natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Commission Decision of 24 April 2007 in case E 10/2005 (ex C 60/1999), paragraph 33, Commission Decision of 4 April 2007 in case E 7/2005 regarding Finnish guarantee schemes, paragraph 16, Commission decision of 20 April 2005 in case E 8/2005 in favour of Spanish Broadcaster RTVE, point 2.2, and Commission Decision in case E 22/2004 — Direct tax incentives in favour of export related activities, paragraphs 34-35.
Odločba Komisije z dne 24. aprila 2007 v zadevi E-10/2005 (prej C-60/1999), odstavek 33, Odločba Komisije z dne 4. aprila 2007 v zadevi E-7/2005 v zvezi s finskimi jamstvenimi shemami, odstavek 16, Odločba Komisije z dne 20. aprila 2005 v zadevi E-8/2005 v korist španskega izdajatelja radiotelevizijskega programa RTVE, točka 2.2, in Odločba Komisije v zadevi E-22/2004 – neposredne davčne spodbude v korist dejavnosti, povezanih z izvozom, odstavka 34–35.
Commission Decision of 24 April 2007 in Case aid E 3/2005 — Financing of public service broadcasters in Germany, paragraphs 200-214, Commission Decision E-14/2005 — Portugal, compensation payments to public service broadcaster RTP, paragraphs 61-80.
Odločba Komisije z dne 24. aprila 2007 v primeru pomoči E-3/2005 – financiranje javnih izdajateljev radiotelevizijskega programa v Nemčiji, odstavki 200–214, Odločba Komisije E-14/2005 – Portugalska, plačila nadomestil javnemu izdajatelju radiotelevizijskega programa RTP, odstavki 61–80.
Commission Decision of 24 April 2007 in Case aid E 3/2005 — Financing of public service broadcasters in Germany, paragraph 215.
Odločba Komisije z dne 24. aprila 2007 v primeru pomoči E-3/2005 – Financiranje javnih izdajateljev radiotelevizijskega programa v Nemčiji, odstavek 214.
As a result of being publicly owned institutions, German public banks had traditionally benefited from an implicit State guarantee, the so-called Anstaltslast.
Ker so nemške javne banke ustanove v javni lasti, so bile tradicionalno upravičene do implicitnega državnega jamstva, tako imenovanega Anstaltslast.
In case E-10/2000 regarding the German Landesbanken, the Commission concluded that Anstaltlast was an institute predating the EC Treaty.
V zadevi E-10/2000 v zvezi z nemškimi deželnimi bankami (Landesbanken) je Komisija ugotovila, da je jamstvo Anstaltslast obstajalo že pred Pogodbo ES.
The aid to the banks flowing from this guarantee was therefore existing, and that applied also where Anstaltslast did not merely follow from a general principle of law, but later had been introduced explicitly in written legal provisions (cf. Letter from the Commission to Germany of 8 May 2000 proposing appropriate measures in case E 10/2000, point 7, first paragraph.
Pomoč bankam, ki je izhajala iz tega jamstva, je bila zato obstoječa pomoč, kar je veljalo tudi, kadar jamstvo Anstaltslast ni izhajalo samo iz splošnega pravnega načela, ampak je bilo izrecno zapisano v predpisih (glej prvi pododstavek točke 7 dopisa Komisije Nemčiji z dne 8. maja 2000 o predlogu ustreznih ukrepov v zadevi E-10/2000).
To the Authority’s knowledge, the German banks benefiting from Anstaltslast are normally established by a separate law regulating the establishment and operation of the individual bank.
Po vednosti Nadzornega organa so nemške banke, upravičene do jamstva Anstaltslast, po navadi ustanovljene po ločenem zakonu, ki ureja ustanovitev in delovanje posamezne banke.
Several of these banks seem to have been established after the entry into force of the EC Treaty.
Zdi se, da je bilo nekaj teh bank ustanovljenih po začetku veljavnosti Pogodbe ES.
Changes in the legislation regulating the operation of the public banks have frequently taken place.
