natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Airports between > 3–5 million passengers per annum only in exceptional circumstances
> 3–5 milijonov potnikov v nekaterih posebnih okoliščinah
No start-up aid for air links from airports above 5 million passengers per annum
> 5 milijonov potnikov le v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah
Not eligible if the route is already operated by a high-speed rail service or another airport in the same catchment area under the same conditions
Ustreznost ukrepa pomoči
Ex ante business plan showing profitability of the route at least after 3 years or irrevocable commitment from the airline to operate the route least for a period as long as the period during which it received start-up aid
Ukrep pomoči mora biti ustrezen instrument politike, ki obravnava cilj skupnega interesa.
Present, if in the absence of the aid, the level of economic activity of the airline at the airport concerned would be significantly reduced (for example the new route would not have been launched).
upoštevanje manj izkrivljajočih instrumentov pomoči (jamstva, ugodna posojila itd.)
The new route or the new schedule can start only after submitting the application form for aid to the granting authority.
predhodno kot fiksni znesek, ki krije pričakovano vrzel v financiranju stroškov poslovanja (določeno na podlagi predhodnega poslovnega načrta) v desetletnem prehodnem obdobju
Airport charges in respect of a route
Spodbujevalni učinek
50 % for a maximum period of 3 years
obstaja, če naložba ne bi bila izvedena ali bi bila izvedena v drugačnem obsegu (hipotetična analiza ali analiza vrzeli v financiranju, ki temelji na predhodnem poslovnem načrtu)
Public authorities must make plans public in good time to enable all interested airlines to offer services
obstaja, če bi se brez pomoči stopnja gospodarske dejavnosti letališča brez pomoči znatno znižala
No cumulation with other types of State aid for operation of a route
Sorazmernost pomoči (pomoč, omejena na najmanjšo potrebno)
Airports < 3 million passengers per annum and airports located in remote regions
upravičeni stroški:
Airports > 3 million passengers per annum, except airports located in remote regions
stroški, ki se nanašajo na naložbe v letališko infrastrukturo in opremo, razen investicijskih stroškov za dejavnosti, ki ne sodijo med aeronavtične dejavnosti
Table 3
vrzel v financiranju operativnih stroškov letališča
Social aid
največje dovoljene intenzivnosti pomoči:
Effectively for the benefit of final consumers
> 3–5 milijonov
Of a social character:
do 25 %
Only covering certain categories of passengers (e.g. with particular needs like children, people with disabilities, people on low incomes, students, elderly people, etc.)
med prehodnim obdobjem: 50 % začetne povprečne vrzeli v financiranju, izračunane za povprečje 5 let pred prehodnim obdobjem (2009–2013)
Except: where the route links remote regions (e.g. islands, sparsely populated areas), the aid can cover the entire population of a region
po prehodnem obdobju 10 let: pomoč za tekoče poslovanje ni dovoljena (razen če je dodeljena v okviru horizontalnih pravil)
Without discrimination as to the origin of the airline operating the services
1–3 milijonov
Table 4
do 50 %
Size of airport based on average traffic (passengers per annum)
do 75 %
Applicable legal framework
Izjeme:
Notification requirement
za letališča v oddaljenih regijah (ne glede na njihovo velikost): največje intenzivnosti pomoči za pomoč za naložbe za financiranje letališke infrastrukture se lahko povečajo za največ 20 %
Airport managers at airports < 200000 passengers per annum over the duration of the SGEI entrustment
za letališča z več kot 5 milijoni potnikov letno: le v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah, v katerih je očitno nedelovanje trga, ter ob upoštevanju obsega naložbe in izkrivljanj konkurence
Airlines as regards air links to islands where traffic < 300000 passengers per annum
za letališča z manj kot 700000 potniki letno: 80 % začetne povprečne vrzeli v financiranju poslovanja za 5 let po začetku prehodnega obdobja
Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement
Izogibanje neupravičenim negativnim učinkom na konkurenco in trgovino med državami EGP
Exempt from the notification requirement
letališča z manj kot 5 milijoni potnikov letno: vnaprej določen znesek ali letni obroki za nadomestilo vrzeli v financiranju stroškov kapitala, ki izhaja iz poslovnega načrta letališča
Airports above 200000 passengers per annum over the duration of the SGEI entrustment
ocena izkrivljanja konkurence in vpliva na trgovino
SGEI Framework
letališča z manj kot 700000 potnikov letno: ponovna ocena štiri leta po začetku prehodnega obdobja
Notification required
sheme pomoči:
The Union benefits from its position as a global aviation hub, with airlines and airports alone contributing more than EUR 140 billion to the Union's gross domestic product each year.
