natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It must be established why the measure distorts or threatens to distort competition and is liable to have an effect on trade between EEA States, based on the foreseeable effects of the measure [287].
Čeprav ni mogoče opredeliti splošnih kategorij ukrepov, ki običajno izpolnjujejo ta merila, pretekle odločitve kažejo primere situacij, v katerih sta Nadzorni organ in Komisija ugotovila, da ob upoštevanju posebnih okoliščin primera ni bilo verjetno, da bi javna podpora vplivala na trgovino med državami EGP.
The Authority and the Commission have in a number of decisions considered, in view of the specific circumstances of the cases, that the measure had a purely local impact and consequently had no effect on trade between EEA States.
Nekaj primerov:
In those cases the Authority and the Commission ascertained in particular that the beneficiary supplied goods or services to a limited area within an EEA State and was unlikely to attract customers from other EEA States, and that it could not be foreseen that the measure would have more than a marginal effect on the conditions of cross-border investments or establishment.
športni in rekreacijski objekti, ki jih uporabljajo lokalni uporabniki in ni verjetno, da bodo pritegnili stranke ali naložbe iz drugih držav EGP [288];
While it is not possible to define general categories of measures that typically meet these criteria, past decisions provide examples of situations where the Authority and the Commission found, in the light of the specific circumstances of the case, that public support was not liable to affect trade between EEA States.
kulturne prireditve in subjekti, ki opravljajo gospodarske dejavnosti [289], za katere ni verjetno, da bodo pritegnile uporabnike ali obiskovalce, ki sicer uporabljajo podobno ponudbo v drugih državah EGP [290]; Nadzorni organ meni, da lahko na trgovino med državami članicami vpliva le financiranje velikih in priznanih kulturnih ustanov in prireditev v državi EGP, ki se široko promovirajo zunaj domače regije;
Some examples of such cases are:
bolnišnice in druge zdravstvene ustanove, ki zagotavljajo običajen obseg zdravstvenih storitev za lokalno prebivalstvo in ni verjetno, da bi pritegnile stranke ali naložbe iz drugih držav EGP [291];
sports and leisure facilities serving predominantly a local audience and unlikely to attract customers or investment from other EEA States [288];
novičarski mediji in/ali kulturni proizvodi, ki so iz jezikovnih in geografskih razlogov omejeni na lokalno občinstvo [292];
cultural events and entities performing economic activities [289] which however are unlikely to attract users or visitors away from similar offers in other EEA States [290]; the Authority considers that only funding granted to large and renowned cultural institutions and events in an EEA State which are widely promoted outside their home region has the potential to affect trade between EEA States;
kongresni center, kadar ni verjetno, da bi zaradi lokacije in potencialnega učinka pomoči na cene ta center pritegnil uporabnike iz drugih centrov v drugih državah EGP [293];
hospitals and other health care facilities providing the usual range of medical services aimed at a local population and unlikely to attract customers or investment from other EEA States [291];
informacijska in omrežna platforma za neposredno reševanje problemov brezposelnosti in socialnih konfliktov na vnaprej določenem in zelo majhnem lokalnem območju [294];
news media and/or cultural products which, for linguistic and geographical reasons, have a locally restricted audience [292];
majhna letališča [295] ali pristanišča [296], ki pretežno služijo lokalnim uporabnikom, s čimer omejujejo konkurenco za storitve, ki se zagotavljajo na lokalni ravni, in za katere je vpliv na čezmejne naložbe dejansko zanemarljiv;
a conference centre, where its location and the potential effect of the aid on prices is genuinely unlikely to divert users from other centres in other EEA States [293];
financiranje nekaterih žičnic (zlasti smučarskih) na območjih z malo objekti in omejenimi turističnimi zmogljivostmi.
an information and networking platform to directly address problems of unemployment and social conflicts in a predefined and very small local area [294];
Komisija je pojasnila, da se za razlikovanje med napravami za podporo dejavnosti, ki lahko privabijo nelokalne uporabnike, za katere se na splošno šteje, da vplivajo na trgovino, in s športom povezane naprave na območjih z malo objekti in omejenimi turističnimi zmogljivostmi, pri katerih javna pomoč morda ne bo vplivala na trgovino med državami EGP, običajno upoštevajo naslednji dejavniki [297]: a) lokacija naprave (na primer v mestih ali povezava med vasmi); b) obratovalni čas; c) pretežno lokalni uporabniki (delež dnevnih vozovnic v primerjavi s tedenskimi); c) skupno število in zmogljivost naprav glede na število lokalnih uporabnikov; e) drugi turistični objekti na tem območju.
small airports [295] or ports [296] that predominately serve local users, thereby limiting competition for the services offered to a local level, and for which the impact on cross-border investment is genuinely no more than marginal;
Podobni in ustrezno prilagojeni dejavniki bi se lahko upoštevali tudi pri drugih vrstah objektov.
the financing of certain cable ways (and in particular ski lifts) in areas with few facilities and limited tourism capability.
