natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, an EFTA State can rebut such an argument by showing that existing basic broadband operators do not plan to invest in NGA networks in the coming 3 years by demonstrating for instance that the historical pattern of the investments made by the existing network investors over the last years in upgrading their broadband infrastructures to provide higher speeds in response to users′ demands was not satisfactory.
Vendar lahko država Efte tako trditev izpodbija, če dokaže, da obstoječi operaterji osnovnih širokopasovnih omrežij v naslednjih treh letih ne načrtujejo naložb v omrežja NGA, ter tako dokaže na primer, da pretekle izkušnje z naložbami v obstoječe omrežje, ki so jih v zadnjih letih izvajali vlagatelji za nadgradnjo širokopasovne infrastrukture in s tem zagotavljanje višjih hitrosti kot odziv na zahteve uporabnikov, niso zadovoljive.
In such cases, state support for the deployment of NGA networks would be subject to the detailed analysis at paragraph 73 and to the fulfilment of the set of conditions discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.5.
V takih primerih bi bilo treba državno pomoč za razvoj omrežij NGA obravnavati v podrobni analizi iz odstavka 73 in zahtevati izpolnjevanje svežnja pogojev, ki je podrobneje opisan v oddelku 3.4.5.
As with the policy followed with respect to basic broadband deployment, State aid in favour of NGA network deployment may constitute an appropriate and justified instrument, provided that a number of fundamental conditions are complied with.
Kot pri politiki, ki se izvaja za razvoj osnovnega širokopasovnega dostopa, lahko državna pomoč za razvoj omrežja NGA pomeni ustrezen in upravičen instrument, če je izpolnjenih več temeljnih pogojev.
With the exception of white NGA areas which are also white areas with regards to basic broadband (where no additional requirements are needed), the Authority considers that, in addition to the safeguards set out in Section 2.3.3 and in particular in paragraph 49 (detailed mapping exercise and coverage analysis, open tender process, best economic offer, technological neutrality, use of existing infrastructure, mandated wholesale open access, benchmarking exercise and claw-back mechanism), the following conditions need also to be met:
Nadzorni organ meni, da je treba, razen pri belih lisah NGA, ki so bele lise tudi glede osnovnega širokopasovnega dostopa (pri katerih niso potrebne dodatne zahteve), poleg zaščitnih ukrepov iz oddelka 2.3.3 in zlasti odstavka 49 (podrobno kartiranje in analiza pokritosti, odprti razpisni postopek, ekonomsko najugodnejša ponudba, tehnološka nevtralnost, uporaba obstoječe infrastrukture, odobritev odprtega grosističnega dostopa, primerjava cen in mehanizem za vračilo sredstev) izpolnjevati tudi naslednje pogoje:
In exchange for receiving state support, the beneficiary should be required to provide third parties with effective wholesale access for at least 7 years.
od upravičenca je treba v zameno za prejemanje državne pomoči zahtevati, da tretjim osebam zagotovi dejanski grosistični dostop za vsaj sedem let.
In particular, the access obligation imposed should also include the right to use ducts or street cabinets in order to allow third parties to have access to passive and not only active infrastructure.
Določena obveznost zagotavljanja dostopa mora vključevati tudi pravico do uporabe vodov ali cestnih omaric, da se tretjim osebam poleg dostopa do aktivne infrastrukture omogoči tudi dostop do pasivne infrastrukture.
This is without prejudice to any similar regulatory obligations that may be imposed by the NRA in the specific market concerned in order to foster effective competition or measures adopted after the expiry of that period [71].
To ne vpliva na nobene druge podobne regulativne obveznosti, ki jih lahko nacionalni regulativni organi sprejmejo na zadevnem specifičnem trgu, da bi ohranjali učinkovito konkurenco, ali na ukrepe sprejete po koncu navedenega obdobja [71].
An ‘open access’ obligation is all the more crucial in order to deal with the temporary substitution between the services offered by existing ADSL operators and those offered by future NGA network operators.
Obveznost „odprtega dostopa“ je še pomembnejša, da se razreši tudi trenutno vprašanje začasne zamenjave med storitvami obstoječih operaterjev ADSL in storitvami prihodnjih operaterjev omrežja NGA.
An open access obligation will ensure that ADSL operators can migrate their customers to a NGA network as soon as a subsidised network is in place and thus start planning their own future investments without suffering any real competitive handicap.
