natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In that light, the basic criteria which must be taken into account in order to ensure that penalty payments have coercive force and Community law is applied uniformly and effectively are, in principle, the duration of the infringement, its degree of seriousness and the ability of the Member State to pay.
Namen naložitve plačila denarne kazni in/ali pav�alnega zneska je izvesti ekonomski pritisk na državo članico, ki je zamudnica pri izvr�itvi sodbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti, da bi jo spodbudili k odpravi ugotovljene neizpolnitve obveznosti.
In applying those criteria, regard should be had in particular to the effects of failure to comply on private and public interests and to the urgency of inducing the Member State concerned to fulfil its obligations.
Naložene denarne kazni morajo biti torej določene glede na stopnjo potrebne prepričljivosti, da zadevna država članica spremeni ravnanje.
(see paras 31, 34, 35)
(Glej točke 31, 34 in 35.)
(see paras 38, 39)
(Glej točki 38 in 39.)
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERALMAZÁK delivered on 9 October 2007 1
SKLEPNI PREDLOGI GENERALNEGA PRAVOBRANILCAJÁNA MAZÁKA, predstavljeni 9. oktobra 20071
I — Introduction and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts. 3
1989 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje.3
II — Legal framework
II – Pravni okvir
The present proceedings were brought by the Commission pursuant to Article 228 EC on 7 February 2006.
Komisija je obravnavani postopek v skladu s členom 228 ES sprožila 7. februarja 2006.
The Commission claims that the Portuguese Republic has failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of 14 October 2004 in Case C-275/03 Commission v Portugal 2 and requests that a penalty payment be imposed on Portugal.
Komisija zatrjuje, da Portugalska republika ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za uskladitev s sodbo Sodi�ča z dne 14. oktobra 2004 v zadevi Komisija proti Portugalski, C-275/03,2in zahteva, naj se ji naloži plačilo denarne kazni.
In that judgment, the Court declared that, by failing to repeal Decree-Law No 48051 of 21 November 1967, making the award of damages to persons injured by a breach of Community law relating to public contracts, or the national laws implementing it, conditional on proof of fault or wilful misconduct, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(1) and Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations
V tej sodbi je Sodi�če ugotovilo, da Portugalska republika s tem, da ni razveljavila uredbezakona �t. 48051 z dne 21. novembra 1967, ki za povrnitev �kode osebam, ki so bile o�kodovane zaradi kr�itve prava Skupnosti na področju javnih naročil ali nacionalnih predpisov, s katerimi je bilo to pravo preneseno, določa, da je treba dokazati naklep ali malomarnost, ni izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 1(1) in 2(1)(c) Direktive Sveta 89/665/EGS z dne 21. decembra
Article 1(1) of Directive 89/665, as amended, provides that ‘[t]he Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that, as regards contract award procedures falling within the scope of Directives 71/305/EEC, 77/62/EEC, and 92/50/EEC, decisions taken by the contracting authorities may be reviewed effectively and, in particular, as rapidly as possible …’
Člen 1(1) Direktive 89/665, kakor je spremenjen, določa: „Države članice sprejmejo potrebne ukrepe za zagotovitev, da se glede na postopke oddaje javnih naročil, ki sodijo na področje uporabe direktiv 71/305/EGS, 77/62/EGS in 92/50EGS, lahko odločitve, ki jih sprejmejo naročniki, učinkovito pregledajo, predvsem pa čim hitreje […].“
1 — Original language: English.2 — Judgment of 14 October 2004, not published in the ECR.
1 — Jezik izvirnika: angle�čina.2 — Sodba z dne 14. oktobra 2004, neobjavljena v ZOdl.
Article 81 of Directive 2004/18 provides that ‘[i]n conformity with … Directive 89/665 …, Member States shall ensure implementation of this Directive by effective, available and transparent mechanisms’.