Tudi če okoliščine, v katerih je dodeljena pomoč, v večini primerov zadoščajo za dokaz, da pomoč lahko vpliva na trgovino med državami EGP in izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco, je treba take okoliščine ustrezno opisati.
The Commission has clarified that the following factors are typically taken into account to draw a distinction between installations supporting an activity capable of attracting non-local users, which are generally considered to have an effect on trade, and sport-related installations in areas with few facilities and limited tourism capability, where public support may not have an effect on trade between EEA States [297]: a) the location of the installation (for example within cities or linking villages); b) operating time; c) predominantly local users (proportion of daily as opposed to weekly passes); d) the total number and capacity of installations relative to the number of resident users; e) other tourism-related facilities in the area.
V primeru shem pomoči običajno zadošča, da se proučijo značilnosti posamezne sheme [298].
Similar factors could, with the necessary adjustments, also be relevant for other types of facilities.
INFRASTRUKTURA: NEKAJ POSEBNIH POJASNIL
Even if the circumstances in which the aid is granted are in most cases sufficient to show that the aid is capable of affecting trade between EEA States and of distorting or threatening to distort competition, those circumstances should be appropriately set out.
Napotki glede pojma državne pomoči iz teh smernic se uporabljajo za javno financiranje infrastrukture z gospodarsko rabo, kot se uporabljajo za vsako drugo javno financiranje, ki spodbuja gospodarsko dejavnost [299].
In the case of aid schemes, it is normally sufficient to examine the characteristics of the particular scheme [298].
Vendar je zaradi strateškega pomena javnega financiranja infrastrukture, zlasti zaradi spodbujanja rasti, in vprašanj, ki so pogosto povezana z njim, primerno zagotoviti posebne napotke o tem, kdaj javno financiranje infrastrukture daje prednost podjetju ter vpliva na konkurenco in trgovino med državami EGP.
INFRASTRUCTURE: SOME SPECIFIC CLARIFICATIONS
Infrastrukturni projekti pogosto vključujejo več kategorij akterjev in kakršna koli državna pomoč lahko potencialno koristi gradnji (vključno z razširitvami ali izboljšavami), upravljanju ali uporabi infrastrukture [300].
The guidance regarding the notion of State aid as set out in these Guidelines applies to the public funding of infrastructure having an economic use, as it applies to any other public funding that favours an economic activity [299].
V tem oddelku je zato koristno razlikovati med nosilcem projekta in/ali prvim lastnikom („nosilec projekta / lastnik“ [301]) infrastrukture, operaterji (tj. podjetja, ki infrastrukturo neposredno uporabljajo za zagotavljanje storitev končnim uporabnikom, vključno s podjetji, ki infrastrukturo kupijo od nosilca projekta / lastnika z namenom gospodarskega izkoriščanja ali ki pridobijo koncesijo ali zakupijo infrastrukturo, da bi jo uporabljali in upravljali) in končnimi uporabniki infrastrukture, čeprav se lahko te funkcije v nekaterih primerih prekrivajo.
However, given the strategic importance of public funding of infrastructure, not least for the promotion of growth, and the questions which it often raises, it is appropriate to provide specific guidance on when public funding of infrastructure favours an undertaking, grants an advantage and has an effect on competition and on trade between EEA States.
Javno financiranje velikega dela infrastrukture tradicionalno ni spadalo v področje uporabe pravil o državni pomoči, saj se je štelo, da je gradnja in upravljanje te infrastrukture splošen ukrep javne politike in ne gospodarska dejavnost [302].
Infrastructure projects often involve several categories of actors and any State aid involved may potentially benefit the construction (including extensions or improvements), the operation or the use of the infrastructure [300].
V zadnjem času pa so se možnosti za izkoriščanje infrastrukture v komercialne namene povečale zaradi več dejavnikov, kot so liberalizacija, privatizacija, povezovanje trgov in tehnološki napredek.