Obveznost odprtega dostopa bo zagotovila, da bodo lahko operaterji ADSL svoje stranke preusmerili k omrežju NGA, ko bo postavljeno subvencionirano omrežje, ter tako začeli načrtovati svoje prihodnje naložbe, ne da bi se dejansko zmanjšala njihova konkurenčnost,
Moreover, in setting the conditions for wholesale network access, EFTA States should consult the relevant NRA.
poleg tega se morajo države Efte pri določanju pogojev za grosistični omrežni dostop posvetovati z ustreznimi nacionalnimi regulativnimi organi.
NRAs are expected in the future to continue either to regulate ex ante or to monitor very closely the competitive conditions of the overall broadband market and impose where appropriate the necessary remedies provided by the applicable regulatory framework.
Pričakuje se, da bodo nacionalni regulativni organi v prihodnosti še naprej sprejemali predhodne ureditve ali zelo natančno spremljali konkurenčne pogoje na celotnem trgu širokopasovnega dostopa in po potrebi sprejemali nujna pravna sredstva na podlagi veljavnega regulativnega okvira.
Thus, by requiring that access conditions should be approved or set by the NRA under the applicable EEA rules, EFTA States will ensure that, if not uniform, at least very similar access conditions will apply throughout all broadband markets identified by the NRA concerned.
Tako bodo države Efte z zahtevo, da nacionalni regulativni organi na podlagi veljavnih pravil EGP potrdijo ali določijo pogoje za dostop, zagotovile, da se bodo na vseh trgih širokopasovnega dostopa, ki jih je ugotovil zadevni nacionalni regulativni organ, uporabljali enotni ali vsaj zelo podobni pogoji za dostop,
In addition, whatever the type of the NGA network architecture that will benefit from State aid, it should support effective and full unbundling and satisfy all different types of network access that operators may seek (including but not limited to access to ducts, fibre and bitstream).
poleg tega bi moralo omrežje NGA, ne glede na vrsto arhitekture, podpirati učinkovito in polno razvezovanje ter omogočati vse različne vrste omrežnega dostopa, ki bi ga želeli operaterji (med drugim z dostopom do vodov, optičnih vlaken in bitnega toka).
In this respect, it should be noted that ‘multiple fibre’ architecture allows full independence between access seekers to provide high-speed broadband offers and is therefore conducive to long-term sustainable competition.
Pri tem je treba poudariti, da arhitektura s kabli iz več optičnih vlaken omogoča popolno neodvisnost med iskalci dostopa za zagotovitev hitrih širokopasovnih storitev ter torej spodbuja dolgoročno trajnostno konkurenco.
In addition, the deployment of NGA networks based on multiple fibre lines supports both ‘point-to-point’ and ‘point-to-multipoint’ topologies and is therefore technology neutral.
Postavitev omrežij NGA s kabli iz več optičnih vlaken podpira tako povezave „točka–točka“ kot „točka–več točk“ in je torej tehnološko nevtralna.
This Chapter will be applied from the first day following its adoption.
To poglavje se bo uporabljalo od prvega dne po sprejetju.
The Authority will review the present Chapter in line with future revisions of the corresponding ‘Communication from the Commission — Community Guidelines for the application of State aid rules in relation to rapid deployment of broadband networks’ by the Commission.
Nadzorni organ bo to poglavje pregledal v skladu s prihodnjimi revizijami ustreznega Sporočila Komisije – Smernice Skupnosti o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči v zvezi s hitro postavitvijo širokopasovnih omrežij.
This Chapter corresponds to the Communication from the Commission — Community Guidelines for the application of State aid rules in relation to rapid deployment of broadband networks (OJ C 235, 30.9.2009, p. 7).
To poglavje ustreza Sporočilu Komisije – Smernice Skupnosti o uporabi pravil o državni pomoči v zvezi s hitro postavitvijo širokopasovnih omrežij (UL C 235, 30.9.2009, str. 7).
See for instance i2010 — A European Information Society for growth and employment (COM(2005) 229 final), 1 June 2005, eEurope 2005: An information society for all (COM(2002) 263 final), Bridging the broadband gap (COM(2006) 129).
Glej na primer i2010 – Evropska informacijska družba za rast in zaposlovanje (COM(2005) 229 konč.), 1. junij 2005; eEvropa 2005: Informacijska družba za vse (COM(2002) 263 konč.), Premoščanje širokopasovne vrzeli (COM(2006) 129).
During the past decade, information and communications technologies have become accessible and affordable for the general public.
V zadnjem desetletju je bila širši javnosti dana na voljo cenovno dostopna informacijska in komunikacijska tehnologija (IKT).