Člen 81 Direktive 2004/18 določa, da „Države članice zagotovijo izvajanje te direktive z učinkovitimi, razpoložljivimi in preglednimi mehanizmi v skladu z Direktivo […] 89/665/EGS.“
The reference in Article 1(1) of Directive 89/665 to Directive 71/305 should be read as a reference to Directive 2004/18. 7
Sklicevanje člena 1(1) Direktive 89/665 na Direktivo 71/305 je treba razumeti kot sklicevanje na Direktivo 2004/18.7
(c) award damages to persons harmed by an infringement’.
(c) se povrne �koda osebam, ki so bile o�kodovane zaradi kr�itve.“
III — Pre-litigation procedure and forms of order sought
III – Predhodni postopek in predlogi strank
Council Directive 71/305/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts 4 was repealed by Council Direct- ive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, 5 which was in turn repealed by Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, with effect from 31 January 2006. 6
71/305/EGS z dne 26. julija 1971 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil za gradnje4je razveljavila Direktiva Sveta 93/37/EGS z dne 14. junija 1993 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil za gradnje,5 to pa je razveljavila Direktiva 2004/18/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 31. marca 2004 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo javnih naročil gradenj, blaga in storitev z veljavnostjo od 31. januarja 2006.6
By letter dated 4 November 2004, the Commission drew the Portuguese authorities’ attention to the terms of the judgment in Case C-275/03 and the fact that Article 228 EC requires Portugal to take the necessary measures to comply with that judgment.
Z dopisom z dne 4. novembra 2004 je Komisija portugalske organe opozorila na vsebino sodbe v zadevi C-275/03 in na dejstvo, da člen 228 ES od Portugalske zahteva sprejetje ukrepov, ki so potrebni za uskladitev z njo.
The Commission requested the Portuguese authorities to inform it of the measures taken by 15 January 2005.
Komisija je od portugalskih organov zahtevala, naj jo o teh ukrepih obvestijo do 15. januarja 2005.
7 — See Article 81 of Directive 2004/18.
7 — Glej člen 81 Direktive 2004/18.
It also drew the Portuguese authorities’ attention to the fact that the Court can impose monetary sanctions pursuant to Article 228(2) EC.
Portugalske organe je opozorila tudi na dejstvo, da lahko Sodi�če v skladu s členom 228(2) ES naloži plačilo denarne sankcije.
The Commission indicated that it would specify to the Court the amount of the lump sum or penalty payment that the Commission considers should be paid by Portugal in the circumstances.
Komisija je navedla, da bo Sodi�ču sporočila vi�ino pav�alnega zneska ali denarne kazni, za katero bo menila, da bi jo Portugalska morala plačati glede na okoli�čine.
On 19 November 2004, the Portuguese authorities forwarded to the Commission a copy of a proposed new law on the noncontractual civil liability of the State and other public entities.
Portugalski organi so 19. novembra 2004 Komisiji predložili kopijo predlaganega novega zakona o nepogodbeni civilni odgovornosti države in drugih subjektov javnega prava.
The Portuguese authorities requested the Commission to indicate whether it considered that the proposed law would ensure the correct and complete transposition of Directive 89/665.
Od Komisije so zahtevali, naj se opredeli do tega, ali bi predlagan zakon zagotovil pravilen in popoln prenos Direktive 89/665.
In addition, by letter dated 12 January 2005, the Portuguese authorities requested the Commission not to take any action pursuant to Article 228 EC until after the new legislator commences, following the elections of 20 February 2005, in order that the procedure for the adoption of the law on noncontractual liability of the State could be undertaken during the first semester of 2005.
Poleg tega so portugalski organi z dopisom z dne 12. januarja 2005 od Komisije zahtevali, naj ne vloži tožbe na podlagi člena 228 ES, dokler ne bo izvoljeno novo zakonodajno telo na volitvah z dne 20. februarja 2005, zato da bi se v prvem polletju leta 2005 lahko izvedel postopek za sprejetje zakona o nepogodbeni odgovornosti države.
