natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
See Annex “illustrative list of obstacles to trade often considered in WTO dispute settlement”
Glej Prilogo “Ponazoritveni seznam trgovinskih ovir, ki se pogosto obravnavajo pri reševanju sporov STO“.
Evidence that the obstacle to trade results in injury or adverse trade effects
Dokaz, da trgovinska ovira povzroča škodo trgovini ali ima nanjo škodljive učinke
The complaint must contain sufficient evidence: of the existence of injuryor adverse trade effects; and that theinjuryor the adverse trade effectsare caused by the invoked obstacles to trade.
Pritožba mora vsebovati zadostne dokaze: o obstoju škode ali škodljivih učinkov na trgovino; in da so škodo ali škodljive učinke na trgovino povzročile trgovinske ovire, na katere se sklicujete.
The following elements may be used to provide evidence of injuryor adverse trade effects.
Za predložitev dokazov o škodi ali škodljivih učinkih na trgovino se lahko uporabi naslednje elemente.
However, thislist is far from being exhaustive and provides some flexibility: statistical data on the affected trade flows including factors such as volume of imports, exports, production, consumption on the third country market and or the Community market, in particular wherethere has been a significant variation; loss of market shares (on the Community markets, the third country market or others countries’markets).
Vendar ta seznam ni izčrpen in omogoča nekaj prilagoditev: statistični podatki o prizadetih trgovinskih tokovih, vključno z dejavniki kot so obseg uvoza, izvoza, proizvodnje, potrošnje na trgu tretje države in ali trgu Skupnosti, zlasti, kjer prihaja do znatnega odstopanja; izguba tržnih deležev (na trgih Skupnosti, trgu tretje države ali trgih drugih držav).
The consequent impact of the barrier might be demonstrated by changing trends such as profit margins,capacity, return on capital, investment, employment, prices etc…
Posledični vpliv ovire se lahko prikaže s spreminjanjem trendov, kot so stopnja dobička, zmogljivost, donosnost kapitala, naložbe, zaposlovanje, cene itd.
Where a threat of injuryor a threat of adverse trade effectsis alleged, the complaint must illustratewhether it is clearly foreseeable that a particular situation is likely to develop into actual injury or adversetrade effects.
Kadar obstaja nevarnost škode ali nevarnost škodljivih učinkov na trgovino, mora pritožba ponazoriti, ali je mogoče jasno predvideti verjetnost razvoja določene situacije v dejansko škodo ali škodljive učinke.
In either case, the following elements could be used: the rate of increase of exports to the market where the competition with Community products is taking place; export capacity in the country of origin or export, which is already in existence and will be operational in the foreseeable future and the likelihood that exports resulting from that capacity will be to the marketwhere the competition with Community products is taking place.
V vsakem primeru je mogoče uporabiti naslednje elemente: stopnja povečanja izvoza na trg, kjer poteka konkurenca z izdelki Skupnosti; izvozna zmogljivost v državi izvora ali izvoza, ki že obstaja in bo izvedljiva v bližnji prihodnosti ter verjetnost, da bo izvoz, ki izvira iz te zmogljivosti, usmerjen na trg, kjer poteka konkurenca z izdelki Skupnosti.
Where adverse trade effectsare being alleged, the Commission examines the impact of the obstacle to tradeon the economy of the Community or of a region of the Community or on a sector of economic activity therein.
Kadar domnevno obstajajo škodljivi učinki na trgovino, Komisija prouči vpliv trgovinske ovire na gospodarstvo Skupnosti ali regije Skupnosti ali na sektor njihove gospodarske dejavnosti.
It is important to note that it is possible, especially where the obstacle to trade has an effect on a non-EUmarket, that little or no trade actually takes place because the trade flows have been “prevented, impeded ordiverted”.
Pomembno je omeniti, da je mogoče, zlasti kadar trgovinska ovira učinkuje na neevropski trg, da se odvija malo ali nič trgovine, ker so bili trgovinski tokovi“zadržani, ovirani ali preusmerjeni“.
This is also relevant under the TBR, and can also be the basis for a complaint.