The term ‘digital divide’ is most commonly used to define the gap between those individuals and communities that have access to the information technologies and those that do not.
Izraz „digitalna ločnica“ se običajno uporablja za opredelitev vrzeli med posamezniki in skupnostmi, ki imajo dostop do informacijske tehnologije, in tistimi, ki ga nimajo.
Although there are several reasons for this ‘digital divide’, the most important is the lack of an adequate broadband infrastructure.
Vzrokov za to digitalno ločnico je več, vendar je najpomembnejši pomanjkanje ustrezne širokopasovne infrastrukture.
Looking at the regional dimension, the degree of urbanisation is an important factor for access to and use of ICT.
Z vidika regionalne razsežnosti je stopnja urbanizacije pomemben dejavnik dostopa in uporabe IKT.
Internet penetration remains thus much lower in thinly populated areas throughout the European Economic Area.
Na redko poseljenih območjih v vsem Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru je razširjenost interneta zato še vedno veliko manjša.
See Act referred to at point 5cl of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33)), Act referred to at point 5ck of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services, (Authorisation Directive) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 21)) and Act referred to at point 5cj of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 7)), as adapted to EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto.
Glej akt iz točke 5cl Priloge XI k Sporazumu EGP (Direktiva 2002/21/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve (okvirna direktiva) (UL L 108, 24.4.2002, str. 33)), akt iz točke 5ck Priloge XI k Sporazumu EGP (Direktiva 2002/20/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o odobritvi elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij in storitev (Direktiva o odobritvi) (UL L 108, 24.4.2002, str. 21)) in akt iz točke 5cj Priloge XI k Sporazumu EGP (Direktiva 2002/19/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o dostopu do elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij in pripadajočih naprav ter o njihovem medmrežnem povezovanju (Direktiva o dostopu) (UL L 108, 24.4.2002, str. 7)), kakor so prilagojeni Sporazumu EGP s Protokolom 1 k Sporazumu.
See decision of the Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority of 3 April 2009 on the designation of undertakings with significant market power and imposing specific obligations in the market for wholesale broadband access (market 5); decision of Post and Telecom Administration no 8/2008 dated 18 April 2008 on the designation of undertakings with significant market power and imposition of obligations in the market for wholesale broadband access in Iceland and decision of the Office for Communications of 16 December 2009 concerning sector specific regulation on the wholesale market for broadband access in Liechtenstein.
Glej odločbo Norveškega urada za pošto in telekomunikacije z dne 3. aprila 2009 o določitvi podjetij z znatno tržno močjo in določitvi posebnih obveznosti za veleprodajni trg širokopasovnega dostopa (trg 5); odločbo Uprave za pošto in telekomunikacije št. 8/2008 z dne 18. aprila 2008 o določitvi podjetij z znatno tržno močjo in določitvi obveznosti za veleprodajni trg širokopasovnega dostopa na Islandiji ter odločbo Urada za komunikacije z dne 16. decembra 2009 o sektorskih ureditvah za veleprodajni trg širokopasovnega dostopa v Lihtenštajnu.
For the purpose of this document NGA networks refers to wired access networks which consist wholly or in part of optical elements and which are capable of delivering broadband access services with enhanced characteristics (such as higher throughput) as compared to those provided over existing copper networks (see also below footnote 58).
V tem dokumentu omrežja NGA pomenijo žična dostopovna omrežja, ki jih v celoti ali delno sestavljajo optični elementi in lahko zagotavljajo storitve širokopasovnega dostopa z izboljšanimi lastnostmi (kot je večji pretok) v primerjavi s storitvami, ki se zagotavljajo prek obstoječih bakrenih omrežij (glej tudi opombo 58).
See Commission’s draft Recommendation on regulated access to Next Generation Access Networks (NGA), athttp://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/public_consult/nga/dr_recomm_nga.pdf and European Regulators Group Statement on the development of NGA Access, ERG (08) 68, at http://www.erg.eu.int/doc/publications/erg_08_68_statement_on_nga_devolopment_081211.pdf
Glej osnutek Priporočila Komisije o reguliranem dostopu do dostopovnih omrežij nove generacije (NGA) na naslovuhttp://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/public_consult/nga/dr_recomm_nga.pdf in izjavo Evropske skupine regulatornih organov o razvoju dostopa do NGA, ERG(08) 68 na naslovu http://www.erg.eu.int/doc/publications/erg_08_68_statement_on_nga_devolopment_081211.pdf
For a list of all Commission’s decisions taken under the state aid rules in the broadband field, see http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/telecommunications/broadband_decisions.pdf
Seznam vseh odločb Komisije, sprejetih na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči na področju širokopasovnega dostopa je na voljo na spletni strani http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/telecommunications/broadband_decisions.pdf
See also Section 2.2.1 on the application of the market economy investor principle.