letališča z manj kot 3 milijoni potnikov letno
The aviation sector employs some 2,3 million people in the Union [2].
posamezne priglasitve:
The Authority's assessment is based on its experience and decision-making practice, as well as on its analysis of current market conditions in the airport and air transport sectors.
letališča z več kot 3 milijoni potnikov letno
It is therefore without prejudice to its approach in respect of other infrastructures or sectors.
pomoč za naložbe, dodeljena letališču z manj kot 1 milijonom potnikov letno, ki presega 75-odstotno intenzivnost pomoči
No 244/14/COL
št. 244/14/COL
concerning potential aid to the Nasjonal digital læringsarena (NDLA) [2015/1902]
v zvezi z morebitno državno pomočjo za Nasjonal digital læringsarena (NDLA) [2015/1902]
The Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), in particular to Article 61 and Protocol 26,
Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporazum EGP), zlasti člena 61 Sporazuma in Protokola 26 k Sporazumu,
The Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (‘SCA’), in particular to Article 24,
Sporazuma med državami Efte o ustanovitvi nadzornega organa in sodišča (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporazum o nadzornem organu in sodišču) ter zlasti člena 24 Sporazuma,
Protocol 3 to the SCA (‘Protocol 3’), in particular to Article 7(2) of Part II,
Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Protokol 3) ter zlasti člena 7(2) dela II,
HAVING called on interested parties to submit their comments according to those provisions [1],
PO POZIVU vsem zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi določbami [1],
By letter dated 15 April 2010 (Event No 553725), Den Norske Forleggerforening, the Norwegian Publishers Association (‘NPA’), sent the Authority a complaint alleging that unlawful state aid has been granted to the Nasjonal digital læringsarena (‘NDLA’).
Norveško združenje založnikov Den Norske Forleggerforening je Nadzornemu organu v dopisu z dne 15. aprila 2010 (ev. št. 553725) predložilo pritožbo, da naj bi bila podjetju Nasjonal digital læringsarena (v nadaljnjem besedilu: podjetje NDLA) dodeljena protipravna državna pomoč.
By e-mail of 15 July 2011 (Event No 608593) the complainant provided additional information.
V elektronskem sporočilu z dne 15. julija 2011 (ev. št. 608593) je pritožnik predložil dodatne informacije.
By letter dated 2 July 2010 (Event No 558201), the Authority requested additional information.
Nadzorni organ je z dopisom z dne 2. julija 2010 (ev. št. 558201) zahteval dodatne informacije.
By letter dated 9 September 2010 (Event No 568942), the Norwegian authorities replied to the information request.
Norveški organi so se z dopisom z dne 9. septembra 2010 (ev. št. 568942) odzvali na zahtevo po informacijah.
In addition, discussions between the Authority and the Norwegian authorities regarding the case took place at a meeting in Norway on 13-14 October 2010.
Poleg tega so Nadzorni organ in norveški organi na sestanku, ki je potekal na Norveškem od 13. do 14. oktobra 2010, razpravljali o tej zadevi.
Additional information from the Norwegian authorities was sent to the Authority by letter dated 1 December 2010 (Event No 579405).
Norveški organi so poslali Nadzornemu organu dodatne informacije v dopisu z dne 1. decembra 2010 (ev. št. 579405).
