natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, where the organisation concerned begins to market its services, 33it moves away from the sphere of exclu- sively social or publicinterest activity; the mere fact that it continues at the same time to pursue an aim in the general interest (in ELPA’s case, the promotion of sport) and does not seek to make a profit is no longer sufficient for it to be denied the status of
Toda ko začne zadevna organizacija svoje storitve tržiti, 33zapusti področje čistega socialnega delovanja oziroma delovanja v javnem interesu; zgolj okoli�čina, da �e naprej sledi tudi namenu, ki temelji na splo�nem interesu – v primeru ELPE je to podpiranje �porta –, in da poleg tega deluje brez pridobitnega namena, ne zado�ča več
34 — On the pursuit of a social objective, see Pavlov (cited in footnote 23, paragraph 118); Case C-218/00 Cisal [2002] ECR I-691, paragraph 37; and Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze (cited in footnote 21, paragraph 124); as well as, similarly, Enirisorse (cited in footnote 21, paragraph 34); on the absence of a profit-making aim see Joined Cases 209/78 to 215/78 and 218/78 van Landewyck and Others v Commission [1980] ECR 3125, paragraph 88; Fédération française des sociétés d’assurance and Others (cited in footnote 30, paragraph 21); Albany (cited in footnote 30, paragraph 85); Pavlov (cited in footnote 23, paragraph 117); Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze (cited in footnote 21, paragraph 123); and Case C-119/06 Commission v Italy, paragraph 37.
34 – Glede socialnega namena glej sodbo Pavlov (navedena v opombi 23, točka 118), sodbo z dne 22. januarja 2002 v zadevi Cisal (C-218/00, Recueil, I-691, točka 37) ter sodbi Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze (navedena v opombi 21, točka 124) in Enirisorse (navedena v opombi 21, točka 34); glede neobstoja pridobitnega namena glej sodbo z dne 29. oktobra 1980 v združenih zadevah Van Landewyck in drugi proti Komisiji (od 209/78 do 215/78 in 218/78, Recueil, 3125, točka 88), sodbe Fédération française des sociétés d’assurance in drugi (navedena v opombi 30, točka 21), Albany (navedena v opombi 30, točka 85), Pavlov (navedena v opombi 23, točka 117), Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze (navedena v opombi 21, točka 123) in sodbo z dne 29. novembra 2007 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji (C-119/06, točka 37).
32 — Wouters (cited in footnote 22, paragraph 57).
32 – Sodba Wouters (navedena v opombi 22, točka 57).
36 — Joined Cases C-159/91 and C-160/91 Poucet and Pistre [1993] ECR I-637; Cisal (cited in footnote 34); and AOK Bundesverband (cited in footnote 21).
36 – Sodba z dne 17. februarja 1993 v združenih zadevah Poucet in Pistre (C-159/91 in C-160/91, Recueil, I-637), sodbi Cisal (navedena v opombi 34) in AOK Bundesverband (navedena v opombi 21).
33 — On the meaning of marketing, see points 33 and 34 of this Opinion, above.
33 – Glede pojma trženja glej zgoraj točki 33 in 34 teh sklepnih predlogov.
The organisation in question may therefore operate in part as a public body and in part as an economic agent.
39Zadevna organizacija lahko torej izvaja delno javna pooblastila in delno gospodarsko dejavnost.
with no significant influence on the extent of the services which it was required to provide or the amount of the contributions that it received.
organizacija ni imela več pomembnega vpliva na raven storitev, ki jih je zagotavljala, in na vi�ino prispevkov zanje.
37According to the information available to the Court, ELPA is not subject to comparable State regulation; nor is there anything in the documents before the Court to indicate that the State imposes any limit on ELPA’s discretion to determine its ser -vices and the remuneration, if any, payable for them.
37Primerlji-vega državnega urejanja ELPE na podlagi podatkov, ki jih ima Sodi�če, ni; iz spisa tudi ni razvidna državna omejitev manevrskega prostora, ki ga ima ELPA pri določanju svojih storitev in plačila, ki ga zanje morebiti zahteva.