Spremembe zakonodaje, ki ureja delovanje javnih bank, so bile pogoste.
Establishing new banks by law, merging and splitting up public banks and other changes in the legislation governing the public banks may certainly affect the activity of the undertaking and may have an impact on the functioning of the common market, on competition or simply on the actual amount of aid which is available to the undertakings.
Ustanavljanje bank v skladu z zakonodajo, združevanje in delitev javnih bank ter druge spremembe zakonodaje, ki ureja javne banke, lahko gotovo vplivajo na dejavnost podjetij, delovanje skupnega trga, konkurenco ali le na dejanski znesek pomoči, ki je podjetjem na voljo.
Nevertheless, the Commission neither examined when the different banks benefiting from the guarantee were established nor did it analyse changes in the operations of the banks or other measures relating to individual banks before it concluded that the advantage flowing from the Anstaltslast was existing aid.
Vendar pa Komisija ni nikoli preučila, kdaj so bile banke, upravičene do garancije, ustanovljene niti ni preučila sprememb delovanja bank ali drugih ukrepov v zvezi s posameznimi bankami, preden je ugotovila, da je ugodnost, ki izhaja iz jamstva Anstaltslast, obstoječa pomoč.
See similarly, Commission decision of 16 October 2002 in Case C 68/02 — France, Electricité de France (EDF), paragraph 68, where one of the aid measures to EDF, a State guarantee, followed from a general principle in French law predating the EC Treaty.
Glej tudi odstavek 68 Odločbe Komisije z dne 16. oktobra 2002 v zadevi C-68/02 – Francija, Electricité de France (EDF), v katerem je eden od ukrepov pomoči EDF, državno jamstvo, izhajal iz splošnega načela francoske zakonodaje, ki je veljalo že pred Pogodbo ES. Delovanje EDF se je z leti precej spremenilo in družba se je tudi razširila na nove trge.
The operation of EDF had changed significantly over the years and the company had also expanded into new markets.
Ne glede na to se Komisiji ni zdelo, da je treba preučiti te dejanske spremembe, tudi ni preučila sprememb zakonodaje, ki se je nanašala na EDF, po začetku veljavnosti Pogodbe ES, ko je ugotavljala, ali navedeni ukrep pomoči pomeni novo ali obstoječo pomoč.
That notwithstanding, the Commission saw no need to examine these factual changes, nor did it look into any changes to the legislation pertaining to EDF, subsequent to the entry into force of the EC Treaty, when establishing whether that aid measure constituted new or existing aid (cf. also similarly Commission Decision of 16 December 2003 on the State aid granted to EDF and the electricity and gas industries (OJ L 49, 22.2.2005, p. 9, paragraph 59), and the Commission’s invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) EC in Case E 3/2002, EDF (OJ C 164, 15.7.2003, p. 7, paragraphs 53-55).
Glej tudi Odločbo Komisije z dne 16. decembra 2003 o državnih pomočeh, ki jih je Francija odobrila družbi EDF in sektorju industrije električne energije in plinarn (UL 2005 L 49, 22.2.2005, str. 9, uvodna izjava 59) in poziv Komisije k predložitvi pripomb na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES v zadevi E-3/2002, EDF (UL C 164, 15.7.2003, str. 7, uvodne izjave 53–55).
Commission Decision of 24 April 2007 in case E 3/2005 — Financing of public service broadcasters in Germany, paragraphs 192-216, Commission Decision of 20 April 2005 in Case E 8/2005 — State aid in favour of the Spanish national public broadcaster RTVE, point 2.2, and Commission Decision of 20 April 2005 in case E 9/2005 — Italy, RAI, paragraphs 25-48.
Odločba Komisije z dne 24. aprila 2007 v zadevi E-3/2005 – Financiranje javnih izdajateljev radiotelevizijskega programa v Nemčiji, odstavki 192–216, Odločba Komisije z dne 20. aprila 2005 v zadevi E-8/2005 – Državna pomoč v korist španskega nacionalnega javnega izdajatelja radiotelevizijskega programa RTVE 20, točka 2.2, in Odločba Komisije z dne 20. aprila 2005 v zadevi E-9/2005 – Italija, RAI, odstavki 25–48.