For the purposes of this section, it is, therefore, useful to distinguish between the developer and/or first owner (‘developer/owner’ [301]) of an infrastructure, the operators (that is to say undertakings who make direct use of the infrastructure to provide services to end-users, including undertakings which acquire the infrastructure from the developer/owner to exploit it economically or which obtain a concession or lease for the use and operation of the infrastructure), and the end-users of an infrastructure, although these functions may in some cases overlap.
Splošno sodišče je v sodbi v zadevi Aéroports de Paris [303] potrdilo ta razvoj in pojasnilo, da je treba upravljanje letališča obravnavati kot gospodarsko dejavnost.
The public funding of much infrastructure was traditionally considered to fall outside the State aid rules since their construction and operation were considered to constitute general measures of public policy and not an economic activity [302].
Bolj nedavno je sodba v zadevi Leipzig/Halle [304] potrdila, da je gradnja vzletno-pristajalne steze na komercialnem letališču sama po sebi gospodarska dejavnost.
More recently, several factors, such as liberalisation, privatisation, market integration and technological progress have, however, increased the scope for commercial exploitation of infrastructures.
Čeprav se ti zadevi nanašata posebej na letališča, se zdi, da imajo načela, ki so jih oblikovala sodišča EGP, širšo razlago in se zato lahko uporabljajo tudi za gradnjo druge infrastrukture, ki je neločljivo povezana z gospodarsko dejavnostjo [305].
In the Aéroports de Paris judgment [303] the General Court acknowledged this evolution, clarifying that the operation of an airport had to be seen as an economic activity.
Po drugi strani je financiranje infrastrukture, ki ni namenjena izkoriščanju v komercialne namene, načeloma izključeno iz uporabe pravil o državni pomoči.
More recently, the Leipzig/Halle judgment [304] confirmed that the construction of a commercial airport runway is an economic activity in itself.
To na primer velja za infrastrukturo, ki se uporablja za dejavnosti, ki jih država opravlja pri običajnem izvajanju svojih javnih pooblastil (na primer vojaški objekti, kontrola zračnega prometa na letališčih, svetilniki in druga oprema za potrebe splošne navigacije, vključno po celinskih vodnih poteh, zaščita pred poplavami in upravljanje nizkih voda v javnem interesu, policija in carina), ali ki se ne uporablja za ponujanje blaga ali storitev na trgu (na primer ceste, ki so na voljo za prosto javno uporabo).
While these cases relate specifically to airports, the principles developed by the EEA Courts appear to be of broader interpretation and thus applicable to the construction of other infrastructures that are indissociably linked to an economic activity [305].
Takšne dejavnosti niso gospodarske narave in se zanje torej ne uporabljajo pravila o državni pomoči, enako pa velja za javno financiranje infrastrukture, povezane s temi dejavnostmi [306].
On the other hand, the funding of infrastructure that is not meant to be commercially exploited is in principle excluded from the application of the State aid rules.
Kadar se infrastruktura, ki je bila prvotno rabljena v negospodarske namene, pozneje začne uporabljati v gospodarske namene (na primer vojaško letališče postane civilno), bodo za presojo na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči upoštevani le stroški, ki nastanejo za pretvorbo infrastrukture v gospodarsko rabo [307].
This concerns, for instance, infrastructure that is used for activities that the State normally performs in the exercise of its public powers (for instance, military facilities, air traffic control in airports, lighthouses and other equipment for the needs of general navigation including on inland waterways, flood protection and low water management in the public interest, police and customs) or that is not used for offering goods or services on a market (for instance roads made available for free public use).
Če se infrastruktura uporablja za gospodarske in negospodarske dejavnosti, se za javno financiranje za njeno gradnjo uporabljajo pravila o državni pomoči le, kolikor je financiranje namenjeno kritju stroškov, ki so povezani z gospodarskimi dejavnostmi.
Such activities are not of an economic nature and consequently fall outside the scope of the State aid rules, as does, accordingly, the public funding of the related infrastructure [306].
Če subjekt opravlja gospodarske in negospodarske dejavnosti, morajo države EGP zagotoviti, da se javno financiranje, zagotovljeno za negospodarske dejavnosti, ne more uporabljati za navzkrižno subvencioniranje gospodarskih dejavnosti.
Where an infrastructure originally used for non-economic activities is later re-assigned to economic use (for example where a military airport is converted to civilian use), only the costs incurred for the conversion of the infrastructure to economic use will be taken into account for the assessment under the State aid rules [307].
