natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Furthermore, in case the Authority were to find that the scheme constituted state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA, NOBIO argues that the scheme is justifiable under both Article 61(2)(a) and 61(3)(c) EEA, on the basis of its respectively social and environmental objectives.
Če bi torej Nadzorni organ ugotovil, da program predstavlja državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, bi združenje NOBIO dokazovalo, da je program na podlagi njegovih socialnih in okoljskih ciljev upravičen tako po členu 61(2)(a) kot tudi po členu 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP.
To be considered state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA, the following four cumulative conditions must be met: The measure must (i) be granted by the State or through state resources, (ii) confer a selective economic advantage on the recipients; (iii) distort or threaten to distort competition; and (iv) be liable to affect trade between the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement.
Da bi program predstavljal državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji štirje kumulativni pogoji: (i) odobriti ga mora država ali pa se mora financirati iz državnih sredstev; (ii) prejemnikom mora nuditi selektivno gospodarsko prednost; (iii) izkrivljati mora konkurenco ali groziti, da jo bo izkrivljal; in (iv) lahko vpliva na trgovino med pogodbenicami Sporazuma EGP.
The alternative heating scheme is financed by the Norwegian State by means of allocations from the state budget.
Program za alternativno ogrevanje financira država Norveška s sredstvi iz državnega proračuna.
The measures in question are therefore granted by the State through state resources.
Zadevni ukrepi torej odobri država iz državnih sredstev.
For state support to constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA it must also confer an economic advantage on undertakings, and be selective in the sense that it favours ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’.
Da bi državna podpora predstavljala državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP, mora podjetjem dajati gospodarsko prednost in mora biti selektivna v smislu dajanja prednosti „posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga“.
Conferring an economic advantage on undertakings
Dajanje gospodarske prednosti podjetjem
The first question to be analysed is therefore whether the scheme in question confers an economic advantage on undertakings [20].The direct recipients of the grants under the alternative heating scheme are private households which cannot generally be classified as undertakings within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
Prvo vprašanje, ki ga je treba obravnavati, je torej, ali zadevni program daje podjetjem gospodarsko prednost [20].Neposredni prejemniki subvencij po programu za alternativno ogrevanje so zasebna gospodinjstva, ki jih ni mogoče opredeliti kot podjetja v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
However, the grant of a subsidy to an individual or to consumers does not per definition exclude the existence of aid [21].
Vendar pa odobritev subvencije posamezniku ali potrošnikom glede na opredelitev ne izključuje obstoja pomoči [21].
Even if the first or direct beneficiaries of a measure are not undertakings, an indirect advantage may nonetheless be granted to undertakings.
Četudi prvi in neposredni upravičenci ukrepa niso podjetja, je lahko podjetjem kljub temu dodeljena posredna prednost.
The alternative heating scheme is aimed at promoting the sale of specific heating technologies [25].
Program za alternativno ogrevanje je namenjen spodbujanju prodaje določenih tehnologij ogrevanja [25].
Therefore, in this case, the question of whether undertakings active in the sector of the technologies covered by the scheme benefit from an indirect economic advantage which may fall within the scope of Article 61(1) EEA must be assessed.
Zato je treba v tem primeru preučiti vprašanje, ali so podjetja, ki delujejo v sektorju tehnologij, zajetih v programu, upravičena do posredne gospodarske prednosti, ki lahko sodi v okvir člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
Article 61(l) EEA does not distinguish between measures of state intervention by reference to their causes or aims, but merely defines them in relation to their effects [26].
Člen 61(1) Sporazuma EGP ne razlikuje med ukrepi državne intervencije glede na njihove razloge ali cilje, temveč jih zgolj opredeljuje glede na njihove učinke [26].
The question is therefore whether the alternative heating scheme has the effect of granting an indirect economic advantage to the undertakings active in the sectors of the heating technologies covered by the scheme.The Authority does not share the view of the Norwegian authorities according to which the existence of indirect aid depends on whether the ultimate and predominant aim is to provide aid to undertakings, so that only schemes that are constructed to circumvent the prohibition on state aid can constitute indirect aid.
Vprašanje je torej, ali ima program za alternativno ogrevanje učinek dodeljevanja posredne gospodarske prednosti podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju tehnologij, zajetih v programu.Nadzorni organ se ne strinja z norveškimi organi, ki trdijo, da je obstoj posredne pomoči odvisen od tega, ali je končni in glavni cilj nuditi pomoč podjetjem, tako da lahko posredno pomoč predstavljajo samo programi, oblikovani z namenom izogniti se prepovedi državne pomoči.