— Participation in a public body’s authorisation of motorcycling events
– Sodelovanje pri upravnih dovoljenjih za motociklistične dirke
This is precisely the case with an organisation such as ELPA, which, on the one hand, participates in the authorisation by a public body of motorcycling events while, on the other, itself organises and markets such events. Even though ELPA’s participation in the public body’s authorisation of motorcycling events may be classified, as such, within the sphere of public activity, this none the less in no way alters that association’s status as an undertaking in other respects, that is to say in so far as it itself organises and markets motorcycling events.
Ravno to velja za dru�tvo, kakr�no je ELPA, ki po eni strani soodloča o upravnih dovoljenjih za motociklistične dirke, po drugi strani pa take dirke prireja in trži: četudi se lahko sodelovanje ELPE pri podeljevanju upravnih dovoljenj za motociklistične dirke opredeli kot izvajanje javnih pooblastil, to ne spremeni lastnosti podjetja tega dru�tva, če motociklistične dirke tudi organizira in trži.
Finally, the assumption that ELPA pursues an economic activity is not precluded by the fact that, in addition to organising and marketing motorcycling events, as mentioned above, it also participates in the authorisation by a public body of such events under Article 49 of the Road Traffic Code.
Končno, dejstvo, da ELPA poleg obravnavanega organiziranja in trženja motocikli -stičnih dirk v skladu s členom 49 zakona o cestnem prometu sodeluje tudi pri upravnih dovoljenjih za tak�ne dirke, ne nasprotuje opredelitvi kot gospodarska dejavnost.
It is true that the exercise of public powers does not fall within the scope of the competition rules in the EC Treaty, and an organisation which exercises public powers is not an undertaking within the meaning of competition law.
Izvajanje javnih pooblastil sicer ne spada na področje pravil Pogodbe ES o konkurenci, in organizacija, ki javna pooblastila izvaja, ni podjetje v smislu konkurenčnega prava.
38 However, the distinction
38Vendar pa je treba ločevati med javnim in gospodarskim delovanjem ločeno za vsako
In the light of all the foregoing, an association such as ELPA must be regarded as an undertaking within the meaning of the provisions on competition in the EC Treaty.
Po vsem tem je dru�tvo, kakr�no je ELPA, treba �teti za podjetje v smislu določb Pogodbe ES o konkurenci.
37 — Poucet and Pistre (cited in footnote 36, paragraphs 18 and 19); Cisal (cited in footnote 34, paragraph 45); and AOK Bundesverband (cited in footnote 21, in particular paragraphs 47 and 49).
37 – Sodbe Poucet in Pistre (navedena v opombi 36, točki 18 in 19), Cisal (navedena v opombi 34, točka 45) in AOK Bundesverband (navedena v opombi 21, zlasti točki 47 in 49).
39 — See to this effect Case 118/85 Commission v Italy [1987] ECR 2599, paragraph 7; Calì (cited in footnote 38, paragraphs 16 and 18); and Case C-82/01 P Aéroports de Paris v Commission [2002] ECR I-9297, paragraphs 74 and 75, second sentence; see also my Opinion in Case C-134/03 Viacom Outdoor [2005] ECR I-1167, point 72.
39 – Glej v tem smislu sodbo z dne 16. junija 1987 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji (118/85, Recueil, 2599, točka 7), sodbo Calì (navedena v opombi 38, točki 16 in 18) in sodbo z dne 24. oktobra 2002 v zadevi Aéroports de Paris proti Komisiji (C-82/01 P, Recueil, I-9297, točki 74 in 75, drugi stavek) ter moje sklepne predloge z dne 28. oktobra 2004 v zadevi Viacom Outdoor (C-134/03, ZOdl., I-1167, točka 72).
38 — Case C-364/92 SAT Fluggesellschaft [1994] ECR I-43, paragraphs 30 and 31; Case C-343/95 Calì [1997] ECR I-1547, paragraphs 22 and 23; and Wouters (cited in footnote 22, paragraph 57).
38 – Sodbi z dne 19. januarja 1994 v zadevi SAT Fluggesellschaft (C-364/92, Recueil, I-43, točki 30 in 31) ter z dne 18. marca 1997 v zadevi Calì (C-343/95, Recueil, I-1547, točki 22 in 23) in sodba Wouters (navedena v opombi 22, točka 57).
