natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
On this basis there was a discussion on specific cases and also on methodological issues and industry developments. is kind of active coordination
Delovna skupina je 13. maja objavila „poročilo o združitvah in povezovanjih v civilnem letalstvu“ (93), ki ponuja pregled trenutnih praks izvrševanja, ki jih uporablja ECA ter se nanašajo na opredelitev trga, presojo konkurence in protiukrepe.
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1 aims at establishing a common knowledge base and a common understanding of competition issues on card payments.
Poročilo o politiki konkurence za leto 2004 – Zvezek 1
125. e securities experts’ network met for the second time in June.
Opozorila je, da so informacije, čeprav zelo izčrpne, zagotovili tržni akterji na neformalni podlagi in jih bo zato treba preveriti.
Despite the complexity of the subject, numbers of participants have been high and contributions to the debates very active. e aim of the meeting was, rst, to establish a mutual understanding amongst all national authorities regarding securities trading, clearing and settlement in EU-25 and, secondly, to have an exchange of views on competition and regulatory activities in the securities sector.
Podskupina je tudi razpravljala o osnutku dokumenta o najboljši praksi v odnosih med nacionalnimi organi za konkurenco in železniškimi regulativnimi organi (ustanovitev slednjih je bila zahteva prvega svežnja železniških direktiv) v pripravi na pravočasno skupno zasedanje obeh skupin.
D SELECTED COURT CASES
Finančne storitve
On 6 January (94), the Court of Justice (ECJ) delivered its judgment on the two appeals, one of which was brought by the Commission, against the judgment (95) of the
Glavni namen srečanja je bil, da Komisija predstavi nacionalnim organom za konkurenco rezultate svojih tržnih študij o plačilih s kreditnimi in bančnimi plačilnimi karticami v Evropi.
Court of First Instance (CFI) in the Adalat case. e CFI had annulled the Commission
Več predstavnikov nacionalnih organov za konkurenco (Danska, Poljska in Združeno kraljestvo) je predstavilo svoje trenutne preiskave v zvezi s sporazumi o medbančni proviziji v mrežah plačilnih kartic, dejavnih v njihovih državah.
96) nding an infringement of Article 81 EC in the form of export bans in the decision (
Razprava je pokazala, da v tem sektorju obstaja potreba po usklajeni konkurenci v vsej Evropi.
Joined Cases C-2/01 P Bundesverband der Arzneimittel-Importeure and Commission v Bayer and C-3/01 P Commission v Bayer, not yet reported.Judgment in Case T-41/96 Bayer [2000] ECR II-3383.Decision of 10 January 1996 in Case COMP/34.279 — Adalat.
Drugo srečanje Podskupine ECN o zavarovanju je potekalo 27. oktobra v Bruslju.
This case concerned restrictions on parallel imports of pharmaceuticals and is named after the product manufactured by Bayer to which the proceedings related.
Med tem drugim srečanjem je postalo jasno, da so zavarovalniški posredniki in posredniške provizije osrednja točka za tržno analizo, ki jo je izvedla vrsta organov v mreži, in da iz teh preiskav izhaja vrsta mogočih vprašanj o konkurenci.
Confirming that, on the basis of the evidence adduced by the Commission, a concurrence of wills had not been established, the ECJ clarified the notion of agreement under Article 81 EC.
Cilj srečanja je bil, prvič, vzpostaviti medsebojno razumevanje med vsemi nacionalnimi organi v zvezi s trgovanjem z vrednostnimi papirji, kliringom in poravnavo vrednostnih papirjev v EU 25, ter, drugič, doseči izmenjavo mnenj o konkurenci in regulativnih dejavnostih v sektorju vrednostnih papirjev.
It should be noted, however, that the ECJ explicitly makes clear that neither the possible application of other aspects of Article 81 EC, nor Article 82 EC, nor any other possible de nitions of the relevant market were issues in those proceedings.
Vendar je treba opozoriti, da SES izrecno jasno navaja, da predmet teh postopkov ni bila niti morebitna uporaba drugih vidikov člena 81 ES, niti člena 82 ES niti katere koli druge možne opredelitve upoštevnega trga.
By judgment of 7 January (97), the ECJ reduced on appeal the ne imposed on one of the appellants by the Commission (98) for its involvement in the cement cartel. e ECJ considered that in order to establish the turnover for the purposes of calculating the ne, the turnover of Ciments français SA subsidiaries could not be taken into account, as it took control of the subsidiary in question only a er its involvement in the infringement at issue. e ECJ dismissed the remainder of the appeals, largely upholding the judgment of the Court of First Instance (99).
