natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For this purpose, after consulting the director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate, the hearing officer may hold a meeting with the persons invited to the hearing and, where appropriate, the relevant Directorates of the Authority, in order to prepare for the hearing itself.
V ta namen lahko pooblaščenec za zaslišanje po posvetovanju z direktorjem Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč skliče sestanek z osebami, ki so vabljene na zaslišanje, in po potrebi z ustreznimi direktorati Nadzornega organa, da se pripravijo na samo zaslišanje.
After consulting the director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate, the hearing officer shall determine the date, the duration and the place of the hearing.
Po posvetovanju z direktorjem Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč pooblaščenec za zaslišanje določi datum, trajanje in kraj zaslišanja.
The hearing officer may allow the parties to whom a statement of objections has been addressed, other involved parties, complainants, other persons invited to the hearing, Directorates of the Authority and the authorities of the EEA States to ask questions during the hearing.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje lahko dovoli strankam, na katere je bilo naslovljeno obvestilo o nasprotovanju, drugim udeleženim strankam, pritožnikom, drugim osebam, ki so vabljene na zaslišanje, direktoratom Nadzornega organa in organom držav EGP, da zastavljajo vprašanja med zaslišanjem.
Where required by the need to ensure the right to be heard, the hearing officer may, after consulting the director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate, afford the parties concerned, other involved parties, complainants or interested third persons within the meaning of Article 5 the opportunity to submit further written comments after the oral hearing.
Kadar je to potrebno zaradi potrebe po zagotovitvi pravice do zaslišanja, lahko pooblaščenec za zaslišanje po posvetovanju z direktorjem Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč zadevnim strankam, drugim udeleženim strankam, pritožnikom ali zainteresiranim tretjim osebam v smislu člena 5 omogoči, da po ustnem zaslišanju predložijo svoje dodatne pisne pripombe.
The Authority shall not be obliged to take into account written comments received after that date.
Nadzorni organ ni dolžen upoštevati pisnih pripomb, prejetih po tem datumu.
The hearing officer shall submit an interim report to the competent College Member on the hearing and the conclusions he or she draws with regard to the respect for the effective exercise of procedural rights.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje pristojnemu članu kolegija predloži vmesno poročilo o zaslišanju in svojih stališčih v zvezi s spoštovanjem učinkovitega uveljavljanja procesnih pravic.
A copy of the report shall be given to the director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate and to the Directorate for Legal and Executive Affairs.
Kopija tega poročila se poda direktorju Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč in Direktoratu za pravne in izvršne zadeve.
In so doing, the hearing officer shall seek to ensure in particular that, in the preparation of draft decisions by the Authority, due account is taken of all the relevant facts, whether favourable or unfavourable to the parties concerned, including the factual elements relevant to the gravity and duration of any infringement.
Pri tem si pooblaščenec za zaslišanje posebej prizadeva zagotoviti, da se pri pripravi osnutkov sklepov Nadzornega organa upoštevajo vsa relevantna dejstva, ugodna ali neugodna za zadevne stranke, vključno z dejstvi, pomembnimi za določitev resnosti in trajanja morebitne kršitve.
Such observations may relate to, inter alia, the need for further information, the withdrawal of certain objections, the formulation of further objections or suggestions for further investigative measures pursuant to Section V of Chapter II of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Taka stališča so lahko med drugim povezana s potrebo po dodatnih informacijah, umikom določenih nasprotovanj, oblikovanjem dodatnih nasprotovanj ali predlogov za dodatne preiskovalne ukrepe na podlagi oddelka V poglavja II Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
The director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate and the Directorate for Legal and Executive Affairs shall be informed of such observations.
Direktor Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč in Direktorat za pravne in izvršilne zadeve je obveščen o teh stališčih.
Parties to the proceedings which offer commitments to meet the concerns expressed to them by the Authority in its preliminary assessment pursuant to Article 9 of Chapter II of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement may call upon the hearing officer at any stage in the procedure pursuant to Article 9, in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights.
Stranke v postopkih, ki ponudijo zaveze za odpravo pomislekov, ki jih je Nadzorni organ izrazil v svoji predhodni oceni v skladu s členom 9 poglavja II Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču, se lahko v kateri koli fazi postopka na podlagi člena 9 obrnejo na pooblaščenca za zaslišanje zaradi zagotovitve učinkovitega uveljavljanja svojih procesnih pravic.
Parties to proceedings in cartel cases which engage in settlement discussions pursuant to Article 10a of Chapter III of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement may call upon the hearing officer at any stage during the settlement procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights.