Dominant position on the market and effect on trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 82 EC motorcycling events, according to the information from the referring court, by concluding sponsorship, advertising and insurance agreements.
Prevladujoči položaj na trgu in oviranje trgovine med državami članicami v smislu člena 82 ES predložitvenega sodi�ča s sklepanjem sponzorskih pogodb, pogodb o ogla�evanju in zavarovalnih pogodb.
There is not necessarily a connection between the two kinds of service and they are not interchangeable.
Obe vrsti storitev nista nujno povezani in ju tudi ni mogoče zamenjati.
Consequently, the organisation and the marketing of sports events must be regarded as being two separate materially relevant markets.
Zato je treba organiziranje in trženje �portnih prireditev opredeliti kot ločena, stvarno upo�tevna trga.
The application of Article 82 EC to an association such as ELPA requires — apart from its status as an undertaking, which has just been discussed — that that association should hold a dominant position on the market and that there should be a possibility that trade between Member States will be affected.
Uporaba člena 82 ES za dru�tvo, kakr�no je ELPA, predpostavlja – ne glede na njegovo pravkar obravnavano lastnost podjetja –, da ima to dru�tvo prevladujoč položaj na trgu in da obstaja možnost vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami.
Although it is not for the Court to assess the facts of the dispute in the main proceedings, it can none the less provide the referring court with any useful guidance on the specific characteristics of those facts that will make it easier for the latter to resolve the dispute in the main proceedings.
Četudi Sodi�če ni pristojno, da samo presoja dejansko stanje iz spora o glavni stvari, lahko vseeno predložitvenemu sodi�ču glede na posebnosti tega dejanskega stanja posreduje vse koristne napotke, ki mu olaj�ajo re�itev spora o glavni stvari.
To that end, the following points should be made.
V zvezi s tem je treba poudariti tole.
(a) Definition of the relevant markets, substantial part of the common market
a) Opredelitev upo�tevnih trgov in znatnega dela skupnega trga
The relevant markets must be defined first before the existence of a dominant position on the market can be examined.
Preveritev obstoja prevladujočega položaja na trgu zahteva najprej razmejitev upo�tevnih trgov.
The territory of that Member State constitutes the geographically relevant market and can also be regarded as a substantial part of the common market. 40
Ozemlje te države članice je prostorsko pomemben trg in se lahko obravnava tudi kot znatni del skupnega trga. 40
40 — Case C-260/89 ERT [1991] ECR I-2925, paragraph 31; see to the same effect Case C-203/96 Dusseldorp and Others [1998] ECR I-4075, paragraph 60; Case C-462/99 Connect Austria [2003] ECR I-5197, paragraph 79; and Case T-228/97 Irish Sugar v Commission [1999] ECR II-2969, paragraph 99.
40 – Sodba Sodi�ča z dne 18. junija 1991 v zadevi ERT (C-260/89, Recueil, I-2925, točka 31); glej v tem smislu sodbi z dne 25. junija 1998 v zadevi Dusseldorp in drugi (C-203/96, Recueil, I-4075, točka 60) in z dne 22. maja 2003 v zadevi Connect Austria (C-462/99, Recueil, I-5197, točka 79) ter sodbo Sodi�ča prve stopnje z dne 7. oktobra 1999 v zadevi Irish Sugar proti Komisiji (T-228/97, Recueil, II-2969, točka 99).
Even component territories of Member States may constitute a substantial part of the common market; see Ambulanz Glöckner (cited in footnote 23, paragraph 38).
Celo posamezna območja držav članic lahko pomenijo znaten del skupnega trga; glej sodbo Ambulanz Glöckner (navedena v opombi 23, točka 38).
With regard to the materially relevant markets, it must be remembered that ELPA provides services in the field of motorcycling in two ways: first, ELPA, assisted by ETHEAM, organises motorcycling events in Greece.
Glede stvarno upo�tevnih trgov je treba spomniti na to, da ELPA opravlja storitve na področju motociklističnega �porta v dveh pogledih: prvič, ELPA organizira z ETHEAM motociklistične dirke v Grčiji.