Another question is whether the exemption of HFF from the guarantee premium introduced in 1998 would be new aid.
Vprašanje je tudi, ali bi bilo izvzetje sklada HFF iz jamstvene premije, uvedeno leta 1998, nova pomoč.
The Authority has today, by Decision No 406/08/COL opened formal investigation procedures regarding the exemptions from the guarantee premiums prescribed in Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees.
Nadzorni organ je danes, z Odločbo št. 406/08/COL, sprožil formalni postopek preiskave o izvzetjih iz jamstvenih premij, določenih v Zakonu št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih.
In this respect, the situation is parallel to the following decisions of the Commission, German Broadcasters, Poczta Polska, La Poste, EDF etc. In those decisions, the Commission had to asses whether State guarantees to public undertakings qualified as new or existing aid.
V zvezi s tem so okoliščine primerljive z naslednjimi odločbami Komisije: nemški izdajatelji radiotelevizijskega programa, Poczta Polska, La Poste, EDF itd. Komisija je morala v teh odločbah presoditi, ali se državna jamstva javnim podjetjem opredelijo kot nova ali obstoječa pomoč.
In all decisions the Commission made the finding that the guarantee itself had either not changed or had remained substantially unchanged.
Komisija je v vseh odločbah ugotovila, da se samo jamstvo ni spremenilo ali pa je ostalo vsebinsko nespremenjeno.
The Commission did not, in its assessment of the aid following from the guarantee, venture into an assessment as to whether the particular undertaking at hand had changed its operations as this question did not relate to the aid measure as such, but as to one of the beneficiaries of an abstractive defined aid scheme.
Komisija pri presoji pomoči, ki izhaja iz jamstva, ni ugotavljala, ali je zadevno podjetje spremenilo svoje delovanje, ker se to vprašanje ni nanašalo na ukrep pomoči kot tak, ampak na enega od upravičencev do splošno opredeljenega ukrepa pomoči.
Commission Decision of 29 November 2007, C(2007) 5778, State aid C 56/07 — France, Garantie illimitée de l’Etat en faveur de La Poste, paragraphs 93-97, Commission Decision E-14/2005 — Portugal, compensation payments to public service broadcaster RTP, paragraphs 78-80, Commission Decision of 20 April 2005 in State aid case E 10/2005 (ex C 60/99) — Redevance radiodiffusion TF1, paragraph 33, and Letter from the Commission to Germany of 8 May 2000 proposing appropriate measures in case E 10/2000, Landesbank, point 7, first paragraph.
Odločba Komisije z dne 29. novembra 2007, C(2007) 5778, Državna pomoč C-56/07 – Francija, Garantie illimitée de l'Etat en faveur de La Poste, odstavki 93–97, Odločba Komisije E-14/2005/Portugalska, plačila nadomestil javnemu izdajatelju radiotelevizijskega programa RTP, odstavki 78–80, Odločba Komisije z dne 20. aprila 2005 v primeru državne pomoči E-10/2005 (prej C-60/99) – Redevance radiodiffusion TF1, odstavek 33, in dopis Komisije Nemčiji z dne 8. maja 2001 o predlogu ustreznih ukrepov v zadevi E-10/2000, Landesbank, prvi odstavek točke 7.
As regards the exemption the HFF enjoys from paying a guarantee fee pursuant to Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees, the Authority’s preliminary assessment is that it constitutes new aid and that measure is being dealt with separately (cf. the Authority’s Decision No 406/08/COL of 27 June 2008).
Kar zadeva izvzetje sklada HFF iz plačila stroškov za jamstvo v skladu z Zakonom št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih, je predhodna ocena Nadzornega organa, da ukrep pomeni novo pomoč in se obravnava ločeno (glej Odločbo Nadzornega organa 406/08/COL z dne 27. junija 2008).
According to Article 35 of Act No 1/1997, the Government Employees Pension Fund Act, a fund member may opt for having his pension increased corresponding to the increase in salary for the post they last occupied.