By letter dated 25 May 2005, the Portuguese authorities replied to the Commission’s formal letter of notice.
Z dopisom z dne 25. maja 2005 so portugalski organi odgovorili na pisni opomin Komisije.
Dissatisfied with that response, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion on 13 July 2005 in which it stated that Portugal had failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court in Case C-275/03 and had failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 228(1) EC.
Ker ta z odgovorom ni bila zadovoljna, je 13. julija 2005 izdala obrazloženo mnenje, v katerem je navedla, da Portugalska ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za izvr�itev sodbe Sodi�ča v zadevi C-275/03, in da ni izpolnila obveznosti iz člena 228(1) ES.
It set a time-limit of two months for the Portuguese Republic to adopt the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-275/03.
Za sprejetje ukrepov, potrebnih za izvr�itev sodbe v zadevi C-275/03, je Portugalski republiki določila dvomesečni rok.
The Commission also drew Portugal’s attention to the fact that if the case were brought before the Court, that the Court could impose monetary sanctions and that the Commission itself would suggest that a lump sum or penalty payment be imposed.
Komisija je Portugalsko opozorila tudi na to, da bi lahko Sodi�če – če bi mu predložila primer – naložilo plačilo denarne sankcije in da bo tudi ona sama predlagala naložitev plačila pav�alnega zneska ali denarne kazni.
On 21 March 2005, the Commission sent a formal letter of notice to the Portuguese authorities in which it informed them that the dissolution of the Portuguese Parliament (Assembleia da República Portuguesa) and the holding of elections did not justify the failure by Portugal to comply with its obligations pursuant to Directive 89/665 and the time-limits established by that directive.
Komisija je 21. marca 2005 portugalskim organom poslala pisni opomin, v katerem jih je obvestila, da razpustitev portugalskega parlamenta (Assembleia da República Portuguesa) in izvedba volitev ne upravičujeta okoli�čine, da Portugalska ni izpolnila obveznosti iz Direktive 89/665, in sicer v rokih, ki jih ta direktiva določa.
The Commission also indicated that the proposed law did not, in any event, comply with Direct ive 89/665.
Komisija je prav tako navedla, da predlagani zakon v nobenem primeru ni skladen z Direktivo 89/665.
The Commission informed the Portuguese authorities, that given that it had not received any information on the measures taken to comply with the judgment of the Court in Case C-275/03, it considered that Portugal had failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 228(1) EC.
Komisija je portugalske oblasti obvestila, da glede na to, da ni prejela nobene informacije o ukrepih, ki bi jih bilo treba sprejeti za izvr�itev sodbe Sodi�ča v zadevi C-275/03, meni, da Portugalska ni izpolnila obveznosti, ki jih ima na
In its response to the reasoned opinion dated 12 December 2005, the Portuguese
V odgovor na obrazloženo mnenje z dne 12. decembra 2005 so portugalski organi
— order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.
MAZÀKA – ZADEVA C-70/06 izvr�itvi sodbe v zadevi C-275/03, od dneva izdaje sodbe v obravnavani zadevi do dneva izvr�itve navedene sodbe; navedli, da je predlagani zakon o nepogodbeni odgovornosti države, ki med drugim razveljavlja uredbozakon �t.
authorities indicated that the proposed law on the noncontractual liability of the State, which inter alia repeals Decree-Law No 48051, had already been submitted to the Portuguese Parliament for final approval.
48051, že bil predložen portugalskemu parlamentu v končno sprejetje.
Taking the view that Portuguese Republic had not complied with the judgment of the Court in Case C-275/03, the Commission decided to bring the present action.
Ker je Komisija menila, da Portugalska republika ni izvr�ila sodbe Sodi�ča v zadevi C-275/03, se je odločila vložiti obravnavano tožbo.