Sodišče Evropskih skupnosti je s sodbo z dne 7. januarja (97) na pritožbo znižalo kazen, ki jo je enemu od pritožnikov naložila Komisija (98) za njegovo vključenost v kartel med proizvajalci cementa. Sodišče je menilo, da za določitev prometa za namen izračuna kazni ni bilo mogoče upoštevati prometa podružnic družbe Ciments français SA, saj je nadzor nad zadevno podružnico prevzela šele po njeni vključenosti v obravnavano
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1
Poročilo o politiki konkurence za leto 2004 – Zvezek 1 kršitev.
— that the services must not be provided by the mailbag system or other similar methods; and
• storitve ne smejo biti opravljene s kurirskim sistemom ali drugimi podobnimi metodami in
— that such operations must not disrupt the services reserved to the universal service provider.
• taki posli ne smejo ovirati storitev, rezerviranih za izvajalca univerzalnih storitev.
Furthermore, it transpires from this ruling that money order services (payments through the public postal network to natural or legal persons) fall outside the scope of Directive 97/67.
Poleg tega iz odločbe izhaja, da storitve denarnega nakazila (plačila prek javnega poštnega omrežja zičnim ali pravnim osebam) ne spadajo v področje uporabe Direktive 97/67/ES.
In a judgment handed down on 29 April (103), the Court of First Instance (CFI) reduced the nes imposed by the Commission (104) on the participants in the graphite electrodes cartel. e CFI found that the Commission had not determined in a coherent way the categories which it used for the calculation of nes under the Commission guidelines on nes (105) and the CFI used its full jurisdiction to create a new category and to modify the starting amount of the calculation in respect of some companies.
V sodbi, izrečeni 29. aprila (103), je Sodišče prve stopnje zmanjšalo globe, ki jih je Komisija (104) naložila članom kartela grafitnih elektrod.
Other reductions related mainly to the question of the degree of cooperation by the companies which the Commission should have acknowledged in the form of reductions in the ne.
Sodišče prve stopnje je ugotovilo, da Komisija kategorij, ki jih je uporabila za izračun denarnih kazni v skladu s smernicami Komisije o denarnih kaznih (105), ni določila dosledno, zato je Sodišče prve stopnje pri nekaterih družbah v celoti uporabilo svojo pristojnost za oblikovanje nove kategorije in spremembo izhodiščnega zneska za izračun.
In the CFI’s view certain evidence provided by the parties was covered by privilege against self-incrimination and should thus have been considered a voluntary contribution by the parties.
Druga znižanja so se nanašala predvsem na vprašanje stopnje sodelovanja družb, ki bi jo morala Komisija upoštevati
I — Antitrust — Articles 81, 82 and 86 EC
I – Protimonopolna zakonodaja – členi 81, 82 in 86 ES v obliki znižanja globe.
In its judgments of 8 July (107), the CFI reduced the nes imposed by the Commission (108) on the participants in the seamless steel tube cartel to take account of the shorter duration of the infringement, nding that the Commission had not established the entire duration on which — amongst other elements — it had based the nes.
Sodišče prve stopnje je v sodbah z dne 8. julija ( naložila članom kartela brezšivnih jeklenih cevi, zmanjšalo zaradi upoštevanja kratkotrajnosti kršitve in ker je ugotovilo, da Komisija ni določila celotnega trajanja, na katerem je – poleg drugih dejavnikov – utemeljila globe.
In this context the CFI held that in the particular circumstances of the case, it was for the Commission to adduce evidence of the exact end of the EU–Japan voluntary restraint agreements which the Commission had taken into account to determine the duration of the infringement.
Glede na to je Sodišče prve stopnje menilo, da bi morala Komisija v tem posebnem primeru navesti dokaze o natančnem prenehanju sporazumov o prostem omejevanju med EU in Japonsko, ki jih je upoštevala pri določanju trajanja kršitve.
As regards the Japanese companies involved, the CFI also reduced the nes in view of the lesser gravity of their involvement in the cartel, given that they had not participated in one leg of the infringement (concerning supply contracts for Corus).