To se zlasti lahko zagotovi z omejitvijo javnega financiranja na neto stroške (vključno s stroški kapitala) negospodarskih dejavnosti, ki se določijo na podlagi jasno ločenih računovodskih izkazov.
If an infrastructure is used for both economic and non-economic activities, public funding for its construction will fall under the State aid rules only insofar as it covers the costs linked to the economic activities.
Če se v primeru mešane uporabe infrastruktura uporablja skoraj izključno za negospodarske dejavnosti, Nadzorni organ meni, da je lahko njeno financiranje v celoti zunaj področja uporabe pravil o državni pomoči, če ostane gospodarska uporaba zgolj pomožne narave, tj. dejavnost, ki je neposredno povezana z upravljanjem infrastrukture in potrebna za njeno upravljanje ali neločljivo povezana z njeno glavno negospodarsko rabo.
If an entity is engaged in economic and non-economic activities, EEA States have to ensure that the public funding provided for the non-economic activities cannot be used to cross-subsidize the economic activities.
Treba bi bilo šteti, da je tako, kadar gospodarske dejavnosti uporabljajo iste proizvodne dejavnike kot primarne negospodarske dejavnosti, na primer material, opremo, delovno silo ali osnovna sredstva.
This can notably be ensured by limiting the public funding to the net cost (including the cost of capital) of the non-economic activities, to be identified on the basis of a clear separation of accounts.
Pomožne gospodarske dejavnosti morajo ostati v omejenem obsegu, kar zadeva zmogljivost infrastrukture [308].
If, in cases of mixed use, the infrastructure is used almost exclusively for a non-economic activity, the Authority considers that its funding may fall outside the State aid rules in its entirety, provided the economic use remains purely ancillary, that is to say an activity which is directly related to and necessary for the operation of the infrastructure, or intrinsically linked to its main non-economic use.
Primer takšne pomožne gospodarske dejavnosti je raziskovalna organizacija, ki svojo opremo in laboratorije občasno daje v najem industrijskim partnerjem [309].
This should be considered to be the case when the economic activities consume the same inputs as the primary non-economic activities, for example material, equipment, labour or fixed capital.
Nadzorni organ prav tako meni, da javno financiranje, zagotovljeno za infrastrukturo za običajne storitve (kot so restavracije, trgovine ali plačljiva parkirišča), ki se uporablja skoraj izključno za negospodarske dejavnosti, praviloma ne vpliva na trgovino med državami EGP, saj ni verjetno, da bi te dejavnosti pritegnile stranke iz drugih držav EGP in da bi njihovo financiranje imelo več kot zanemarljiv učinek na čezmejne naložbe ali ustanavljanje.
Ancillary economic activities must remain limited in scope, as regards the capacity of the infrastructure [308].
Kakor je Sodišče navedlo v svoji sodbi Leipzig-Halle, lahko spada gradnja infrastrukture ali njenega dela na področje izvajanja javnih pooblastil države [310].
Examples of such ancillary economic activities may include a research organisation occasionally renting out its equipment and laboratories to industrial partners [309].
V takšnem primeru javno financiranje infrastrukture (ali ustreznega dela infrastrukture) ni predmet pravil o državni pomoči.
The Authority also considers that public financing provided to customary amenities (such as restaurants, shops or paid parking) of infrastructures that are almost exclusively used for a non-economic activity normally has no effect on trade between EEA States since those customary amenities are unlikely to attract customers from other EEA States and their financing is unlikely to have a more than marginal effect on cross-border investment or establishment.
Zaradi negotovosti, ki je obstajala pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris, so javni organi lahko legitimno trdili, da javno financiranje infrastrukture, dodeljeno pred to sodbo, ni pomenilo državne pomoči in zato takšnih ukrepov ni bilo treba priglasiti Nadzornemu organu.
As the Court of Justice acknowledged in its Leipzig/Halle judgment, the construction of an infrastructure, or part of it, can fall within the State's exercise of public powers [310].
Iz tega sledi, da Nadzorni organ o takšnih ukrepih financiranja, ki so bili dokončno sprejeti pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris, ne more podvomiti na podlagi pravil o državni pomoči [311].
In such a case the public funding of the infrastructure (or the relevant part of the infrastructure) is not subject to State aid rules.
Na podlagi tega ni mogoče izpeljati nobene predpostavke glede obstoja ali odsotnosti državne pomoči ali legitimnega pričakovanja v zvezi z ukrepi financiranja, ki niso bili dokončno sprejeti pred sodbo Aéroports de Paris, kar bo treba preveriti po posameznih primerih [312].