To je pomembno tudi po UTO in lahko služi kot osnova za pritožbo.
Finally, the complaint should also demonstrate that there is a causal link between the adverse trade effects (orinjury) and the WTO incompatible practice that is the subject matter of the TBR investigation.
Pritožba naj prikaže tudi obstoj občasne povezave med škodljivimi učinki na trgovino (ali škodo) in neskladno prakso STO, ki je predmet preiskave po UTO.
By doing so itreinforces any possible counter-claim that the adverse trade effects (or injury) are not related to the obstacle,and have occurred as a result of other factors beyond the control of the country imposing the trade barrier.
S tem se vzpodbudi morebitno nasprotno trditev, da škodljivi učinki na trgovino (ali škoda) niso povezani z oviro in so nastali kot posledica drugih dejavnikov izven nadzora države, ki izvaja trgovinsko oviro.
What can be achieved by a complaint?
Kaj jemogočedoseči s pritožbo?
The ultimate aim of the TBR is to eliminate the obstacle to trade, and re-establish a levelplaying field.
Temeljni cilj UTO je odprava trgovinske ovire in ponovna vzpostavitev enakih konkurenčnih pogojev.
How, then, can this be achieved?
Kako je mogoče to doseči?
The following section provides some of the scenarios that might be the result of a successful TBR complaint.
Naslednje poglavje prikazuje nekaj predvidenih potekov, ki lahko sledijo uspešni pritožbi UTO.
Satisfactory steps taken by third country
Zadovoljivi ukrepi tretje države
If following the initiation of the TBR procedure, the third country takes satisfactory steps to eliminate theobstacle to trade, no action by the Community is required.
Če tretja država po začetku postopka UTO zadovoljivo ukrepa v smeri odprave trgovinske ovire, ukrepanje Skupnosti ni potrebno.
In that case the procedure may be suspendedor terminated and the Commission will check that the third country respects its undertakings.
V tem primeru se lahko postopek prekine ali ustavi in Komisija preveri, ali tretja država spoštuje svoje obveznosti.
For this purpose,a monitoring procedure may be established..
V ta namen se lahko uvede postopek spremljanja stanja.
Formal agreement with third country
Uradni sporazum s tretjo državo
If after the end of the examination procedure, or at any time before, the third country is willing to negotiatea settlement with the Commission, the proceedings would be temporarily suspended to allow negotiationsto take place.
Če je po končanem postopku preverjanja, ali kadar koli pred tem, tretja država pripravljena skleniti poravnavo s Komisijo, se postopek začasno prekine, da se omogoči pogajanja.
If an agreement was reached the procedure could be either formally suspended or terminated.
Če je sporazum dosežen, se postopek uradno prekine ali ustavi.
Initiation of international (WTO or other) dispute settlement procedure
Začetek postopka mednarodnega reševanja spora (STO ali drugi)
If it has not been possible to reach a satisfactory solution and the investigation supports the claims of thecomplaint, the case might be brought under the WTO dispute settlement procedure or another appropriateinternational mechanism, notably the dispute settlement mechanisms established by bilateral agreements.
Če ni bilo mogoče doseči zadovoljive rešitve in preiskava potrjuje pritožbene trditve, se lahko zadeva obravnava v postopku reševanja sporov STO ali z drugim ustreznim mednarodnim mehanizmom, zlasti z mehanizmi za reševanje sporov, uvedenimi z dvostranskimi sporazumi.
It should be noted that an international dispute settlement procedure involves exclusively Governments andpublic entities like the EU; private parties do not have direct access to this procedure.
Opomniti je treba, da postopek reševanja mednarodnih sporov vključuje izključno vlade držav in javne organizacije, kot je EU; zasebne stranke nimajo neposrednega dostopa do tega postopka.
The TBR is, therefore, aninstrument which effectively provides industry with an indirect access to the rights deriving from the WTOAgreements.
UTO je torej instrument, ki industriji učinkovito zagotavlja neposredni dostop do pravic, ki izhajajo iz sporazumov STO.
Under the WTO dispute settlement procedure, WTO Members are required to try and resolve their dispute byholding consultations.