Japonskim družbam je Sodišče prve stopnje tudi znižalo globe zaradi manjše teže pri njihovi vključenosti v kartel, saj v enem delu kršitve niso sodelovali (pri dobavnih pogodbah za Corus).
Legal privilege: Akzo and Akcros
Pravni privilegij: Akzo & Akcros 134.
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1
Vprašanja v tem stalnem sporu – glavna zadeva je konec leta 2004 še vedno potekala – so obseg Pravnega privilegija in njegovi upravičenci.
Given the far-reaching negative implications of such a change for day-to-day enforcement work in antitrust cases, the Commission considered it necessary to appeal this order with a view to obtaining legal certainty as regards applicability of the established case-law.
Predsednik Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti je razveljavil začasno odredbo, ker je menil, da ni nobene nujne potrebe, da bi kakršna koli dokumentacija ne bila dostopna Komisiji.
which the Commission had found that a number of German banks had been involved in a price cartel concerning bank charges for exchanging euro-zone currencies in the period leading up to the introduction of the euro as the single currency of the euro zone. e CFI found that the Commission decision had been based on insufficient evidence.
Sodišče prve stopnje je v svojih sodbah (112) z dne 14. oktobra razveljavilo odločbo (113), s katero je Komisija ugotovila, da je vrsta nemških bank sodelovala v cenovnem kartelu v zvezi z bančnimi stroški za menjavanje valut območja eura v obdobju do uvedbe eura kot enotne valute v območju eura. Sodišče prve stopnje je ugotovilo, da je odločba Komisije temeljila na nezadostnih dokazih.
It confirms the Commission’s policy in the eld of sports.
Sodišče prve stopnje je v primeru dopinga med plavalci (
Cases T-44/02 Dresdner Bank, T-54/02 Vereins und Westbank, T-56/02 Bayrische Hypo- und Vereinsbank, T-60/02 Deutsche Verkehrsbank, T-61/02 Commerzbank, not yet reported.Commission decision of 11 December 2001 in Case COMP/E–1/37.919 (ex 37.391) — Bank charges for exchanging euro-zone currencies — Germany.COMP/38.158 — Meca Medina and Majcen against the International Olympic Committee, http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/cases/index/by_nr_76.html#i38_158Case T-313/02 Meca Medina and Majcen v Commission, http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc & lg=en & numdoc=62002A0313Case C-470/02.Case T-185/00.Commission decision of 1 May 2000 in Case COMP/32.150 — EBU/Eurovision (OJ L 151, 24.6.2000).Cases T-201/04 (main action) and T-201/04 R (interim measures).
Komisija je po pregledu formalno zavrnila zahteve strank z odločbo.Zadeve T-44/02, Dresdner Bank AG, T-54/02, Vereins und Westbank AG, T-56/02, Bayrische Hypo- und Vereinsbank AG, T-60/02, Deutsche Verkehrsbank AG, T-61/02, Commerzbank AG, sodbe še neobjavljene v Recueil.Odločba Komisije z dne 11. decembra 2001 v zadevi COMP/E–1/37.919 (ex 37.391) – Bančni stroški za menjavanje valut območja eura – Nemčija.COMP/38.158 – Meca-Medina in Majcen proti Mednarodnemu olimpijskemu komiteju, http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/cases/index/by_nr_76.html#i38_158Zadeva T-313/02 Meca-Medina in Majcen proti Komisiji, http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc? smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc & lg=en & numdoc=62002A0313
I — Antitrust — Articles 81, 82 and 86 EC decision in the Microsocase (120) suspended.
I – Protimonopolna zakonodaja – členi 81, 82 in 86 ES o ekonomskih svoboščinah in zlasti členi 49, 81 in 82.
In this decision the Commission condemned Microso ’s refusal to supply interoperability information and the tying of Windows and Windows Media Player.
Komisija je v tej odločbi obsodila Microso ovo zavrnitev dajanja podatkov za interoperabilnost in vezavo predvajalnika M i c r o so Media Player na sistem Windows.
In addition to a ne, the Commission imposed measures to put an end to the anticompetitive practices highlighted in the decision.
Komisija je poleg globe naložila ukrepe za odpravo protikonkurenčnega ravnanja, poudarjenega v odločbi.
However, the President held that Microso had not shown that it might suffer serious and irreparable damage as a result of the implementation of the decision, and a suspension of the decision’s remedies was not therefore justified. e President found that disclosure of information previously kept secret does not necessarily entail serious and irreparable damage and that such damage was not demonstrated in the present case.