V skladu s členom 35 Zakona št. 1/1997, Zakona o pokojninskem skladu državnih uslužbencev, se lahko član sklada odloči, da se njegova pokojnina ustrezno poveča glede na povečanje plače za njegovo zadnje delovno mesto.
The Director of the State Housing Agency considered that his post was comparable to that of the Director of the HFF, which was not considered the case by the Pension Fund.
Direktor Državne stanovanjske agencije je menil, da je njegovo delovno mesto primerljivo z mestom direktorja sklada HFF, s čimer se pokojninski sklad ni strinjal.
In a judgment of 22 January 2004 in case No 344/2003 the Supreme Court of Iceland decided the case in favour of the Director.
Vrhovno sodišče Islandije je v sodbi z dne 22. januarja 2004 v zadevi št. 344/2003 razsodilo v korist direktorja.
In the judgment it was, inter alia, stated that the Housing Financing Fund was for the main part charged with the same role as the State Housing Agency, acting as a mortgage lending institution for Icelanders.
V sodbi je bilo med drugim navedeno, da ima sklad HFF v glavnem enako vlogo kot Državna stanovanjska agencija in deluje kot ustanova za hipotekarna posojila za Islandce.
The Court considered that the post of Director of the Agency was comparable to the Director of the Fund with regard to nature of the duties, their scope and responsibility.
Sodišče je menilo, da je delovno mesto direktorja Agencije primerljivo delovnem mestu direktorju Sklada, kar zadeva vrsto dolžnosti, njihov obseg in odgovornost.
In its Decision E-14/2005 — Portugal, compensation payments to public service broadcaster RTP, paragraphs 63 and 74, the Commission found that changes made to a Portuguese aid measure did not convert the measure into a new aid, inter alia, because the alterations to the national rule did not change the aim pursued by the subsidies.
V odstavkih 63 in 74 Odločbe Komisije v zadevi E-14/2005 – Portugalska, plačila nadomestil javnemu izdajatelju radiotelevizijskega programa RTP, je Komisija ugotovila, da se zaradi sprememb portugalskega ukrepa pomoči ta ukrep ni spremenil v novo pomoč, med drugim, ker se s spremembami nacionalnega pravila ni spremenil cilj subvencij.
Commission Decision 2006/240/EC of 16 November 2004 on aid granted by Germany to grain brandy distilleries (Kornbranntwein) (OJ L 88, 25.3.2006, p. 50, paragraph 83-84).
Odločba Komisije 2006/240/ES z dne 16. novembra 2004 o državni pomoči Nemčije za proizvajalce žitnega žganja, uvodne izjave 83–84 (UL L 88, 25.3.2006, str. 50).
See also the Commission’s Article 17(2) letter of 14 July 2005 in case E 2/2005 concerning Dutch aid to the housing sector where the Commission found that the aid was existing even if the regime of direct subsidies had been replaced with a regime of state loans and a tax exemption after the entry into force of the EC Treaty.
Glej tudi člen 17(2) dopisa Komisije z dne 14. julija 2005 v zadevi E-2/2005 v zvezi z nizozemsko pomočjo stanovanjskemu sektorju, v katerem je Komisija ugotovila, da je pomoč obstoječa kljub zamenjavi ureditve neposrednih subvencij z ureditvijo državnih posojil in davčno oprostitvijo po začetku veljavnosti Pogodbe ES.
This was so as these changes, taken together, had resulted in a lesser obstacle to competition (cf. paragraphs 16-26 of the letter).
Razlog za to je bil, da je bila skupni rezultat teh sprememb manjša ovira za konkurenco (glej odstavke 16–26 dopisa).
Commission Decision E 12/2005 — Poland, unlimited State guarantee in favour of Poctza Polska, paragraphs 39-47.
Odločba Komisije E-12/2005 – Poljska, neomejeno državno jamstvo v korist Poctza Polska, odstavki 39–47.
In that respect the SFF referred to the statements made by the Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee when the word ‘individual’ was deleted from paragraph 1 of Article 15, concerning the general loan category, of the bill which later became the Housing Act.