The Authority requested additional information by letter dated 4 February 2011 (Event No 574762).
Nadzorni organ je z dopisom z dne 4. februarja 2011 (ev. št. 574762) zahteval dodatne informacije.
The Norwegian authorities responded by letter dated 7 March 2011 (Event No 589528).
Norveški organi so odgovorili z dopisom z dne 7. marca 2011 (ev. št. 589528).
The Norwegian authorities provided further clarifications by emails of 2 May 2011 and 12 August 2011 (Event Nos 596402 and 608596).
Dodatna pojasnila so predložili v elektronskih sporočilih z dne 2. maja 2011 in 12. avgusta 2011 (ev. št. 596402 in 608596).
On 12 October 2011 the Authority adopted Decision No 311/11/COL deciding that the measure did not constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement (‘the Decision’) [2].
Nadzorni organ je 12. oktobra 2011 sprejel Odločbo št. 311/11/COL (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Odločba) [2], v kateri je sklenil, da ukrep ne pomeni državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
On 9 January 2012 the applicant brought an action against the Decision and, by its judgment in Case E-1/12 Den norske Forleggerforening v EFTA Surveillance Authority dated 11 December 2012, the EFTA Court annulled the Decision (‘the Judgment’) [3].
Pritožnik je 9. januarja 2012 vložil tožbo zoper Odločbo in Sodišče Efte je s sodbo z dne 11. decembra 2012 v zadevi E-1/12 Den norske Forleggerforening proti Nadzornemu organu Efte (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sodba) [3] Odločbo razveljavilo.
Following the Judgment, the Authority adopted Decision No 136/13/COL on 27 March 2013 initiating a formal investigation [4].
Po Sodbi je Nadzorni organ 27. marca 2013 sprejel Odločbo št. 136/13/COL o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave [4].
The Norwegian authorities submitted their comments to the decision on 6 May 2013 (Event No 672024).
Norveški organi so predložili pripombe v zvezi z odločbo 6. maja 2013 (ev. št. 672024).
The NPA submitted its observations on 31 July 2013 (Event No 679681).
Norveško združenje založnikov je svoje pripombe predložilo 31. julija 2013 (ev. št. 679681).
A number of comments were submitted from third parties between 2 September and 15 September 2013.
Med 2. in 15. septembrom 2013 so tretje osebe predložile več pripomb.
These third party comments were forwarded to the Norwegian authorities by emails dated 4 October 2013 (Event Nos 685793, 685794, 685795, and 685797) and 7 October 2013 (Event Nos 685884, 685885, 685886, 685887, 685889) and by letter dated 29 October 2013 (Event No 688133).
Te pripombe tretjih oseb so bile norveškim organom posredovane z elektronskimi sporočili z dne 4. oktobra 2013 (ev. št. 685793, 685794, 685795 in 685797) in 7. oktobra 2013 (ev. št. 685884, 685885, 685886, 685887 in 685889) ter z dopisom z dne 29. oktobra 2013 (ev. št. 688133).
Further to a request from the NPA, a meeting was held in Brussels on 16 October 2013 during which the NPA gave a presentation outlining further comments regarding the case.
Na zahtevo norveškega združenja založnikov je 16. oktobra 2013 v Bruslju potekalo srečanje, na katerem je norveško združenje založnikov predstavilo dodatne pripombe v zvezi z zadevo.
The Norwegian authorities submitted their comments on 29 November 2013 (Event No 691769).
Norveški organi so odgovorili z dopisom z dne 31. marca 2014 (ev. št. 703980 in 703991, Priloge 1–28 k ev. št. 703987).
The Authority requested further information by a letter dated 17 February 2014 (Event No 694424).
PODJETJE NDLA
The Norwegian authorities answered by letter dated 31 March 2014 (Event Nos 703980 and 703991, Annexes 1-28 in Event No 703987).