In the case under assessment, the subsidy to private households for investments in specific alternative renewable heating technologies provides them with an economic incentive to purchase these products.
V zadevnem primeru subvencija zasebnim gospodinjstvom za naložbe v določene alternativne tehnologije ogrevanja z obnovljivimi viri energije tem gospodinjstvom zagotavlja gospodarsko spodbudo za nakup teh proizvodov.
The measure creates an incentive for consumers to switch from traditional electric heating to alternative heating systems [27].
Ukrep pomeni spodbudo potrošnikom za prehod s tradicionalnega ogrevanja na elektriko na alternativne sisteme ogrevanja [27].
A higher demand from consumers can result in higher profits for these kinds of technologies which provides an advantage to the undertakings active in the sector of the technologies covered by the scheme in comparison with other undertakings [28].The fact that consumers can choose among the technologies covered by the scheme does not mean that the connection between the direct grant from the State to the consumer and the advantage given to the undertakings in question has been eliminated [29].Although the advantage is of an indirect nature, the alternative heating scheme has been established in such a way that there is a direct link from the grant of aid to the consumer and the purchase of the relevant technology.
Večje povpraševanje potrošnikov lahko pomeni večje dobičke za tovrstne tehnologije, kar nudi podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju tehnologij, zajetih v programu, prednost v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji [28].Dejstvo, da lahko potrošniki izbirajo med tehnologijami iz programa, ne pomeni, da je bila povezava med neposredno subvencijo države potrošniku in prednostjo, dodeljeno zadevnim podjetjem, odpravljena [29].Čeprav je prednost posredne narave, je program za alternativno ogrevanje oblikovan tako, da obstaja neposredna povezava med dodelitvijo pomoči potrošniku in nakupom ustrezne tehnologije.
In order to obtain the grant, a proof of purchase of one of the technologies covered by the alternative heating scheme must be submitted to Enova SF.
Za pridobitev subvencije je treba podjetju Enova SF predložiti dokazilo o nakupu ene izmed tehnologij iz programa za alternativno ogrevanje.
In light of the above, the Authority considers that the alternative heating scheme provides an indirect advantage to undertakings active in the sector of alternative, renewable heating systems.
Glede na zgoraj navedeno Nadzorni organ meni, da program za alternativno ogrevanje zagotavlja posredno prednost podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju alternativnih sistemov ogrevanja z obnovljivimi viri energije.
The criterion of selectivity
Merilo selektivnosti
The next question to be analysed is whether the measure is selective, i.e. whether it favours ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’.
Naslednje vprašanje, ki ga je treba obravnavati, je, ali je ukrep selektiven, tj ali daje prednost „posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga“.
The Authority considers that the alternative heating scheme is selective in that it only (indirectly) favours undertakings active in the sector of the alternative, renewable heating technologies covered (i.e. pellet stoves and boilers, heat pumps and solar heating collectors connected to waterborne heating systems and control systems for reducing consumption of electricity).
Nadzorni organ meni, da je program za alternativno ogrevanje selektiven, v kolikor daje (posredno) prednost podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju alternativnih tehnologij ogrevanja z obnovljivimi viri energije iz programa (tj. peči in grelniki na pelete, toplotne črpalke in sončni kolektorji v sistemih ogrevanja s toplo vodo in nadzornih sistemih za zmanjšanje porabe električne energije).
No other undertakings, including those active on the sectors of other renewable heating technologies, can benefit from the grants disbursed under the scheme [30].The Norwegian authorities consider that the advantage granted under the alternative heating system is justified by the nature or general scheme of the system of which it is part.
Nobena druga podjetja, vključno s tistimi, ki delujejo v sektorjih drugih tehnologij ogrevanja z obnovljivimi viri energije, niso upravičena do subvencij, izplačanih po tem programu [30].Norveški organi menijo, da je prednost, dodeljena na podlagi programa za alternativno ogrevanje, upravičena z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, katerega del je.
The Authority does not share this view.
Nadzorni organ se s tem ne strinja.
The ECJ and the EFTA Court have consistently held that measures granting advantages to certain recipients are not selective if they can be justified by the nature and general scheme of the system of which they are part [31].