Due to the uncertainty that existed prior to the Aéroports de Paris judgment, public authorities could legitimately consider that the public funding of infrastructure granted prior to that judgment did not constitute State aid and that, accordingly, such measures did not need to be notified to the Authority.
Razlogi, na katerih temeljijo zadeve, v katerih je Nadzorni organ menil, da posamezni ukrepi niso mogli vplivati na trgovino med državami EGP, kakor je navedeno v točkah 196 in 197, so lahko relevantni tudi za posamezno javno financiranje infrastrukture, zlasti lokalne ali občinske infrastrukture, tudi če se izkorišča v komercialne namene.
It follows that the Authority cannot put such funding measures definitively adopted before the Aéroports de Paris judgment into question on the basis of State aid rules [311].
Ena od relevantnih značilnosti takšnih zadev bi bilo pretežno lokalno zaledje ter dokazi, da ni verjetno, da bi bil vpliv na čezmejne naložbe kaj več kot zanemarljiv.
This does not imply any presumption as regards the presence or absence of State aid or legitimate expectations as regards funding measures not definitively adopted before the Aéroports de Paris judgment, which will have to be verified on a case by case basis [312].
Na primer pri gradnji lokalnih središč za zabavo, zdravstvenih ustanov, majhnih letališč ali pristanišč, ki jih pretežno uporabljajo lokalni uporabniki in pri katerih je vpliv na čezmejne naložbe zanemarljiv, ni verjetno, da bodo vplivali na trgovino.
The rationale underlying the cases in which the Authority and the Commission considered that certain measures were not capable of affecting trade between EEA States as set out in paragraphs 196 and 197 can also be relevant for certain public funding of infrastructure, particularly local or municipal infrastructure, even if it is commercially exploited.
Dokazi, ki dokazujejo, da ni vpliva na trgovino, lahko vključujejo podatke, ki kažejo, da infrastrukturo zelo malo uporabljajo uporabniki drugih držav EGP in da so čezmejne naložbe na trgu, ki je predmet presoje, minimalne oziroma za njih ni verjetno, da jim bo zadevni ukrep škodil.
One pertinent characteristic of such cases would be a predominately local catchment area as well as evidence that cross-border investment is unlikely to be affected more than marginally.
V nekaterih okoliščinah nekatere infrastrukture neposredno ne konkurirajo drugim infrastrukturam iste vrste ali drugim infrastrukturam drugačne vrste, ki ponujajo storitve z veliko stopnjo zamenljivosti oziroma neposredno takšne storitve [313].
For example, the construction of local leisure installations, health care facilities, small airports or ports that predominately serve local users and for which the impact on cross-border investment is marginal are unlikely to affect trade.
Pri celovitih omrežnih infrastrukturah, ki so naravni monopoli, tj. pri katerih bi bila podvojitev negospodarna, najverjetneje ni neposredne konkurence med infrastrukturami [314].
Evidence to demonstrate that there is no effect on trade could include data showing that there is only limited use of the infrastructure from outside the EEA State and that cross-border investments in the market under consideration are minimal or unlikely to be adversely affected.
Podobno kot lahko obstajajo sektorji, v katerih je zasebno financiranje za gradnjo infrastruktur zanemarljivo [315].
There are circumstances in which certain infrastructures do not face direct competition from other infrastructures of the same kind or other infrastructures of a different kind offering services with a significant degree of substitutability, or with such services directly [313].
Nadzorni organ meni, da je mogoče vpliv na trgovino med državami EGP ali izkrivljanje konkurence pri gradnji infrastrukture običajno izključiti v primerih, v katerih so hkrati izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji: (i) običajno infrastruktura nima neposredne konkurence; (ii) zasebno financiranje v sektorju in zadevni državi EGP je zanemarljivo; in (iii) infrastruktura ni oblikovana tako, da daje selektivno prednost posameznemu podjetju ali sektorju, ampak koristi družbi na splošno.
The absence of direct competition between infrastructures is likely the case for comprehensive network infrastructures [314] that are natural monopolies, that is to say for which a replication would be uneconomical.
Da celotno javno financiranje zadevnega projekta ne bi spadalo na področje pravil o državni pomoči, morajo države EGP zagotoviti, da se financiranje, zagotovljeno za gradnjo infrastruktur v primerih, omenjenih v točki 211, ne more uporabiti za navzkrižno subvencioniranje ali posredno subvencioniranje drugih gospodarskih dejavnosti, vključno z upravljanjem infrastrukture.