The Portuguese Republic contends that the Court should:
S tožbo Komisija Sodi�ču predlaga, naj:
Dismiss as unfounded all the claims of the Commission, and:
Kot neutemeljene zavrne vse tožbene predloge Komisije in:
— declare that, by having failed to take the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of the Court … in Case C-275/03 …, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228(1) of the EC Treaty;
— ugotovi, da Portugalska republika s tem, da ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za izvr�itev sodbe Sodi�ča […] v zadevi C-275/03 […], ni izpolnila obveznosti iz člena 228(1) Pogodbe ES; a) ugotovi, da je Portugalska republika sprejela vse ukrepe, potrebne za izvr�itev sodbe Sodi�ča […] v zadevi C-275/03 […] in zato kot neutemeljen zavrne prvi tožbeni predlog Komisije;
(b) dispense the Portuguese Republic of the obligation to pay … a penalty
— Portugalski republiki naloži, naj Komisiji na račun „lastna sredstva Evropskih skupnosti“, naveden v členu 9 Uredbe Sveta (ES, Euratom) �t.
— order the Portuguese Republic to pay to the Commission, into the account ‘European Community own resources’, mentioned in Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000, a penalty payment of EUR 21 450 for every day of delay in complying with the judgment in Case C-275/03 from the day on which the Court … delivers judgment in the present case until the day on which the judgment in Case C-275/03 is complied with;
1150/2000, plača 21.450 EUR za vsak dan zamude pri b) Portugalsko republiko oprosti dolžnosti plačila […] denarne kazni
COMMISSION v PORTUGAL payment of EUR 21 450 for every day of delay in complying with the judgment in Case C-275/03 from the day on which the Court delivers judgment in the present case until the day on which the judgment in Case C-275/03 is complied with, and thus consider as unfounded the second claim of the Commission.
21.450 EUR za vsak dan zamude pri izvr�itvi sodbe v zadevi C-275/0 od dneva izdaje sodbe v obravnavani zadevi do dneva izvr�itve navedene sodbe in zato kot neutemeljen zavrne drugi tožbeni predlog Komisije.
comply with the judgment of the Court in Case C-275/03 as that Member State has not repealed Decree-Law No 48051.
Sodi�ča v zadevi C-275/03, ker ni razveljavila uredbezakona �t. 48051.
The Commission submits that the proposed law on the noncontractual civil liability of the State and other public bodies, which was placed before the Portuguese Parliament by the Portuguese Government, does not comply with that judgment.
Komisija zatrjuje, da predlagani zakon o nepogodbeni civilni odgovornosti države in drugih subjektov javnega prava, ki ga je portugalska vlada predložila portugalskemu parlamentu, ne izvr�uje te sodbe.
Moreover, as no other measures have been communicated to the Commission, it considers that the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228(1) EC.
Še več, ker Komisija ni bila obve�čena o nobenih drugih ukrepih, meni, da Portugalska republika ni izpolnila obveznosti na podlagi člena 228(1) ES.
In the alternative, in the event that our position is not accepted — [quod non] — reduce the amount of the penalty payment specified, as that amount is manifestly excessive, and fix the applicable coefficient for seriousness at a level not exceeding 4 (four), fix the payment of the penalty payment on an annual basis and suspend the payment of the penalty payment until the entry into force of the measures adopted in the meantime by the Portuguese State.
Podredno, če na�emu predlogu ne bo ugodeno – [quod non] – zniža znesek odmerjene denarne kazni, saj je ta znesek očitno pretiran, in določi koeficient za resnost, ki se uporabi, na ravni, ki ne presega 4 (�tiri), določi plačilo denarne kazni na letni ravni in zadrži plačilo denarne kazni do začetka veljavnosti ukrepov, ki jih bo v vmesnem času sprejela država Portugalska.