Second, ELPA markets those
Drugič, ELPA trži te motociklistične dirke po navedbah
(b) Dominant position on the market
KOKOTT – ZADEVA C-49/07 b) Prevladujoči položaj na trgu
The following arguments assume that ELPA holds a dominant position on each of the two markets concerned.
V nadaljnjem obravnavanju se predpostavlja, da ima ELPA na vsakem od obeh zadevnih trgov prevladujoč položaj.
A dominant position on the market relates to a position of economic strength enjoyed by an undertaking which enables it to prevent effective competition being maintained on the relevant market by giving it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, customers and ultimately of consumers. 41
Prevladujoč položaj na trgu obstaja, če gospodarska moč podjetja postavlja to podjetje v položaj, ki omogoča preprečevanje učinkovite konkurence na upo�tevnem trgu s tem, da mu daje možnost, da ravna nasproti svojim konkurentom, strankam in končno potro�nikom neodvisno v omembe vrednem obsegu. 41
Should it turn out that ELPA (co-)organ-ises all or at any rate the vast majority of all motorcycling events in Greece — it is for the referring court to make the necessary findings in this regard — it would have to be assumed that ELPA holds a dominant position on the market.
Če bi se izkazalo, da ELPA (so)organizira vse ali vsaj veliko večino vseh motociklističnih dirk v Grčiji – to mora ugotoviti predložitveno sodi�če –, bi iz tega sledilo, da ima ELPA na trgu prevladujoč položaj.
The same applies to the marketing of such motorcycling events.
Enako velja za trženje tak�nih motociklističnih dirk.
Article 82 EC prohibits the abuse of a dominant position only ‘in so far as it may affect trade between Member States’.
V členu 82 ES je prepovedana zloraba prevladujočega položaja na trgu samo, „kolikor bi lahko prizadela trgovino med državami članicami“.
This so-called intraCommunity clause defines the boundary between the areas covered by national competition law and by Community competition law. 43
Ta klavzula o čezmejni naravi vplivov na trgovino služi razmejitvi področja uporabe nacionalnega konkurenčnega prava in konkurenčnega prava Skupnosti. 43
All of this presupposes that the materially relevant market is confined in each case to motorcycling events and does not also cover the organisation or marketing of other sports events.
To pa velja pod pogojem, da je upo�tevni trg vsakokrat omejen na motociklistične dirke in da organiziranje oziroma trženje drugih �portnih prireditev ni zajeto.
42 The more individual sports events are covered by the materially relevant markets, the less likely it is that ELPA will hold a dominant position on them.
42Čim več različnih �portnih prireditev zajemajo stvarno upo�tevni trgi, tem manj verjetno ima ELPA na njih prevladujoč položaj.
Such an effect on trade between Member States can be assumed only if it is possible to foresee with a sufficient degree of probability, on the basis of a set of objective legal and factual elements, that the behaviour in question may have an influence, direct or indir- ect, actual or potential, on trade between Member States in such a way as might hinder
Iz tak�nega vpliva se lahko izhaja samo, če se lahko na podlagi vseh objektivnih pravnih dejavnikov ali dejstev v zadostni meri predvidi, da bi sporno ravnanje lahko neposredno ali posredno, dejansko ali potencialno vplivalo na blagovno menjavo med državami članicami, in to tako, da bi bilo lahko
41 — Case 27/76 United Brands v Commission [1978] ECR 207, paragraph 65; Case 85/76 Hoffmann-La Roche v Commission [1979] ECR 461, paragraph 38; Case 322/81 Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461, paragraph 30; and Joined Cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P Compagnie maritime belge transports and Others v Commission [2000] ECR I-1365, paragraph 34.
41 – Sodbe z dne 14. februarja 1978 v zadevi United Brands proti Komisiji (27/76, Recueil, 207, točka 65), z dne 13. februarja 1979 v zadevi Hoffmann-La Roche proti Komisiji (85/76, Recueil, 461, točka 38), z dne 9. novembra 1983 v zadevi Michelin proti Komisiji (322/81, Recueil, 3461, točka 30) in z dne 16. marca 2000 v združenih zadevah Compagnie maritime belge transports in drugi proti Komisiji (C-395/96 P in C-396/96 P, Recueil, I-1365, točka 34).