V postopku reševanja sporov STO se članice STO pozove, naj poskusijo spor rešiti s posvetovanjem.
However if this fails to resolve the dispute, by reaching a mutually satisfactory solution,the “complaining party”has the right to ask a panel of experts to make an objective assessment of the matter,taking into account the facts of the particular case and whether the provisions of the WTO agreements havebeen violated.
Če se sporna ta način, z dosego obojestransko zadovoljive rešitve, ne reši, ima “pritožnik“ pravico skupino izvedencev zaprositi za objektivno oceno zadeve, upoštevajoč dejstva konkretne zadeve in morebitno kršitev določb sporazumov STO.
The panel submits its written report to the parties directly involved in the case as well as to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) who monitors all WTO Disputes.
Skupina izvedencev predloži svoje pisno poročilo strankam, ki so v sporu neposredno udeležene, in organu za reševanje sporov (DSB), ki spremlja vse spore STO.
Whilst there is the right of appeal, the endresult is that whatever the Appellate Body rules, it will be binding (i.e. enforceable) on the parties.
Zaradi pravice do pritožbe je končni rezultat ta, da je odločitev pritožbenega organa za stranki zavezujoča (tj. izvršljiva).
Similarly apanel report, if not appealed, is binding.
Podobno je zavezujoče poročilo skupine izvedencev, če zoper njega ni vložena pritožba.
If the decision is in favour of the EU: the third country concerned may accept the outcome and comply with the recommendations of the dispute settlement body by eliminating the obstacle to trade; if the third county does not implement the recommendations within a timeframe established by the WTO Dispute Settlement body or by the panel established under a bilateral Free Trade Agreement, the Commission may propose to the Council retaliatory measures, which can then be adopted by qualified majority within 30 days from the transmission of the Commission proposal.
Če je odločitev v korist EU: zadevna tretja država lahko sprejme izid in upošteva priporočila organa za reševanje sporov z odpravo trgovinske ovire; če tretja država ne izvrši priporočil v časovnem okviru, ki ga je določil organ za reševanje sporov STO ali odbor, ustanovljen v okviru dvostranskega sporazuma o prosti trgovini, lahko Komisija predlaga Svetu povračilne ukrepe, ki jih je nato mogoče sprejeti s kvalificirano večino v 30 dneh od dneva oddaje predloga Komisije.
The retaliatorymeasures can take different forms e.g. withdrawal of concessions, raising of tariffs or the imposition of quantitative restrictions.
Povračilni ukrepi so lahko različni, npr. odvzem koncesij, zvišanje tarif ali uvedba količinskih omejitev.
Since 1996, 25 TBR examination procedures have been initiated.
Od leta 1996 je bilo sproženih 25 postopkov preverjanja UTO.
The TBR has been successful in obtainingresults for the complainants in most of the cases, either through action taken by the third country to eliminatethe obstacle to trade or through WTO dispute settlement.
UTO je bila za pritožnike glede doseženih rezultatov uspešna v večini zadev, bodisi z ukrepanjem tretje države za odpravo trgovinske ovire bodisi v postopku reševanja sporov STO.
In particular, negotiated settlements led to changesin the legislation or the administrative practice.
Sklenjene poravnave so vodile zlasti v spremembe zakonodaje ali upravne prakse.
In certain cases, the actions taken by the third country need tobe monitored.
V nekaterih primerih je treba ukrepe tretje države nadzorovati.
In other words, to put it in figures: out of the 25 TBR investigations carried out so far,
Z drugimi besedami, številčno: od skupno 25 doslej opravljenih preiskav UTO jih je
12 led to satisfactory action by a third country, for which in some cases monitoring is still required;
12 vodilo v zadovoljive ukrepe tretje države, za katere je v nekaterih primerih še vedno potreben nadzor;
1 has been terminated since no trade barriers were identified,
1 je bila ustavljena, ker niso bile ugotovljene trgovinske ovire;
1 is still under TBR examination procedure
1 je še vedno v postopku preverjanja UTO;
7 resulted into WTO dispute settlement cases.