Stranke v postopkih v zvezi s kartelnimi zadevami, ki sodelujejo v pogovorih o poravnavi v skladu s členom 10a poglavja III Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču, se lahko v kateri koli fazi postopka poravnave obrnejo na pooblaščenca za zaslišanje zaradi zagotovitve učinkovitega uveljavljanja svojih procesnih pravic.
The final report shall be submitted to the competent College Member, the director of the Competition and State Aid Directorate and the Directorate for Legal and Executive Affairs.
Končno poročilo se predloži pristojnemu članu kolegija, direktorju Direktorata za konkurenco in državno pomoč in Direktoratu za pravne in izvršilne zadeve.
It shall be communicated to the competent authorities of the EEA EFTA States and, in accordance with the provisions on cooperation laid down in Protocol 23 to the EEA Agreement, to the European Commission.
Poročilo se poda pristojnim organom držav Efte, ki so hkrati članice EGP, in v skladu z določbami o sodelovanju, opredeljenimi v Protokolu 23 k Sporazumu EGP, Evropski komisiji.
Submission to the Authority and publication
Predložitev Nadzornemu organu in objava
The hearing officer’s final report shall be presented to the Authority together with the draft decision submitted to it, in order to ensure that, when it reaches a decision on an individual case, the Authority is fully apprised of all relevant information as to the course of the procedure and that the effective exercise of procedural rights has been respected throughout the proceedings.
Končno poročilo pooblaščenca za zaslišanje se predloži Nadzornemu organu skupaj z osnutkom sklepa, da se zagotovi, da je Nadzorni organ pri sprejetju odločitve v posamezni zadevi v celoti seznanjen z vsemi pomembnimi informacijami glede poteka postopka in da se ves čas postopka spoštuje učinkovito uveljavljanje procesnih pravic.
The final report may be modified by the hearing officer in the light of any amendments to the draft decision prior to its adoption by the Authority.
Pooblaščenec za zaslišanje lahko spreminja končno poročilo v smislu kakršnega koli dopolnila k osnutku sklepa, preden Nadzorni organ sklep sprejme.
The Authority shall communicate the hearing officer’s final report, together with the decision, to the addressees of the decision.
Nadzorni organ pošlje končno poročilo pooblaščenca za zaslišanje skupaj s sklepom naslovljencem sklepa.
It shall publish the hearing officer’s final report in the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement thereto, together with the decision, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.
Končno poročilo pooblaščenca za zaslišanje objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije in Dopolnilu EGP k Uradnemu listu Evropske unije skupaj s sklepom ob upoštevanju legitimnega interesa podjetij pri varovanju njihovih poslovnih skrivnosti.
Decision No 177/02/COL of 30 October 2002 and Decision No 792/08/COL of 17 December 2008 are repealed.
Odločba št. 177/02/COL z dne 30. oktobra 2002 in Odločba št. 792/08/COL z dne 17. decembra 2008 se razveljavita.
Procedural steps already taken under Decision No 177/02/COL and/or Decision No 792/08/COL of 17 December 2008 shall continue to have effect.
Postopkovni ukrepi, že sprejeti na podlagi Odločbe št. 177/02/COL z dne 30. oktobra 2002 in/ali Odločbe št. 792/08/COL z dne 17. decembra 2008, ostanejo v veljavi.
In cases where the initiation of proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Chapter II of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement or the initiation of proceedings pursuant to Article 6(1)(c) of Chapter IV of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement took place before the entry into force of the present Decision, the interim report pursuant to Article 14 of the present Decision and the final report pursuant to Article 16 shall not cover the investigation phase, unless the hearing officer decides otherwise.
V zadevah, v katerih se je postopek na podlagi člena 11(6) poglavja II Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču ali postopek na podlagi člena 6(1)(c) poglavja IV Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču začel pred začetkom veljavnosti tega sklepa, vmesno poročilo v skladu s členom 14 tega sklepa in končno poročilo v skladu s členom 16 ne zajemata faze preiskave, razen če se pooblaščenec za zaslišanje odloči drugače.
This Decision shall be authentic in the English language and shall enter into force from the day of its adoption.
Ta sklep je verodostojen v angleškem jeziku in začne veljati z dnem sprejetja.
It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union and in the EEA Supplement thereto.
Sklep se objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije in Dopolnilu EGP k Uradnemu listu Evropske unije.
The EFTA States shall be informed by means of a copy of this Decision.
Države Efte se obvestijo z izvodom tega sklepa.
The European Commission shall be informed by means of a copy of this Decision.
Evropska komisija se obvesti z izvodom tega sklepa.
See, for example, Case E-15/10 - Posten Norge AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority, judgment of 18 April 2012, not yet published, paragraphs 85-92.