Podjetje NDLA je subjekt, ki so ga ustanovili norveški okrajni organi na podlagi oddelka 27 Zakona o lokalni samoupravi [5].
THE NDLA
Podjetje ni pravna oseba.
The NDLA is an entity established by Norwegian county authorities on the basis of Section 27 of the Local Government Act [5].
V oddelku 27 Zakona o lokalni samoupravi je določeno, da se lahko občine ali okrajni organi povežejo v izvajanju skupnih nalog.
It does not have legal personality.
Sodelovanje mora potekati prek odbora, ki ga imenuje zadevna občina ali okrajni organ.
Section 27 of the Local Government Act stipulates that municipalities or county authorities may join forces to undertake common tasks.
Odbor se lahko pooblasti za sprejemanje sklepov glede izvajanja in organizacije medobčinskega sodelovanja.
The cooperation should take place through a board appointed by the relevant municipality or county authority.
Poleg tega je v določbi predvideno, da mora statut o takšnem sodelovanju določati imenovanje odbora in zastopanost v njem, področje dejavnosti, ali morajo sodelujoče občine/okrajni organi zagotoviti finančne prispevke, ali lahko odbor sklene kreditno pogodbo ali kako drugače naloži sodelujočim občinam/okrajnim organom finančne obveznosti in kako je treba to sodelovanje prekiniti.
The board may be empowered to adopt decisions concerning the operation and organisation of the inter-municipal cooperation.
V medobčinsko sodelovanje se lahko vključijo le občine in okrajni organi.
Moreover, the provision stipulates that the articles of association of such cooperation should determine the appointment and representation in the board, the area of activities, whether the participating municipalities/county authorities should make financial contributions, whether the board may enter into loan agreements or in other ways make the participating municipalities/county authorities liable for financial obligations and, finally, how such cooperation should be terminated.
V takšno sodelovanje se ne morejo vključiti niti država ali drugi državni subjekti niti zasebniki.
Only municipalities and county authorities are allowed to participate in an inter-municipal cooperation.
Poleg tega mora biti sodelovanje resnično, pri čemer zakon prepoveduje prenos upravljanja sodelovanja na en okrajni organ.
Neither the State, other state entities nor private parties can participate in such cooperations.
Ustanovitev podjetja NDLA je opisana v oddelku I.4.4.
Furthermore, the cooperation must be genuine in the sense that the law prohibits the management of the cooperation to be delegated to one county authority.
Cilj podjetja NDLA je razvoj in nakup digitalnega učnega gradiva z namenom objave gradiva na spletu, da bi se učiteljem in učencem zagotovila njegova brezplačna uporaba.
The establishment of the NDLA is described in section I.4.4.
V ta namen se gradivo objavi na javno dostopnem spletišču.
The objective of the NDLA is to develop and purchase digital learning material with a view to publish the material on the internet free of charge for teachers and students to use.
Štiri glavna področja dejavnosti so: prvič, razvoj in dobava digitalnega učnega gradiva za višjo srednjo šolo; drugič, javno naročanje digitalnega učnega gradiva pri tretjih ponudnikih; tretjič, nadzor kakovosti učnega gradiva, in četrtič, upravljanje spletišča, na katerem je digitalno učno gradivo objavljeno (te dejavnosti se v nadaljnjem besedilu navajajo tudi: nakup, razvoj in dobava digitalnega učnega gradiva).
This is done by publishing the material on an open website.
PRITOŽNIK – NORVEŠKO ZDRUŽENJE ZALOŽNIKOV
It has four main areas of activity: first, the development and supply of digital learning material for the upper secondary school; second, the procurement of digital learning material from third party suppliers; third, the quality control of learning material; and fourth, the operation of the website through which the digital learning material is published (these activities are hereafter also referred to as the ‘purchase, development and supply of digital learning materials’).
Norveško združenje založnikov zastopa podjetja, ki so dejavna ali bi lahko bila dejavna na področju razvoja in distribucije digitalnega učnega gradiva.