7 jih je vodilo v postopek reševanja sporov STO.
Satisfactory actions by third country (monitoring in certain cases)
Zadovoljivi ukrepi tretje države (nadzor v nekaterih primerih)
US – rules of origin for textiles Brazil – Cognac Brazil – stainless steel products Brazil – textiles Korea – cosmetics Chile – swordfish Brazil – Sorbitol Korea – pharmaceuticals Argentina – textiles Columbia – cars Canada – Bordeaux Médoc Uruguay – whisky
ZDA - pravila o poreklu tekstilnih izdelkov Brazilija - konjak Brazilija - izdelki iz nerjavečega jekla Brazilija - tekstilni izdelki Koreja - kozmetični izdelki Čile - mečarica Brazilija - sorbitol Koreja - farmacevtski izdelki Argentina - tekstilni izdelki Kolumbija - avtomobili Kanada - Bordeaux Médoc Urugvaj - viski
US – Antidumping Act 1916 (implemented)US – music licensing (pending implementation)Argentina – Hides and skin (partial implementation)Brazil – regional aircraft (panel procedure terminated)Korea – subsidies to shipbuilding industry (pending implementation)Brazil – retreaded tyres (ongoing procedure)India – wines and spirits (implemented)
ZDA - Protidampinški zakon 1916 (izveden) ZDA - izdajanje dovoljenj za glasbo (nedokončan) Argentina - kože (delno izvajanje) Brazilija - regionalna letala (zaključen postopek pred skupino izvedencev) Koreja - subvencije ladjedelniški industriji (nedokončan) Brazilija - protektirane pnevmatike (postopek v teku) Indija - vina in žgane pijače (izveden)
Under TBR examination
Postopek preverjanja po UTO
Chinese Taipei – Compulsory licensing of CD-Rs
Kitajski Tajpej - izdajanje obveznih dovoljenj za CD-R
Canada – Prosciutto di Parma Japan – Leather US – oilseeds Turkey – pharmaceutical products
Kanada - Prosciutto di Parma Japonska - usnje ZDA - oljnice Turčija - farmacevtski izdelki
No action required
Ukrepanje ni potrebno
US – measures concerning imports of prepared mustard
ZDA - ukrepi glede uvoza pripravljene gorčice
TBR: 10 years of experience
UTO: 10 let izkušenj
The Trade Barriers Regulation (TBR) has been in force now for more than ten years, since 1 January 1995.
Uredbao trgovinskihovirah (UTO) je v veljavi že več kot deset let, od 1. januarja 1995.
During that time it has proved itself to be an effective mechanism in solving market access problems for European Union producers wishing to export to third countries.
V tem času se je izkazala kot učinkovit mehanizem za reševanje težav v zvezi z vstopom na trg za proizvajalce Evropske unije, ki želijo izvažati v tretje države.
During the past years the instrument has been used to serve the needs of a variety of industries and has considered practices of different trading partners.
V preteklih letih je instrument služil potrebam različnih gospodarskih panog in je obravnaval prakse različnih trgovinskih partnerjev.
In some of thosecases a solution has been reached through negotiation or action by the third country and in others by means of WTO dispute settlement proceedings.
V nekaterih izmed teh primerov je bila rešitev dosežena s pogajanji ali ukrepanjem tretje države, v ostalih pa s postopki reševanja sporov STO.
The TBR investigations that have been carried out so far have dealt with various industry sectors.
Doslej izvedene preiskave UTO so se ukvarjale z različnimi industrijskimi sektorji.
Industry sectors that lodged TBR complaints (16)
Industrijski sektorji, ki so vložili pritožbe UTO (16)
Cars (1), Spirits (3), Cosmetics (1), Leather (2), Music (2), Textiles (3), Steel (2), Pharmaceuticals (2), Food industry (2), Regional aircraft (1), Fisheries (1), Agricultural products (2), Shipbuilding, (1) Tyres (1), Electronics (1), Wine (2).