Sodišče ES in Sodišče Efte dosledno menita, da ukrepi, ki dajejo prednosti posameznim prejemnikom, niso selektivni, če so lahko upravičeni z naravo in splošno shemo sistema, katerega del so [31].
For a selective measure to be justified by the logic of a system there has to be a general system to which it relates.
Za upravičenost selektivnega ukrepa na podlagi logike sistema mora obstajati splošni sistem, na katerega se ukrep navezuje.
In addition, the case law has focused the assessment of whether a measure is justified by the nature and logic of the general system regarding schemes that in some form constitute a derogation from taxes, charges or other similar systems of more general application.
Poleg tega je precedenčno pravo izostrilo oceno glede upravičenosti ukrepa z naravo in logiko splošnega sistema v zvezi s programi, ki na določen način pomenijo izogibanje davkom, stroškom, ali z drugimi podobnimi sistemi bolj splošne uporabe.
The Norwegian authorities have not provided any argument with regard to the general system to which the aid measure relates.
Norveški organi niso predložili nobene utemeljitve v zvezi s splošnim sistemom, na katerega se ukrep pomoči nanaša.
The alternative heating scheme indirectly confers advantages on certain undertakings active in the sector of the technologies covered by the scheme.
Program za alternativno ogrevanje posredno daje prednosti posameznim podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju tehnologij, zajetih v programu.
In light of the above, the Authority must therefore conclude that the measure is selective within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.1.3. DISTORTION OF COMPETITION AND AFFECTING TRADE BETWEEN CONTRACTING PARTIES
Glede na zgoraj navedeno mora Nadzorni organ torej zaključiti, da je ukrep selektiven v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.1.3 IZKRIVLJANJE KONKURENCE IN VPLIV NA TRGOVINO MED POGODBENICAMI
In order to constitute state aid, a measure must distort or threaten to distort competition and be liable to affect trade between the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement.
Da bi predstavljal državno pomoč, mora ukrep izkrivljati ali groziti, da bo izkrivljal konkurenco, in imeti možnost vplivati na trgovino med pogodbenicami Sporazuma EGP.
The Authority does not have to establish that an aid has a real effect on trade between EEA States and that competition is actually being distorted, but only to examine whether that aid is liable to affect such trade and threaten to distort competition [32].
Nadzornemu organu ni treba dokazati, da pomoč dejansko vpliva na trgovino med državami EGP in da je konkurenca dejansko izkrivljena, temveč mora samo preučiti, ali zadevna pomoč lahko vpliva na takšno trgovino in izkrivlja konkurenco [32].
Any grant of aid to an undertaking exercising its activities in the EEA market is liable to cause distortion of competition and affect trade [33].The alternative heating scheme (indirectly) confers an advantage on undertakings active in the sector of alternative, renewable heating technologies.
Kakršna koli dodelitev pomoči podjetju, ki izvaja dejavnosti na trgu EGP, lahko povzroči izkrivljanje konkurence in vpliva na trgovino [33].Program za alternativno ogrevanje (posredno) daje prednost podjetjem, ki delujejo v sektorju alternativnih tehnologij ogrevanja z obnovljivimi viri energije.
Stimulation of consumer demand for the technologies covered is an intrinsic component of the alternative heating scheme.
Bistveni element programa za alternativno ogrevanje je spodbujanje povpraševanja potrošnikov po tehnologijah iz programa.
Further, according to the figures available to the Authority, by way of example, the sales of one of the technologies covered by the scheme, pellet stoves, have increased and stabilised after the introduction of the scheme in Norway.
Nadalje, po podatkih, s katerimi razpolaga Nadzorni organ, se je na primer na Norveškem po uvedbi programa povečala in ustalila prodaja ene od tehnologij iz programa, in sicer peči na pelete.
In comparison, the sales of wood burning stoves, a technology not covered by the scheme, have not experienced a similarly positive development during the same period.
Za primerjavo: prodaja peči na trdo gorivo, tehnologije, ki ni vključena v program, v istem obdobju ni doživela podobnega pozitivnega razvoja.
For these reasons, it can be concluded that the aid threatens to distort competition.
Na podlagi teh razlogov je mogoče zaključiti, da pomoč lahko izkrivlja konkurenco.