THE COMPLAINANT — THE NORWEGIAN PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION (‘THE NPA’)
Pritožnik trdi, da dodelitev sredstev podjetju NDLA za nakup, razvoj in dobavo digitalnega učnega gradiva pomeni protipravno državno pomoč podjetju NDLA.
The NPA represents companies which are or could be active in the development and distribution of digital learning material.
V zvezi s tem poudarja, da podjetje NDLA po njegovem mnenju ni sestavni del javne uprave, temveč podjetje v smislu pravil o državni pomoči.
The complainant submits that the granting of funds to the NDLA for the purchase, development and supply of digital learning material constitutes unlawful state aid to the NDLA.
Pritožnik opozarja, da je podjetje v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso subjekt, ki opravlja gospodarsko dejavnost.
In that regard the complainant emphasises that — in its view — the NDLA is not an integrated part of the public administration, but rather an undertaking within the meaning of the state aid rules.
Po navedbah pritožnika je gospodarska dejavnost v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča dejavnost, ki jo lahko vsaj načeloma opravlja zasebno podjetje za namene ustvarjanja dobička.
The complainant recalls that, according to established case law, an undertaking is an entity which is engaged in economic activity.
Tako je vsak subjekt, ki opravlja dejavnost, ki bi se lahko opravljala za namene ustvarjanja dobička, vključen v gospodarsko dejavnost.
The complainant suggests that according to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘Court of Justice’), an economic activity is an activity, which could, at least in principle, be carried out by a private undertaking in order to make a profit.
Pritožnik trdi tudi, da je trg digitalnega učnega gradiva obstajal že pred dejavnostmi podjetja NDLA in da podjetje NDLA zdaj konkurira uveljavljenim zasebnim podjetjem, ki ponujajo digitalne učne vire.
As such, any entity carrying out an activity which could be carried out for profit, is engaged in an economic activity.
Trdi, da razvoj in dobava digitalnih učnih virov na podlagi tega pomeni gospodarsko dejavnost.
The complainant further submits that there was a market for digital learning material prior to the activities of the NDLA and that the NDLA now competes with established private undertakings offering digital learning resources.
Navaja tudi, da so druge dejavnosti podjetja NDLA tesno povezane z razvojem in dobavo digitalnih učnih virov ter jih je zato prav tako treba šteti za gospodarske.
The complainant claims that on this basis the development and supply of digital learning resources constitutes an economic activity.
Pritožnik trdi tudi, da se člen 59(2) Sporazuma EGP ne uporablja, pri čemer je glede na odsotnost priglasitve sklenil, da Norveška pri dodelitvi državne pomoči ni upoštevala pravil o državni pomoči.
The complainant further suggests that the other activities of the NDLA are closely linked to the development and supply of digital learning resources and are therefore also to be considered as economic in nature.
OZADJE
The complainant also argues that Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement is not applicable and concludes that — in the absence of a notification — the Norwegian State has granted state aid contrary to the state aid rules.
ŠOLSKI SISTEM NA NORVEŠKEM
BACKGROUND
Na Norveškem se izobrazba zagotavlja s sistemom brezplačnih javnih šol.
THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN NORWAY
Ta sistem je razdeljen na obvezno osnovno šolo (od 6. do 13. leta), obvezno nižjo srednjo šolo (od 13. do 16. leta) in neobvezno višjo srednjo šolo (od 16. do 19. leta).
Education in Norway is provided through a system of free public schools.
Norveški organi so se leta 2006 med izvajanjem „pobude o spodbujanju znanja“ odločili [6], da bodo vse norveške šole pri vseh predmetih izpostavile določene osnovne spretnosti.
This system is divided into a compulsory elementary school (age 6 to 13), a compulsory lower secondary school (age 13 to 16), and a non-compulsory upper secondary school (age 16 to 19).
Ena od teh spretnosti je sposobnost učenja nekega predmeta s pomočjo digitalne informacijske in komunikacijske tehnologije.