Npr. zadeva E-15/10 – Posten Norge AS proti Nadzornemu organu Efte, sodba z dne 18. aprila 2012, še neobjavljena, odstavki 85–92.
Article 6 of the EEA Agreement provides that, “without prejudice to future development of case law, the provisions of this Agreement, in so far as they are identical in substance to corresponding rules of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community and the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community and to acts adopted in application of these two Treaties, shall, in their implementation and application, be interpreted in conformity with the relevant rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Communities given prior to the date of signature of this Agreement”.
Člen 6 Sporazuma EGP določa: „Brez vpliva na prihodnji razvoj sodne prakse se določbe tega sporazuma, kolikor so po vsebini enake ustreznim pravilom Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti za premog in jeklo ter aktov, sprejetih za uporabo teh dveh pogodb, pri njihovem izvajanju in uporabi razlagajo v skladu z ustreznimi odločitvami Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti, sprejetimi pred datumom podpisa tega sporazuma.“ Kar zadeva bistvene odločitve, sprejete po datumu podpisa Sporazuma EGP, iz člena 3(2) Sporazuma o nadzornem organu in sodišču izhaja, da Nadzorni organ Efte in Sodišče Efte ustrezno upoštevata načela, določena s temi odločitvami.
Any issue regarding the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the parties concerned, other involved parties within the meaning of Article 11(b) of Chapter V of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement (hereinafter “the other involved parties”), complainants within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Chapter II of Protocol 4 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement (hereinafter “complainants”) and interested third persons within the meaning of Article 5 of this Decision involved in such proceedings shall first be raised with the Directorate for Competition and State Aid.
V zvezi s katerim koli vprašanjem glede učinkovitega uveljavljanja procesnih pravic zadevnih strank, drugih udeleženih strank v smislu člena 11(b) poglavja V Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču (v nadaljnjem besedilu: druge udeležene stranke), pritožnikov v smislu člena 7(2) poglavja II Protokola 4 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču (v nadaljnjem besedilu: pritožniki) in zainteresiranih tretjih oseb v smislu člena 5 tega sklepa, udeleženih v teh postopkih, se te osebe najprej obrnejo na Direktorat za konkurenco in državno pomoč.
No 519/12/COL
št. 519/12/COL
closing the formal investigation procedure into potential aid to AS Oslo Sporveier and AS Sporveisbussene (Norway)
o zaključku formalnega postopka preiskave glede potencialne pomoči podjetjema AS Oslo Sporveier in AS Sporveisbussene (Norveška)
THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY (“THE AUTHORITY”)
NADZORNI ORGAN EFTE (V NADALJNJEM BESEDILU: NADZORNI ORGAN) JE –
HAVING REGARD to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), in particular to Articles 49 and 61 to 63 and Protocol 26 thereof,
OB UPOŠTEVANJU Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporazum EGP), zlasti členov 49 in 61 do 63 Sporazuma ter Protokola 26 k Sporazumu,
HAVING REGARD to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (“the Surveillance and Court Agreement”), in particular to Article 24,
OB UPOŠTEVANJU Sporazuma med državami Efte o ustanovitvi nadzornega organa in sodišča (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sporazum o nadzornem organu in sodišču), zlasti člena 24 Sporazuma,
HAVING REGARD to Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement (“Protocol 3”), in particular to Article 1(2) of Part I and Article 7(2) of Part II,
OB UPOŠTEVANJU Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Protokol 3), zlasti člena 1(2) dela I in člena 7(2) dela II Protokola,
HAVING called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to those provisions [1],
PO POZIVU vsem zainteresiranim stranem, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi določbami [1],
Administrative procedure leading to the Authority’s Decision No 254/10/COL
Upravni postopek, na podlagi katerega je bila sprejeta Odločba Nadzornega organa št. 254/10/COL
By letter dated 11 August 2006, the Authority received a complaint (“the complaint”) from Konkurrenten.no AS (“the complainant”) alleging that the Norwegian authorities had granted state aid to AS Oslo Sporveier and AS Sporveisbussene.
V dopisu z dne 11. avgusta 2006 je družba Konkurrenten.no AS (v nadaljnjem besedilu: pritožnik) pri Nadzornem organu vložila pritožbo z navedbo, da so norveški organi odobrili državno pomoč podjetjema AS Oslo Sporveier in AS Sporveisbussene.
The letter was registered by the Authority on 16 August 2006 (Event No 384017).
Nadzorni organ je dopis evidentiral 16. avgusta 2006 (ev. št. 384017).
By letter dated 17 August 2006 to the complainant, the Authority acknowledged the receipt of the complaint (Event No 384134).