As regards the condition relating to the effect on trade, when state aid strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-EEA trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid [34].Undertakings active in the sector of heating technologies operate in a European market, therefore the alternative heating scheme affects trade between the Contracting Parties within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
Glede pogoja, povezanega z vplivom na trgovino, velja, da državna pomoč, ki okrepi položaj podjetja v primerjavi z drugimi konkurenčnimi trgovskimi podjetji znotraj EGP, navedena pomoč vpliva na ta podjetja [34].Podjetja, ki delujejo v sektorju tehnologij ogrevanja, opravljajo dejavnost na evropskem trgu, zato program za alternativno ogrevanje vpliva na trgovino med pogodbenicami v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
Thus, the conclusion must be drawn that the aid threatens to distort competition and is liable to affect trade between the Contracting Parties to the EEA.
Zato se zaključi, da pomoč lahko izkrivlja konkurenco in vpliva na trgovino med pogodbenicami EGP.
The Authority considers that the Norwegian alternative heating scheme constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) EEA.
Nadzorni organ meni, da norveški program za alternativno ogrevanje predstavlja državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The Norwegian authorities did not notify the alternative heating scheme to the Authority before it was put into effect.
Norveški organi programa za alternativno ogrevanje pred njegovo uveljavitvijo niso priglasili Nadzornemu organu.
The Authority therefore concludes that the Norwegian authorities have not respected their obligations pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3.
Nadzorni organ zato ugotavlja, da norveški organi niso spoštovali svojih obveznosti iz člena 1(3) dela I Protokola 3.
The Norwegian authorities argue that the aid can be justified under Article 61(2)(a), or alternatively 61(3)(c) EEA in conjunction with the Authority’s State Aid Guidelines on aid for environmental protection.
Norveški organi trdijo, da je mogoče pomoč utemeljiti na podlagi člena 61(2)(a) ali na podlagi člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, skupaj s Smernicami Nadzornega organa o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja.
COMPATIBILITY UNDER ARTICLE 61(2)(A) EEA
ZDRUŽLJIVOST V SKLADU S ČLENOM 61(2)(A) SPORAZUMA EGP
According to Article 61(2)(a) EEA aid of ‘a social character’ is compatible with the functioning of the Agreement if it is ‘granted to individual consumers, provided that such aid is granted without discrimination related to the origin of the products concerned’.
V skladu s členom 61(2)(a) Sporazuma EGP je pomoč „socialnega značaja“ združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma, če „je dodeljena posameznim potrošnikom, pod pogojem, da je dodeljena brez diskriminacije glede na poreklo zadevnih izdelkov“.
The Authority notes that derogations from the prohibition on state aid shall be interpreted strictly.
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da je treba odstopanja od prepovedi državne pomoči strogo razlagati.
The Norwegian alternative heating scheme is targeted at all Norwegian private households.
Norveški program za alternativno ogrevanje je namenjen vsem norveškim zasebnim gospodinjstvom.
In the Authority’s view, to be considered compatible under Article 61(2)(a) EEA, the scheme must have a social character in the sense that it must benefit a less privileged segment of the population [35].
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa mora imeti program, da bi bil združljiv v skladu s členom 61(2)(a) Sporazuma EGP, socialni značaj v smislu, da mora nuditi ugodnosti prikrajšanemu delu prebivalstva [35].
Since the measure is open to all private households on a ‘first come/first serve’-basis, the scheme can not be considered as having a social character within the meaning of Article 61(2)(a) EEA.
Ker je ukrep odprt za vsa zasebna gospodinjstva na podlagi načela „prvi pride, prvi dobi“, programa ni mogoče obravnavati kot programa socialnega značaja v smislu člena 61(2)(a) Sporazuma EGP.
COMPATIBILITY UNDER ARTICLE 61(3)(C) EEA
ZDRUŽLJIVOST V SKLADU S ČLENOM 61(3)(C) SPORAZUMA EGP
According to Article 61(3)(c) EEA, aid may be declared compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement if it ‘facilitates the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest’.
V skladu s členom 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP se pomoč lahko razglasi za združljivo z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP, če „pospešuje razvoj nekaterih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali nekaterih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne škoduje trgovinskim pogojem v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi“.
The Guidelines on environmental protection
Smernice o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja
The Authority has issued guidelines laying down the criteria it will apply in the assessment of whether state aid measures intended to protect the environment can be considered compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement according to Article 61(3)(c) EEA.