Avtomobili (1), žganje (3), kozmetika (1), usnje (2), glasba (2), tekstilni izdelki (3), jeklo (2), farmacevtski izdelki (2), živilska industrija (1), regionalna letala (1), ribolov (1), kmetijski izdelki (2), ladjedelništvo (1), pnevmatike (1), elektronika (1), vino (2).
In what countries have problems occurred?
V katerih državah so se pojavile težave?
Countries against which TBR complaints have been lodged (12)
Države, zoper katere so bile vložene pritožbe UTO (12)
What type of problems has the TBR investigated?
Kakšne težave je preiskovala UTO?
The trade barriers investigated have been varied:
Preiskovane trgovinske ovire so bile različne:
Indicative list of problems addressed in TBR complaints
Okvirni seznam težav, na katere so se nanašale pritožbe UTO
Nature of problem
Narava težave
Number of complaints
Število pritožb
Transit of products
Prevoz izdelkov
Rules of origin (determination, certificates)
Pravila o poreklu (ugotavljanje, potrdila)
Customs valuation of goods
Carinsko vrednotenje blaga
Discriminatory taxation
Diskriminatorno obdavčevanje
Abusive trade defence instruments
Pretirana trgovinska zaščita
Lack of protection of appellation of origin / geographical indication
Pomanjkanje varstva pri označbi porekla/geografska označba
Lack of data exclusivity/data protection
Pomanjkanje ekskluzivnosti podatkov/varstvo podatkov
Subsidies to domestic producers
Subvencije domačim proizvajalcem
Labelling of products
Označevanje izdelkov
Copyright violation
Kršitev avtorskih pravic
Who lodged the complaints?
Kdo je vložil pritožbe?
The complaints lodged with the Commission until now have been made by companies, national industryassociations, and European industry associations.
Doslej so pritožbe pri Komisiji vložila podjetja, nacionalna industrijska združenja in evropska industrijska združenja.
Some were prepared by the complainants themselves andlawyers were used in particularly complex cases.
Nekatere so pripravili pritožniki sami, odvetniki pa so sodelovali v posebej zapletenih zadevah.
National industry association
Nacionalno industrijsko združenje
European industry association
Evropsko industrijsko združenje
Three of these, BNIC (Cognac), CIBV (Bordeaux Médoc) and Consorzio di Prosciutto di Parma, are also European associations as the industry is located solely in one country in each case.
Trije izmed navedenih, BNIC (konjak), CIBV (Bordeaux Médoc) in Consorzio di Prosciutto di Parma, so tudi evropska združenja, saj je industrija v vsakem primeru locirana samo v eni državi.
The following case studies are examples of the various paths, which have led to solutions of the problems raised by TBR complaints
Naslednje študije zadev so primeri različnih poti, ki so vodile k rešitvam težav, izpostavljenih s pritožbami UTO.
Satisfactory action by a third country
Zadovoljivo ukrepanje tretje države
Columbia Tax discrimination on imported motor vehicles
Davčna diskriminacija KOLUMBIJE na uvožena motorna vozila
Complaint lodged by Volkswagen AG on 7 July 2000
Pritožba, ki jo je vložil Volkswagen AG 7. julija 2000
Trade barrier:The Colombian VAT regime on cars, which discriminates against motor vehicles imported into Colombia of cubic capacity up to 1400 cc.
Trgovinska ovira: Kolumbijska ureditev DDV za avtomobile, ki diskriminira motorna vozila, uvožena v Kolumbijo,
TBR investigation initiated on 18 August 2000.
Preiskava UTO se je začela 18. avgusta 2000.
Findings of investigation:The contested practice appears to violate Colombia's obligations under Article III of the GATT 1994
Izsledki preiskave: Sporna praksa izkazano krši obveznosti Kolumbije iz člena III GATT 1994.
Outcome:The EU and Colombia reached an agreement according to which Colombia commits itself not toincrease the present tax differential vis-à-vis imported motor cars up to 1400 and to eliminate the above mentioned VAT differential by 1 July 2005, by means of periodic, regular and continuous reductions at a rate of 1 or 1.5% every two months.