Z dopisom z dne 17. avgusta 2006 je Nadzorni organ pritožniku potrdil prejem pritožbe (ev. št. 384134).
By letter dated 7 September 2006, the Authority forwarded the complaint to the Norwegian authorities and invited them to comment (Event No 387163).
V dopisu z dne 7. septembra 2006 je Nadzorni organ posredoval pritožbo norveškim organom in jih pozval, naj nanjo odgovorijo (ev. št. 387163).
By letter dated 11 October 2006, the Norwegian authorities replied to the information request.
Norveški organi so na zahtevo po informacijah odgovorili v dopisu z dne 11. oktobra 2006.
The letter was registered by the Authority on 19 October 2006 (Event No 392725).
Nadzorni organ je dopis evidentiral 19. oktobra 2006 (ev. št. 392725).
By letter dated 20 October 2006, the complainant submitted further comments.
V dopisu z dne 20. oktobra 2006 je pritožnik posredoval dodatne pripombe.
The letter was registered by the Authority on 23 October 2006 (Event No 394520).
Nadzorni organ je dopis evidentiral 23. oktobra 2006 (ev. št. 394520).
By letter dated 29 November 2006, the Authority requested further information from the Norwegian authorities (Event No 394397).
Nadzorni organ je v dopisu z dne 29. novembra 2006 zaprosil norveške organe za dodatne informacije (ev. št. 394397).
By letter dated 19 June 2007, the Authority requested further information from the Norwegian authorities (Event No 425271).
V dopisu z dne 19. junija 2007 je Nadzorni organ zaprosil norveške organe za dodatne informacije (ev. št. 425271).
The Norwegian authorities replied by letter submitted electronically on 16 August 2007 (Event No 434326).
Norveški organi so odgovorili v elektronskem dopisu z dne 16. avgusta 2007 (ev. št. 434326).
By e-mail dated 20 February 2008, the complainant submitted further information (Event No 466226).
Pritožnik je v elektronskem dopisu z dne 20. februarja 2008 posredoval dodatne informacije (ev. št. 466226).
By letter submitted electronically on 2 April 2008, the Authority requested yet further information from the Norwegian authorities (Event No 471926).
V elektronskem dopisu z dne 2. aprila 2008 je Nadzorni organ ponovno zaprosil norveške organe za dodatne informacije (ev. št. 471926).
The Norwegian authorities replied by letter submitted electronically on 29 April 2008 (Event No 475480).
Norveški organi so odgovorili v elektronskem dopisu z dne 29. aprila 2008 (ev. št. 475480).
The complainant submitted further information by e-mails dated 25 May 2008 (Event No 478132), 2 June 2008 (Event No 479743), 9 July 2008 (Events No 489623 and 489626), 14 August 2008 (Event No 489591), 15 August 2008 (Event No 488527), 20 January 2009 (Event No 505210) and 22 January 2009 (Event No 505503).
Pritožnik je posredoval dodatne informacije v elektronskih dopisih z dne 25. maja 2008 (ev. št. 478132), 2. junija 2008 (ev. št. 479743), 9. julija 2008 (ev. št. 489623 in 489626), 14. avgusta 2008 (ev. št. 489591), 15. avgusta 2008 (ev. št. 488527), 20. januarja 2009 (ev. št. 505210) in 22. januarja 2009 (ev. št. 505503).
During the beginning of 2010, the Authority and the Norwegian authorities had informal contact both via telephone and e-mail regarding the case.
Nadzorni organ in norveški organi so v zvezi s tem primerom v začetku leta 2010 vzpostavili neuraden stik prek telefona in elektronske pošte.
Information received by the Authority in this context was consolidated in a letter submitted to the Authority electronically on 21 April 2010 by the Norwegian authorities (Event No 554417).
Informacije, ki jih je v tem okviru prejel Nadzorni organ, so bile potrjene v dopisu, ki so ga norveški organi 21. aprila 2010 posredovali Nadzornemu organu v elektronski obliki (ev. št. 554417).
On 21 June 2010, the Authority adopted Decision No 254/10/COL closing the case on the grounds that the aid involved existing aid that had ceased.
Nadzorni organ je 21. junija 2010 sprejel Odločbo št. 254/10/COL o zaključku primera, ker je pomoč vključevala obstoječo pomoč, ki se je že iztekla.
By letters dated 21 June 2010, the Authority forwarded copies of Decision No 254/10/COL to the Norwegian authorities (Event No 558824) and the complainant (Event No 561949).
Nadzorni organ je v dopisih z dne 21. junija 2010 norveškim organom (ev. št. 558824) in pritožniku (ev. št. 561949) posredoval kopije Odločbe št. 254/10/COL.
Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-14/10 Konkurrenten.no AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority
Sodba Sodišča Efte v zadevi Konkurrenten.no AS proti Nadzornemu organu Efte, E-14/10
By application lodged at the Registry of the EFTA Court on 2 September 2010, the complainant brought an action for annulment of the Authority’s Decision No 254/10/COL.
Pritožnik je 2. septembra 2010 v tajništvu Sodišča Efte vložil tožbo za razglasitev ničnosti Odločbe Nadzornega organa št. 254/10/COL.
On 22 August 2011, the EFTA Court rendered its judgment in Case E-14/10 Konkurrenten.no AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority, annulling Decision No 254/10/COL in its entirety, for the following reasons.
Sodišče Efte je 22. avgusta 2011 izreklo sodbo v zadevi Konkurrenten.no AS proti Nadzornemu organu Efte, E-14/10, in Odločbo št. 254/10/COL v celoti razglasilo za nično iz naslednjih razlogov.
Firstly, the EFTA Court found that the Decision was inadequately reasoned, in that the Authority had failed to explain how the renewal of the concession, as of 1 January 2000, could be classified as part of an existing aid scheme, or why it could not be considered to be a relevant alteration of that aid scheme [2].
Sodišče Efte je ugotovilo, da odločba ni bila ustrezno utemeljena, saj Nadzorni organ ni pojasnil, kako bi bilo obnovitev koncesije s 1. januarjem 2000 mogoče uvrstiti v obstoječo shemo pomoči ali zakaj je ne bi bilo mogoče šteti kot ustrezne spremembe navedene sheme pomoči [2].
Thus, the EFTA Court concluded that the Authority should have opened the formal investigation procedure in order to become, to the extent possible, fully informed of the facts.
Sodišče Efte je tako ugotovilo, da bi Nadzorni organ moral začeti formalni postopek preiskave, da bi se v največji možni meri seznanil z vsemi dejstvi.
The applicant’s plea addressing the same issues with regard to the period 2000 – 2008 was also declared well founded [3].
Kot utemeljen je bil sprejet tudi ugovor tožeče stranke, ki obravnava ista vprašanja v zvezi z obdobjem 2000–2008 [3].
Thirdly, the EFTA Court held that the Authority had failed to identify whether the capital injection only concerned unfunded pension liabilities that arose in connection with the discharge of public service obligations, or also covered other activities.
Sodišče Efte je presodilo, da Nadzorni organ ni opredelil, ali se je kapitalski vložek nanašal samo na nefinancirane pokojninske obveznosti, do katerih je prišlo v zvezi z izpolnjevanjem obveznosti javne službe, ali pa je pokrival tudi druge dejavnosti.
As the EFTA Court could not review the Decision in relation to the applicant’s claim that the capital injection did not correspond to a payment for transport services provided, this amounted to a lack of reasoning [4].
Ker Sodišče Efte ni moglo proučiti odločbe ob upoštevanju očitka tožeče stranke, da se kapitalski vložek ni ujemal s plačilom za opravljene prevozne storitve, je bila obrazložitev zaradi tega pomanjkljiva [4].
Re-assessment of the complaint
Ponovna presoja pritožbe
The complainant has alleged that the following measures may involve unlawful state aid:
Pritožnik je zatrdil, da je nezakonita državna pomoč lahko vključena v naslednje ukrepe:
Cross-subsidies between the four companies AS Oslo Sporveier, AS Sporveisbussene, Arctic Express AS and Sporveisbussenes Turbiler AS [5],
navzkrižno subvencioniranje med štirimi podjetji, tj. AS Oslo Sporveier, AS Sporveisbussene, Arctic Express AS in Sporveisbussenes Turbiler AS [5];
A capital injection of NOK 41499000 made in 2004 by AS Oslo Sporveier into AS Sporveisbussene,
kapital v višini 41499000 NOK, ki ga je leta 2004 podjetje AS Oslo Sporveier vložilo v podjetje AS Sporveisbussene;
A favourable tax position acquired in a non-competitive market, allowing AS Sporveisbussene to avoid paying tax on profits, and
ugoden davčni položaj na nekonkurenčnem trgu, ki je podjetju AS Sporveisbussene omogočil, da se izogne plačilu davka na dobiček, in
Guarantees granted by AS Sporveisbussene to the benefit of its subsidiaries Arctic Express AS and Sporveisbussenes Turbiler AS.
jamstva, ki jih je podjetje AS Sporveisbussene podelilo v korist svojima odvisnima podjetjema Arctic Express AS in Sporveisbussenes Turbiler AS.