Nadzorni organ je izdal smernice, ki določajo merila za oceno, ali se ukrepi državne pomoči, namenjeni varstvu okolja, lahko štejejo za združljive z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP v skladu s členom 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP.
Thus, a scheme covering these different periods in time must be assessed in light of both sets of guidelines in accordance with the principles laid down in paragraph 74 of the 2001 Guidelines and paragraph 205 of the 2008 Guidelines.
Tako mora biti program, ki zajema ta različna časovna obdobja, ocenjen na podlagi enih in drugih smernic v skladu z načeli, določenimi v odstavku 74 Smernic iz leta 2001 in odstavku 205 Smernic iz leta 2008.
However, the situation where indirect aid benefits some producers, importers and/or sellers of certain heating technologies for private households, is neither covered by the 2001 Guidelines, nor the 2008 Guidelines.
Vendar pa primeri, v katerih posredna pomoč zagotavlja prednosti nekaterim proizvajalcem, uvoznikom in/ali prodajalcem določenih tehnologij ogrevanja za zasebna gospodinjstva, niso zajeti niti v Smernicah iz leta 2001 niti v Smernicah iz leta 2008.
Compatibility directly under Article 61(3)(c) EEA
Združljivost neposredno po členu 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP
As the 2001 and 2008 Guidelines are not directly applicable to the Norwegian alternative heating scheme, the Authority will assess the compatibility of the scheme directly under Article 61(3)(c) EEA [38].
Ker se smernice iz leta 2001 in leta 2008 ne uporabljajo neposredno v norveškem programu za alternativno ogrevanje, bo Nadzorni organ ocenil združljivost programa neposredno po členu 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP [38].
Derogations within the meaning of Article 61(3)(c) EEA must be interpreted narrowly [39] and may be granted only when it can be established that the aid will contribute to the attainment of an objective of common interest, which could not be secured under normal market conditions alone.
Odstopanja v smislu člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP je treba razlagati ozko [39] in so lahko dovoljena samo takrat, kadar je mogoče sklepati, da bo pomoč pripomogla k doseganju cilja skupnega interesa, ki ga ne bi bilo mogoče doseči zgolj pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji.
The so-called ‘compensatory justification principle’ was endorsed by the ECJ in the Philip Morris case [40].Appreciating the compatibility of state aid is fundamentally about balancing the negative effects of aid on competition with its positive effects in terms of common interest [41].
Tako imenovano „načelo nadomestne utemeljitve“ je Sodišče ES potrdilo v zadevi Philip Morris [40].Pri ocenjevanju združljivosti državne pomoči gre v osnovi za uravnoteženje negativnih učinkov pomoči na konkurenco in njenih pozitivnih učinkov v smislu skupnega interesa [41].
In order to be declared compatible under Article 61(3)(c) EEA, state aid scheme must:be aimed at a well-defined objective of common interest,
Da bi bil program državne pomoči razglašen za združljivega po členu 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP:mora biti njegov cilj dobro opredeljen in v skupnem interesu,
be well-designed to deliver the objective of common interest, and in that regard, be an appropriate instrument, have an incentive effect, and be proportionate,
mora biti dobro zasnovan, da pripomore k doseganju cilja skupnega interesa in v zvezi s tem predstavlja ustrezno orodje, ima spodbujevalni učinek in je sorazmeren,
not distort competition and trade in the EEA to an extent contrary to common interest [42].The Authority must assess whether the objective pursued by the measure is necessary, in line with objectives of common interest and, if so, whether this is the least distortive method of pursuing that objective.
ne sme izkrivljati konkurence in trgovine v EGP v obsegu, ki je v nasprotju s skupnim interesom [42].Nadzorni organ mora v skladu s cilji skupnega interesa oceniti, ali je cilj ukrepa potreben,, in če je tako, ali tak način doseganja zadevnega cilja najmanj izkrivlja konkurenco.
Well-defined objective of common interest
Dobro opredeljen cilj skupnega interesa
The alternative heating scheme pursues an environmental objective by incentivising consumers’ investments in environmentally friendly technologies with a limited spread on the Norwegian market.
Program za alternativno ogrevanje stremi k doseganju okoljskega cilja s spodbujanjem potrošnikov k naložbam v okolju prijazne tehnologije z omejeno razširjenostjo na norveškem trgu.