IV — Compliance with the obligation imposed by Article 228(1) EC
IV – Izpolnjevanje obveznosti na podlagi člena 228(1) ES
A — Arguments of the parties
A – Trditve strank
The Commission claims that Portugal has not adopted the necessary measures to
Komisija zatrjuje, da Portugalska ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za izvr�itev sodbe
Portugal considers that proposed Law No 56/X on the noncontractual civil liability of the State and other public entities, which was unanimously adopted by the Portuguese Parliament on 6 April 2006 and which will shortly enter into force correctly transposes Directive 89/665.
Portugalska meni, da predlagani zakon �t. 56/X o nepogodbeni civilni odgovornosti držav in drugih subjektov javnega prava, ki ga je portugalski parlament sprejel soglasno 6. aprila 2006 in ki bo kmalu začel veljati, pravilno prena�a Direktivo 89/665.
Portugal also considers that the legal regime adopted by it in the meantime adequately transposes Directive 89/665 and that it thereby wholly complies with the judgment in Case C-275/03.
Portugalska tudi meni, da je s pravno ureditvijo, ki jo je sprejela v vmesnem času, Direktiva 89/665 ustrezno prenesena in da s tem popolnoma izvr�uje sodbo v zadevi C-275/03.
In that regard, Portugal submits that Articles 22 and 271 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic (CRP) and the new Procedural Code of the Administrative Courts (CPTA) ensure sufficient compliance with the judgment in Case C-275/03.
Glede tega Portugalska navaja, da člena 22 in 271 ustave Portugalske republike (CRP) in novi zakon o upravnem sporu (CPTA) zagotavljata zadostno izvr�itev sodbe v zadevi C-275/03.
Moreover, it claims that the Portuguese courts, in their settled caselaw, have recognised that there exists a presumption of fault in relation to the illegal acts of the Administration.
Poleg tega meni, da so portugalska sodi�ča v svoji ustaljeni sodni praksi potrdila, da se pri nezakonitem ravnanju uprave krivda domneva.
B — Assessment necessary in my view to ascertain, in the context of the present case which concerns a failure to fulfil obligations pursuant to Article 228(1) EC, whether the Portuguese Republic has complied with that judgment and, in particular, whether it has repealed Decree-Law No 48051.
B – Presoja primer, ki se nana�a na neizpolnitev obveznosti na podlagi člena 228(1) ES, nujno treba preveriti, ali je Portugalska republika izvr�ila to sodbo in zlasti, ali je razveljavila uredbozakon �t. 48051.
It is for the Commission to provide the Court, in the course of Article 228 EC proceedings, with the information necessary to determine the extent to which a Member State has complied with a judgment declaring it to be in breach of its obligations.
Komisija mora med postopkom, ki poteka na podlagi člena 228 ES, Sodi�ču sporočiti podatke, ki so potrebni za določitev obsega, v katerem je država članica izvr�ila sodbo, s katero je bilo ugotovljeno, da je ta država članica kr�ila svoje obveznosti.
Moreover, where the Commission has adduced sufficient evidence to show that the breach of obligations has persisted, it is for the Member State concerned to challenge in substance and in detail the information produced and its consequences. 8
Dalje, če Komisija predloži zadosti dokazov, da je bila kr�itev obveznosti dolgotrajna, je zadevna država članica tista, ki mora vsebinsko in podrobno izpodbijati predložene podatke in posledice, ki iz njih izhajajo.8
The reference date for assessing whether there has been a failure to fulfil obligations under Article 228(1) EC is the date of expiry of the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion issued under that provision.
Upo�tevni datum za ugotovitev, ali obveznosti na podlagi člena 228(1) ES niso bile izpolnjene, je datum poteka obdobja, določenega v obrazloženem mnenju, ki je bilo izdano na podlagi te določbe.
Moreover, since the Commission seeks the imposition of a penalty payment on the Portuguese Republic, it must also be ascertained whether the alleged failure to fulfil obligations continued up to the Court’s hearing in the present case.