Glej tudi oddelek 2.2.1. o izvajanju načela vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji.
See Commission Decision of 30 May 2007 in Case NN 24/07 — Czech Republic, Prague Municipal Wireless Network.
Glej Odločbo Komisije z dne 30. maja 2007 v zadevi NN 24/07 – Češka, Mestno brezžično omrežje v Pragi.
The term ‘investors’ denotes undertakings or electronic communications network operators that invest in the construction and deployment of broadband infrastructure.
Izraz „vlagatelji“ označuje podjetja ali operaterje elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij, ki vlagajo v izgradnjo in postavitev širokopasovne infrastrukture.
The Commission has only approved one case of a measure that did not involve an open tender but which involved a tax credit scheme to support the roll-out of broadband in underserved areas of Hungary, see Decision N 398/05 — Hungary, Development of Tax Benefit for Broadband.
Komisija je samo v enem primeru odobrila ukrep, ki ni vključeval javnega razpisa, temveč shemo davčne olajšave za podporo postavitvi širokopasovnega omrežja na manj pokritih območjih Madžarske, glej Odločbo N 398/05 – Madžarska „Razvoj davčne ugodnosti za širokopasovni dostop“.
See for instance, Commission Decision N 570/07 — Germany, ‘Broadband in rural areas of Baden-Württemberg’; Decision N 157/06 — United Kingdom, ‘South Yorkshire Digital Region Broadband Project’; Decision N 262/06 — Italy, ‘Broadband for rural Tuscany’; Decision N 201/06 — Greece, ‘Broadband access development in underserved territories’; and Decision N 131/05 — United Kingdom, ‘Fibre Speed Broadband Project Wales’.
Glej na primer Odločbo Komisije N 570/207 – Nemčija, Širokopasovno omrežje v podeželskih območjih Baden-Württemberg; Odločbo Komisije N 157/06 – Združeno kraljestvo, Projekt na področju širokopasovnih povezav „Digital Region“ v južnem Yorkshiru; Odločbo Komisije N 262/06 – Italija, Širokopasovno omrežje za toskansko podeželje; Odločbo Komisije N 201/06 – Grčija, Razvoj dostopa do širokopasovnega omrežja na manj pokritih območjih; in Odločbo Komisije N 131/05 – Združeno kraljestvo, Projekt na področju širokopasovnih povezav „FibreSpeed“ v Walesu.
Residential users, although also beneficiaries of such measures, are not however subject to the state aid rules since they are neither undertakings nor economic operators within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Vendar za rezidenčne uporabnike in tudi upravičence do takih ukrepov ne veljajo pravila o državni pomoči, ker niso ne podjetja ne gospodarski subjekti v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
See Commission Decision N 266/08 — Germany, ‘Broadband in rural areas of Bayern’.
Glej Odločbo Komisije N 266/208 – Nemčija, Širokopasovno omrežje na bavarskih podeželskih območjih.
See Commission Decision N 237/08 — Germany, ‘Broadband support in Niedersachsen’.
Glej Odločbo Komisije N 237/08 – Nemčija, Podpora za širokopasovno omrežje v Spodnji Saški.
Case C-303/88 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1433, at paragraphs 20-22.
Zadeva C-303/88, Italija proti Komisiji, Recueil 1991, str. I-1433, odstavki 20–22.
Commission Decision of 11 December 2007 in Case C 53/2006 Citynet Amsterdam — investment by the city of Amsterdam in a fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) network, OJ L 247, 16.9.2008, p. 27.
Odločba Komisije z dne 11. decembra 2007 v zadevi C 53/2006, Citynet Amsterdam – naložba mesta Amsterdam v omrežje kablov iz steklenih vlaken do doma (FTTH), UL L 247, 16.9.2008, str. 27.
The case concerned the construction of a ‘Fibre-to-the-Home’ (FTTH) broadband access network connecting 37000 households in Amsterdam, which were already served by several competing broadband networks.
V zadevi je bila obravnavana izgradnja širokopasovnega dostopovnega omrežja kablov iz optičnih vlaken do doma (FTTH), ki naj bi povezovalo 37000 gospodinjstev v Amsterdamu, ki so že bila vključena v več konkurenčnih širokopasovnih omrežij.
The Amsterdam municipality had decided to invest in the passive layer of the network together with two private investors and five housing corporations.
