopka, točka 8 (ev. št. 679680).
In Norwegian: ‘Buskerud, Telemark, og Vestfold’-innkjøp.
Glej uvodno izjavo 70.
See the submission from Norwegian authorities dated 4.3.2011 (Event No 672032) which was attached to the comment to the opening decision.
Sodba Sodišča Efte v zadevi E-1/12, Den norske Forleggerforening (navedena zgoraj), točka 117.
At the time of the submission, Akershus had not rejoined the NDLA yet.
To je potrjeno v predložitvi norveških organov z dne 2. maja 2013 (ev. št. 672024), str. 6.
OJ L 161, 13.6.2013, p. 12, and EEA Supplement No 34, 13.6.2013, p. 1.
Glej načrt projekta podjetja NDLA; Priloga 11 k pritožbi (ev. št. 553952), str. 2.
Case C-49/07 MOTOE [2008] ECR I-4863, paragraph 27.
Statut, glej Prilogo 10 k pritožbi (ev. št. 553953).