Še več, ker Komisija predlaga, naj se Portugalski republiki naloži denarna kazen, je prav tako treba preveriti, ali je domnevna neizpolnitev obveznosti trajala vse do obravnave v tej zadevi pred Sodi�čem.
In the operative part of the judgment in Case C-275/03, the Court declared that, by failing to repeal Decree-Law No 48051, making the award of damages to persons injured by a breach of Community law relating to public contracts, or the national laws implementing it, conditional on proof of fault or wilful misconduct, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 1(1) and Article 2(1)(c) of Directive 89/665.
V izreku sodbe v zadevi C-275/03 je Sodi�če izreklo, da Portugalska republika s tem, da ni razveljavila uredbezakona �t. 48051, ki za povrnitev �kode osebam, ki so bile o�kodovane zaradi kr�itve prava Skupnosti na področju javnih naročil ali nacionalnih predpisov, s katerimi je bilo to preneseno, določa, da je treba dokazati naklep ali malomarnost, ni izpolnila obveznosti iz členov 1(1) in 2(1)(c) Direktive 89/665.
Given the terms of the operative part of the judgment in Case C-275/03, it is
Glede na vsebino izreka sodbe v zadevi C-275/03 je po mojem mnenju za obravnavani
In the present case, it would appear from the written pleadings submitted by the Commission, and indeed Portugal, that while a proposed law for the repeal of Decree-Law No 48051 is currently before the Portuguese Parliament, that law has not been definitely adopted.
V obravnavani zadevi iz pisnih vlog, ki jih je predložila Komisija, pa tudi Portugalska, izhaja, da predlagani zakon, s katerim bo razveljavljena uredbazakon �t. 48051 in ki ga trenutno obravnava portugalski parlament, �e ni dokončno sprejet. Portugalska vlada je sama v pisnih vlogah priznala, da je za začetek veljavnosti predlaganega zakona 56/X med drugim potreben podpis Presidente da República (predsednika republike) in objava v Diário da República
ings. In my opinion, the submissions in question represent an attempt by Portugal to re-open the procedure in Case C-275/03 and to seek a re-examination of matters which were already debated by the parties and thus considered by the Court in reaching its final judgment in that case.
Portugalske doseči ponovno uvedbo postopka v zadevi C-275/03 in ponovno obravnavo vpra�anj, do katerih sta se stranki že opredelili in jih je torej Sodi�če za namen izdaje končne odločitve v tej zadevi že presodilo.
In the light of all the foregoing, the conclusion must be that the Portuguese Republic has failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment in Case C-275/03 as regards the transposition of Articles 1(1) and 2(1)(c) of Directive 89/665, and has thereby failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228(1) EC.
Ob upo�tevanju navedenega je treba zaključiti, da Portugalska republika ni sprejela ukrepov, potrebnih za izvr�itev sodbe v zadevi C-275/03 glede prenosa členov 1(1) in 2(1)(c) Direktive 89/665, s čimer ni izpolnila obveznosti na podlagi člena 228(1) ES.
Since the failure to fulfil obligations on the part of the Portuguese Republic has thus been shown still to subsist on the date of the Court’s hearing in the present case, the Commission’s proposal of a penalty payment must now be examined.
Ker je izkazano, da Portugalska republika obveznosti ni izpolnila niti do datuma javne obravnave v obravnavani zadevi pred Sodi�čem, je treba preskusiti predlog Komisije o naložitvi denarne kazni.
As regards, the submissions of the Portuguese Government based on Articles 22 and 271 of the CRP, the CPTA and the caselaw of the Portuguese courts 10on the presumption of fault, those submissions are, in my view, legally irrelevant and inappropriate in the context of the present proceed-
Menim, da so v obravnavanem postopku navedbe vlade Portugalske, ki temeljijo na členih 22 in 271 CRP, CPTA in sodni praksi portugalskih sodi�č,10glede domneve krivdnega ravnanja pravno neupo�tevne in neprimerne. Menim, da pomenijo poskus