Mestna občina Amsterdam je sklenila, da bo z dvema zasebnima vlagateljema in petimi stanovanjskimi podjetji vložila v pasivni del omrežja.
The passive infrastructure was owned and managed by a separate entity of which the Amsterdam municipality owned one third of its shares, two other private investors (ING Real Estate and Reggefiber) another third, while housing corporations owned the remaining third.
Pasivno infrastrukturo je imel v lasti ločen gospodarski subjekt in jo je tudi upravljal, lastnik tretjine delnic tega subjekta pa je bila mestna občina Amsterdam, druga tretjina je bila v lasti dveh zasebnih vlagateljev (ING Real Estate in Reggefiber), stanovanjska podjetja pa so imela v lasti preostalo tretjino.
According to the case-law, undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest must have been assigned that task by an act of a public authority.
V skladu s sodno prakso je treba podjetjem, ki so pooblaščena za opravljanje storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena, tako nalogo dodeliti z aktom javnega organa.
In this respect, a service of general economic interest may be entrusted to an operator through the grant of a public service concession; see Joined Cases T-204/97 and T-270/97 EPAC v Commission [2000] ECR II-2267, paragraph 126 and Case T-17/02 Fred Olsen v Commission [2005] ECR II-2031, paragraphs 186, 188-189.
Zato se lahko operaterja pooblasti za opravljanje storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena s podelitvijo koncesije za opravljanje javne službe; glej združeni zadevi T-204/97 in T-270/97, EPAC proti Komisiji, Recueil 2000, str. II-2267, točka 126, in zadevo T-17/02, Fred Olsen proti Komisiji, ZOdl. 2005, str. II-2031, točke 186, 188 in 189.
See C-280/00, Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH [2003] ECR I-7747.
Glej zadevo C-280/00, Altmark Trans GmbH in Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg proti Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH [2003] PSES I-7747.
Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Altmark judgment’.
V nadaljnjem besedilu: sodba Altmark.
See Commission Decision N 381/04 — France, Projet de réseau de télécommunications haut débit des Pyrénées-Atlantiques, and Commission Decision N 382/04 — France, Mise en place d'une infrastructure haut débit sur le territoire de la région Limousin (DORSAL).
Glej Odločbo Komisije N 381/04 – Francija, Projekt hitrega telekomunikacijskega omrežja v Pyrénées-Atlantiques, in Odločbo Komisije N 382/04 – Francija, Vzpostavitev hitre infrastrukture v regiji Limousin (DORSAL).
Although reference is made in this Chapter to a public service ‘concession’, the form of the contractual instrument chosen for the award of a public service mission or SGEI may vary from one EFTA State to another.
Čeprav je v tem poglavju govora o „koncesiji“ za opravljanje javne službe, pa se lahko oblika pogodbenega instrumenta za oddajo naročila javne službe ali SSGP od ene države Efte do druge razlikuje.
However, the instrument should specify at least the precise nature, scope and duration of the public service obligations imposed and the identity of undertakings concerned, and the costs to be borne by the undertaking concerned.
Vendar mora izbrani instrument določati vsaj natančno vrsto, obseg in trajanje dodeljenih obveznosti javne službe in identiteto zadevnih podjetij ter stroške, ki jih mora prevzeti zadevno podjetje.
In particular, given that Member States enjoy a wide discretion in defining the scope of an SGEI, the Commission recognised in the above two decisions that to the extent that the provision of a ubiquitous broadband infrastructure would be open to all other network providers and would remedy a market failure and would provide connectivity to all users in the regions concerned, the Member State concerned had not committed a manifest error in considering that the provision of such a service fell within the notion of an SGEI.
Ker imajo države članice veliko svobode pri opredeljevanju področja uporabe SSGP, je Komisija v navedenih dveh odločbah sklenila, da zadevne države članice niso storile očitne napake, ko so zadevne storitve opredelile kot SSGP, ker je zagotavljanje vseprisotne širokopasovne infrastrukture odprto za vse druge ponudnike omrežij ter odpravlja tržne nepopolnosti in zagotavlja povezljivost vsem uporabnikom v zadevnih regijah.
See Commission Decision N 284/05 — Ireland, ‘Regional Broadband Programme: Metropolitan Area Networks (“MANs”), phases II and III ’, at paragraphs 23, 37-40.
Glej Odločbo Komisije N 284/2005 – Irska, Regionalni program na področju širokopasovnih povezav: fazi II in III programa Metropolitan Area Networks (MAN), odstavki 23, 37–40.