V zvezi s tem se je združenje SFF sklicevalo na izjave predsednika parlamentarnega odbora ob izbrisu besede „individualna“ v zvezi s kategorijo splošnih posojil iz odstavka 1 člena 15 predloga zakona, ki je pozneje postal Stanovanjski zakon.
See item 7 in the speech (see http://www.althingi.is/altext/122/05/r13133243.sgml).
Glej točko 7 govora na spletni strani http://www.althingi.is/altext/122/05/r13133243.sgml
In its decision in the German public service broadcasting case, the Commission concluded that increases in the level of the licence fee should not be regarded as new aid: ‘The increase is rather the consequence of an increased financial need of public service broadcasters in fulfilling their public service mission. It is therefore — and in line with previous Commission practice — not severable from the initial funding regime and does not constitute a substantive amendment provided that the public service mission as such has not substantively been changed.’
Komisija je v odločbi o zadevi v zvezi z nemškimi javnimi izdajatelji radiotelevizijskega programa ugotovila, da povišanja zneska licenčnine ni mogoče obravnavati kot novo pomoč: „Povišanje je posledica večje finančne potrebe javnih izdajateljev radiotelevizijskega programa pri izpolnjevanju njihovih nalog iz opravljanja javnih storitev.
Commission Decision of 24 April 2007, cited above, paragraph 206.
Zato ga – v skladu s predhodno prakso Komisije – ni mogoče ločiti od začetne ureditve financiranja in ne pomeni vsebinske spremembe, če se naloge iz opravljanja javni storitev kot take niso vsebinsko spremenile.“ Odstavek 206 Odločbe Komisije z dne 24. aprila 2007, citirane zgoraj.
Case T-35/1999 Keller SpA v Commission [2002] ECR II-261, paragraph 62.
Zadeva T-35/1999, Keller proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. II-261, točka 62.
As mentioned above, the so-called housing bond system was established in 1989.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, je bil tako imenovani sistem stanovanjskih obveznic vzpostavljen leta 1989.
Accordingly, Article 18 of Act No 97/1993, authorised the State Building Fund to operate a separate Housing Bonds Division, whose finances were to be kept separate from the Fund’s other activities.
Skladno s tem je bil Državni gradbeni sklad po členu 18 Zakona št. 97/1993 pooblaščen za upravljanje ločenega Sektorja za stanovanjske obveznice, katerega finance so morale biti ločene od drugih dejavnosti Sklada.
The Housing Act No 44/1998 entered into force on 1 January 1999.
Stanovanjski zakon št. 44/1998 je začel veljati 1. januarja 1999.
By that Act the Housing Financing Fund was established.
S tem zakonom je bil ustanovljen sklad HFF (Housing financing fund – Sklad za stanovanjsko financiranje).
The interest rate of additional loans were, in the first part of 2004, 5,3 % or considerably higher than the rate of general loans after the amendments made to the bond issuance of the Housing Financing Fund which entered into force on 1 July 2004.
Obrestna mera dodatnih posojil je v prvi polovici leta 2004 znašala 5,3 %, kar je precej več od obrestne mere splošnih posojil po spremembah glede izdajanja obveznic sklada HFF, ki so začele veljati 1. julija 2004.
As of September, additional loans have borne the same interest rate as general loans.
Od septembra so imela dodatna posojila enako obrestno mero kot splošna posojila.
With regard to property tax, it was abolished, erga omnes, by Act No 129/2004 and was levied for the last time on assets at the end of the year 2005.
Nepremičninski davek je bil odpravljen erga omnes z Zakonom št. 129/2004, za nepremičnine pa je bil zadnjič odmerjen ob koncu leta 2005.
Until the adoption of Act No 129/2004, paragraph 1 of Article 4 Act No 90/2003 exempted the abovementioned institutions from the payment of property tax as well.
Do sprejetja Zakona št. 129/2004 so bile navedene ustanove izvzete tudi iz plačila nepremičninskega davka v skladu z odstavkom 1 člena 4 Zakona št. 90/2003.