43 — Joined Cases 56/64 and 58/64 Consten and Grundig v Commission [1966] ECR 299, 341; Joined Cases 6/73 and 7/73 Commercial Solvents v Commission [1974] ECR 223, paragraph 31; and Ambulanz Glöckner (cited in footnote 23, paragraph 47).
43 – Sodbi z dne 13. julija 1966 v združenih zadevah Consten in Grundig proti Komisiji (56/64 in 58/64, Recueil, 322, 389) in z dne 6. marca 1974 v združenih zadevah Commercial Solvents proti Komisiji (6/73 in 7/73, Recueil, 223, točka 31) ter sodbo Ambulanz Glöckner (navedena v opombi 23, točka 47).
42 — See in this regard point 56 of this Opinion, above.
42 – Glej tudi točko 56 teh sklepnih predlogov.
MOTOE the attainment of a single market between Member States. 44
�kodljivo za uresničevanje cilja enotnega trga med državami članicami. 44
Secondly, it should be taken into account that an association such as ELPA, on account of its right of co-decision in the authorisation by a public body of motorcycling events (Article 49 of the Road Traffic Code), is capable of effectively preventing other service providers from entering the Greek market.
Drugič, treba je upo�tevati, da lahko dru�tvo, kakr�no je ELPA, na podlagi svoje pravice do soodločanja o upravnih dovoljenjih za motociklistične dirke (člen 49 zakona o cestnem prometu) učinkovito ustavi prodor drugih ponudnikov na gr�ki trg.
The fact that MOTOE, as a domestic competitor, was not allowed to organise its planned motorcycling events in the year 2000, in the absence of a declaration of consent from ELPA, may also have a deterrent effect on foreign service providers.
Dejstvo, da MOTOE kot domači konkurent ni smel prirediti leta 2000 načrtovanih motociklističnih dirk, ker za to ni dobil soglasja od ELPE, lahko tudi odvrne tuje ponudnike.
It is for the referring court to make the necessary findings in this regard, taking into account the guidance from the Court. 47
Dejstva, ki so potrebna v zvezi s tem, mora predložitveno sodi�če ugotoviti ob upo�tevanju usmeritev Sodi�ča, 47pri čemer mora upo�tevati zlasti troje.
Thirdly, ELPA provides in its association rules that commercial advertising at motorcycling events can take place only with its consent or the consent of the ETHEAM committee acting under its charge.
Tretjič, ELPA v svojih predpisih združenja določa, da se sme komercialno ogla�evati na motociklističnih dirkah samo z njenim soglasjem oziroma s soglasjem komisije ETHEAM, ki ima njeno pooblastilo.
48That obstacle to the marketing of motorcycling events may likewise deter foreign service providers from entering the Greek market.
48 Ta ovira pri trženju motociklističnih dirk lahko tuje ponudnike prav tako odvrne od tega, da bi prodrli na gr�ki trg.
Furthermore, foreign sponsors, advertising partners and insurance undertakings may in this way be put off engaging in the Greek motorcycle-racing business.
Ob tem lahko to tuje sponzorje, ogla�evalske partnerje in zavarovalnice na ta način odvrne od sodelovanja v gr�kem motociklističnem poslu.
Firstly, as the Commission has stated, the business of sport is becoming international.
Prvič, kot je navedla Komisija, s �portom povezani gospodarski posli postajajo mednarodni.
Consequently, it does not necessarily seem out of the question that foreign undertakings might have an interest in entering the Greek market and in organising and marketing motorcycling events there.
Zato ni nujno vnaprej napačno, da bi imela tuja podjetja interes prodreti na gr�ki trg ter tam organizirati in tržiti motociklistične dirke.
44 — Ambulanz Glöckner (cited in footnote 23, paragraph 48), as well as — in relation to Article 81 EC — Case 31/80 L’Oréal [1980] ECR 3775, paragraph 18; Case C-295/04 Manfredi [2006] ECR I-6619, paragraph 42; Case C-238/05 Asnef-Equifax [2006] ECR I-11125, paragraph 34; and Case C-407/04 P Dalmine v Commission [2007] ECR I-829, paragraph 90.