Izid: EU in Kolumbija sta dosegli sporazum, s katerim se Kolumbija obvezuje, da ne bo povišala sedanje davčne razlike v zvezi z uvoženimi avtomobili z motorjem do 1.400 cm3 in da bo odpravila zgoraj omenjeno razliko DDV do 1. julija 2005 z občasnimi, rednimi in stalnimi znižanji po stopnji 1 ali 1,5 % vsaka dva meseca.
The first reduction will apply on 1 July 2003.
Prvo znižanje bo izvedeno 1. julija 2003.
A draft law providing for the above gradual elimination of the VAT differential was adopted by the Colombian Parliament on 27 December 2002.
Osnutek zakona, ki določa zgoraj navedeno postopno odpravo razlike DDV je sprejel kolumbijski parlament 27. decembra 2002.
The TBR procedure was therefore suspended by decision of the Commission on 20 May 2003.
Postopek UTO je bil zato ustavljen s sklepom Komisije z dne 20. maja 2003.
Finding of a mutually agreed solution.
Vzajemno dogovorjena rešitev.
Trade barrier: Lack of protection of the wines with geographical indication “Bordeaux”and “Médoc”Canada.
Trgovinska ovira: Pomanjkanje zaščite v in z geografsko označbo “Bordeaux“ in “Médoc“ Kanada.
TBR investigation initiated on 25 May 2002.
Preiskava UTO se je začela 25. maja 2002.
Findings of investigation: The investigation confirmed the complainant's legal claim that the C-57 Amendment to the Canadian Trade Marks Act violates Articles 23.1 and 2 as well as Article 24.3 (the so called standstill clause) of TRIPS and that such infringements cannot be justified on the basis of the exception under Article 24.6 of TRIPS.
Izsledki preiskave: Preiskava je potrdila pravni zahtevek pritožnika, da amandma C-57 h kanadskemu zakonu o blagovnih znamkah krši člena 23.1 in 2 ter člen 24.3 (tako imenovana klavzula o mirovanju) TRIPS in da takšna kršitev ne more biti opravičljiva na podlagi izjeme iz člena 24.6 TRIPS.
Outcome: On 24 April 2003, the Commission initialled a bilateral agreement with Canada on trade in wine and spirits, which provided for the definitive elimination of the names listed as “generic”in Canada,including “Bordeaux”, “Médoc”and “Médoc”by the entry into force of the agreement.
Izid: 24. aprila 2003 je Komisija parafirala dvostranski sporazum s Kanado o trgovini z vinom in žganjem, ki je določil dokončno odpravo imen, opredeljenih kot “generična“ v Kanadi, vključno z “Bordeaux“, “Médoc“ in “Medoc“, do začetka veljavnosti sporazuma.
On 9 July 2003, the Commission decided to suspend(
9. julija 2003 se je Komisija odločila ustavi ti (
) the examination procedure with a view to terminate it as soon as the bilateral agreement had entered into force.
) postopek preverjanja, ki bi ga ustavila takoj po začetku veljavnosti dvostranskega sporazuma.
On 1 June 2004, the bilateralagreement referred to above entered into force and, as a result, Canada eliminated Bordeaux and Médoc from the list of generic names provided by the C-57 Amendment.
1. junija 2004 je dvostranski sporazum, naveden zgoraj, začel veljati in Kanada je posledično odstranila Bordeaux in Médoc s seznama generičnih imen, določenih z amandmajem C-57.
The TBR procedure wastherefore terminated.
Postopek UTO je bil zato ustavljen.
Cases where follow-up action is necessary
Primeri, v katerih je potrebno nadaljnje ukrepanje
Complaint lodged by COLIPA on 2 April 1998
Pritožba, ki jo je vložila COLIPA 2. aprila 1998
Trade barrier: Korean standard and other requirements that adversely affect import and marketing of Communitycosmetics products in Korea.
Trgovinska ovira: Korejske standardne in druge zahteve, ki škodljivo vplivajo na uvoz in trženje kozmetičnih izdelkov Skupnosti v Koreji.
TBR investigation initiated on 19 May 1998.
Preiskava UTO se je začela 19. maja 1998.