Moreover, where the undertaking concerned receives aid from several measures having different purposes and legal basis, adopted at different times, and some being individual and others having the character of schemes, the different aid measures should be assessed one by one and not merged together in one overall assessment, just because the measures wholly or partially have the same beneficiary [42].2.3. CLASSIFICATION OF THE DIFFERENT AID MEASURES AS NEW OR EXISTING AID
Poleg tega, kadar zadevno podjetje prejema pomoč iz več ukrepov, ki imajo različne namene in pravne podlage ter so bili sprejeti v različnih obdobjih, pri čemer so nekateri individualni, drugi pa imajo značilnosti shem, je treba različne ukrepe pomoči presojati vsakega posebej, in ne združene v skupno presojo, samo zato, ker je upravičenec do ukrepov v celoti ali delno isti [42].2.3 OPREDELITEV RAZLIČNIH UKREPOV POMOČI ZA NOVO ALI OBSTOJEČO POMOČ
Hereinafter referred to as the State Aid Guidelines.
V nadaljnjem besedilu: Smernice o državni pomoči.
These rules were not carried over to the Housing Act of 1998.
Ta pravila se niso prenesla v Stanovanjski zakon iz leta 1998.
Currently housing cooperatives are governed by a separate Act No 66/2003.
Delovanje stanovanjskih zadrug trenutno ureja ločen Zakon št. 66/2003.
In the general comments to the bill which became Act No 121/1997, on State Guarantees (lög um ríkisábyrgðir) the following was stated: ‘This is based on the unequivocal rule of Icelandic law that the State is liable for the obligations of its institutions and undertakings, unless the guarantee is limited by an explicit legal provision […] or the liability of the State in a limited liability company is limited to the share capital contribution.’
V splošnih pripombah k predlogu zakona, ki je postal Zakon št. 121/1997 o državnih jamstvih (lög um ríkisábyrgðir), je bilo navedeno: „To temelji na nedvoumnem pravilu islandske zakonodaje, da je država odgovorna za obveznosti svojih ustanov in podjetij, razen če je jamstvo omejeno z izrecnim predpisom […] ali če je odgovornost države v družbi z omejeno odgovornostjo omejena na delež vloženega kapitala.“ [25].
The guarantee is applicable to all State institutions, regardless of when they are established or their activities, or changes in those activities.
Jamstvo se uporablja za vse državne ustanove, ne glede na datum njihove ustanovitve ali dejavnosti ali spremembe teh dejavnosti.
THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY [1],
NADZORNI ORGAN EFTE JE [1] –
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area [2], in particular to Articles 59(2), 61 to 63 and Protocol 26 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru [2] ter zlasti členov 59(2), 61 do 63 in Protokola 26 k Sporazumu,
No 500/08/COL
št. 500/08/COL
amending, for the sixty-fifth time, the procedural and substantive rules in the field of State aid by introducing a new chapter on State aid for environmental protection
o petinšestdeseti spremembi procesnih in materialnih pravil na področju državne pomoči z uvedbo novega poglavja o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja
THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY [1], HAVING REGARD to the Agreement on the European Economic Area [2], in particular to Articles 61 to 63 and Protocol 26 thereof, HAVING REGARD to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice [3], in particular to Article 24 and Article 5(2)(b) thereof, WHEREAS under Article 24 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement, the Authority shall give effect to the provisions of the EEA Agreement concerning State aid,
NADZORNI ORGAN EFTE JE [1] – OB UPOŠTEVANJU Sporazuma o Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru [2] ter zlasti členov 61 do 63 in Protokola 26 k Sporazumu, OB UPOŠTEVANJU Sporazuma med državami Efte o ustanovitvi nadzornega organa in sodišča [3] ter zlasti člena 24 in člena 5(2)(b) Sporazuma, KER v skladu s členom 24 Sporazuma o nadzornem organu in sodišču Nadzorni organ uveljavlja določbe Sporazuma EGP v zvezi z državno pomočjo,