In 2006 the Norwegian authorities decided, in the course of the ‘Knowledge Promotion Initiative’ [6], that all Norwegian schools were to emphasise certain basic skills in all subjects.
Ta zahteva je bila v državni učni načrt uvedena za učence v 10-letni obvezni šoli (tj. šoli od 1. do 10. razreda) in za učence prvega letnika višje srednje šole (tj. šole od 11. do 13. razreda) ter za vajeništvo.
One of these skills is the ability to learn a given subject by using digital information and communication technology.
Okrajni organi so v skladu z norveškim Zakonom o šolstvu [7] odgovorni za izpolnjevanje teh zahtev.
This requirement was introduced in the national curriculum for pupils in the 10-year compulsory school (i.e. school for grades 1 to 10) and for pupils in the first year of upper secondary education (i.e. school for grades 11 to 13) and apprenticeships.
Poleg tega so norveški organi leta 2007 spremenili Zakon o šolstvu in okrajnim organom naložili, da morajo učencem brezplačno zagotavljati potrebno tiskano in digitalno učno gradivo.
Under the Norwegian Education Act [7], the county authorities are responsible for meeting these requirements.
Opozoriti je treba, da so morali učenci norveških višjih srednjih šol (od 11. do 13. razreda) do takrat kupovati učno gradivo, ki so ga šole izbrale v skladu z državnim učnim načrtom.
Furthermore, in 2007, the Norwegian authorities amended the Education Act and obliged the county authorities to provide pupils with the necessary printed and digital learning materials free of charge.
Sprememba je bila uvedena, potem ko je norveška vlada proučila možne načine zagotavljanja brezplačnega učnega gradiva v okviru višjega srednješolskega sistema in njegove gospodarske posledice [8].
It should be noted that until that time, pupils in Norwegian upper secondary school (grades 11 to 13) had to purchase their learning material based on the choice of learning material designated by the schools in compliance with the national curriculum.
V skladu z belo knjigo [9] načelo brezplačnega zagotavljanja učnega gradiva ni novo, saj je že bilo implicitno določeno v okviru prepovedi zaračunavanja šolnin, ki bi se lahko razlagala, kot da vključuje tudi brezplačno zagotavljanje učnega gradiva.
The change was implemented after the Norwegian government examined possible modes for, and the economic consequence of, implementing free learning material in the upper secondary schooling system [8].
„Izobraževanje in usposabljanje, ki poteka na javnih višjih srednjih šolah ali v ustanovah za usposabljanje, sta brezplačna.
The principle of free education is derived from Section 35 of the Secondary School Act [10] on education, third paragraph, which prohibits tuition fees being charged.
(neuradni prevod)4.2 DOLOČBE REVIDIRANEGA DRŽAVNEGA PRORAČUNA
The current system whereby students and apprentices have to buy their own learning materials and tools is not regulated by law.’ [11] (unofficial translation)(20) Indeed, the new sub-section 9 of the Education Act, Section 3-1, now explicitly states that:
Obveznost zagotavljanja brezplačnega digitalnega in fizičnega učnega gradiva pomeni za norveške okrajne organe znatno finančno breme.
‘Education and training provided at publicly-maintained upper secondary schools or training establishments are free of charge.
Ob upoštevanju teh dodatnih stroškov se je norveška vlada leta 2006 odločila zagotoviti dodatna sredstva.
The county authority is responsible for providing the pupils with the necessary printed and digital teaching tool and digital equipment.
Zagotovitev teh sredstev je bila vključena v revidiran državni proračun, ki je bil sprejet 12. maja 2006:
The pupils cannot be required to pay any of the costs for such materials and equipment in excess of that which is decided in the regulation. (…)’ [12] (unofficial translation)4.2.
„Cilj vlade je uvedba brezplačnega učnega gradiva v srednje šole.
PROVISIONS IN THE REVISED STATE BUDGET
Hkrati želi vlada spodbuditi uporabo digitalnega učnega gradiva v srednjih šolah.