44 – Sodba Ambulanz Glöckner (navedena v opombi 23, točka 48) in – glede člena 81 ES – sodbe z dne 11. decembra 1980 v zadevi L’Oréal (31/80, Recueil, 3775, točka 18), z dne 13. julija 2006 v zadevi Manfredi (C-295/04, ZOdl., I-6619, točka 42), z dne 23. novembra 2006 v zadevi Asnef-Equifax (C-238/05, ZOdl., I-11125, točka 34) in z dne 25. januarja 2007 v zadevi Dalmine proti Komisiji (C-407/04 P, ZOdl., I-829, točka 90).
All in all, it is not inconceivable in these circumstances that any abuse by ELPA in connection with the authorisation of the motorcycling events of other service providers or in connection with the marketing of those events would be capable of affecting trade between Member States.
Tako v takih okoli�činah ni izključeno, da lahko morebitna zloraba na strani ELPE v zvezi z dovoljenji za motociklistične dirke drugih ponudnikov ali v zvezi z njihovim trženjem ovira trgovino med državami članicami.
46 — Commission Notice ‘Guidelines on the effect on trade concept contained in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty’ (OJ 2004 C 101, p.
46 – Obvestilo Komisije Smernice o konceptu vpliva na trgovino iz členov 81 in 82 Pogodbe (UL 2004, C 101, str.
81, the ‘Commission Guidelines’), paragraph 43.
81; v nadaljevanju: Smernice Komisije), točka 43.
47 — See, for example, Manfredi (paragraphs 47 and 48) and Asnef-Equifax (paragraphs 39 and 40), cited in footnote 44.
47 – Glej v opombi 44 navedeni sodbi Manfredi (točki 47 in 48) in Asnef-Equifax (točki 39 in 40).
48 — Article 10.7 of the EAKM rules governing the sport of motorcycling (see point 10 of this Opinion).
48 – Št. 10.7 pravil motociklističnega �porta EAKM (glej točko 10 teh sklepnih predlogov).
The Greek Government argues that, in view of the small number of motorcycling events with international participation organised in Greece, the possible effects of any anti-competitive behaviour by ELPA on trade between Member States are completely insignificant.
Gr�ka vlada ugovarja, da so spričo malenkostnega �tevila motociklističnih dirk z mednarodno udeležbo, ki so prirejene v Grčiji, mogoči vplivi morebitnega protikonkurenčnega ravnanja ELPE na trgovino popolnoma zanemarljivi.
tion whether trade between Member States has been appreciably affected, the volume of the goods or services affected by the alleged abuse must also be considered; that volume must then be viewed in relation to the overall volume of the materially and geographically relevant market. 52
skupnega trga. 51 V zvezi z vpra�anjem, ali je morebiten vpliv na trgovino med državami članicami znaten, je vendarle treba dodatno obravnavati tudi obseg blaga ali storitev, prizadetih zaradi dozdevne zlorabe; ta obseg se potem določi v razmerju do skupnega obsega stvarnega in prostorsko upo�tevnega trga. 52
Even if, as the Greek Government submits, only comparatively few international motorcycling events are organised in Greece, hindering the organisation or marketing of one or a few additional motorcycling events can still have appreciable effects in relation to the overall volume of the market.
Tudi če se v Grčiji, kot navaja gr�ka vlada, priredi razmeroma malo mednarodnih motociklističnih dirk, bi lahko že oviranje organiziranja ali trženja ene ali nekaj dodatnih motociklističnih dirk glede na skupni obseg tamkaj�njega trga imelo znaten vpliv.
It can ultimately impede the development of a larger market with greater turnover potential.
Zaradi tega bi bil navsezadnje lahko otežen razvoj večjega trga z možnostjo večjega prometa.
It is true that, for the purposes of the application of Article 82 EC, and also Article 81 EC, there must be an appreciable effect on trade between Member States; in other words, the effect must not be insignificant.
Drži, da mora biti za uporabo člena 82 ES kot tudi za uporabo člena 81 ES vpliv na trgovino med državami članicami znaten; z drugimi besedami, vpliv ne sme biti samo neznaten.