Vendar je predsednik menil, da Microso ni dokazal, da bi zaradi izvajanja odločbe utrpel hudo in nepopravljivo škodo, in tako zadržanje protiukrepov v določbi ni upravičeno. Predsednik je ugotovil, da razkritje podatkov, ki so bili dotlej skrivni, ne povzroča nujno resne in nepopravljive škode in da v tem primeru takšne škode ni.
He also considered that, in respect of the untying remedy, Microso had not demonstrated specifically that it might suffer serious and irreparable damage owing to interference with its business policy or to injury to its reputation.
Menil je tudi, da Microsov zvezi z ukrepom razdružitve ni izrecno dokazal, da bi lahko utrpel resno in nepopravljivo škodo zaradi vmešavanja v poslovno politiko ali škodovanja ugledu.
New cases
Nove zadeve
See above point 36.
Primeri, začeti na pobudo Komisije
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1
I – Protimonopolna zakonodaja – členi 81, 82 in 86 ES
Cases closed
Zaključene zadeve
Formal decisions
Neformalni postopek
Changes in the number of pending cases at the year end
Spremembe števila nerešenih zadev ob koncu leta
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1
Izmed sedmih preiskav faze II, končanih leta 2004, je bilo šest transakcij na koncu odobrenih, ena pa prepovedana.
A LEGISLATIVE AND INTERPRETATIVE RULES
A ZAKONODAJNA IN RAZLAGALNA PRAVILA
Recast merger regulation, new notices and amended implementing regulation
Preoblikovana uredba o združitvah, nova obvestila in spremenjena izvedbena uredba
New merger regulation: Regulation (EC) No 139/2004
Nova uredba o združitvah: Uredba (ES) št. 139/2004
Following the adoption of this new merger regulation, related and other modifications to the implementing regulation were adopted on 1 May.
Po sprejetju nove uredbe o združitvah so bile 1. maja 2004 sprejete z njo povezane in druge spremembe izvedbene uredbe.
Corresponding changes were also made to the notice on a simplified procedure as well as to the notice on ancillary restraints.
Ustrezno sta bili spremenjeni tudi obvestili o poenostavljenem postopku in o pomožnih omejitvah. Da bi
To provide guidance on the application and interpretation of the new rules in the merger regulation concerning the referral of cases, the Commission also adopted a new notice on case allocation.
Komisija zagotovila usmeritve pri uporabi in razlagi novih pravil v uredbi o združitvah v zvezi z napotitvijo primerov, je sprejela tudi novo obvestilo o dodelitvi zadev.
Finally, new merger guidelines were adopted providing guidance on the assessment of horizontal mergers.
Na koncu so bile sprejete nove smernice za združitve, ki pomenijo smernice za presojo horizontalnih združitev.
Revised implementing regulation
Popravljena izvedbena uredba
However, the Commission also took the opportunity to make improvements to the clarity of the text, as well as to the e ciency and fairness of the process. e new IR was adopted in April following public consultation by the Commission and entered into force on 1 May (123).
Komisija je ob tej priložnosti tudi izboljšala jasnost besedila ter učinkovitost in nepristranskost postopka. Nova izvedbena uredba je bila sprejeta aprila po javnem posvetovanju, ki ga je uvedla Komisija, veljati pa je začela 1. maja (123).
New forms for notification — Form CO and short form CO
Nova obrazca za priglasitev – obrazec CO in kratki obrazec CO
In addition to revised procedural rules, revisions have been made to the form CO and a new short form CO has been introduced.
Poleg popravljenih postopkovnih pravil je bil popravljen tudi obrazec CO, poleg tega pa je bil uveden nov kratki obrazec CO.
Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004).Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 of 7 April 2004 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ L 133, 30.4.2004).
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 802/2004 z dne 7. aprila 2004 o izvajanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 139/2004 o nadzoru koncentracij podjetij (UL L 133, 30.4.2004).
II — Merger control
II – Nadzor združevanja
149. e new form COre ects changes made to the new merger regulation and also focuses on certain competition issues raised within the analytical framework of the new Commission notice on the assessment of horizontal mergers (the new merger guidelines). e main innovations involve a requirement to provide an executive summary specifying the markets in which the transaction will have an impact and the strategic and economic rationale for the transaction (Section 1); a new section drawing attention to the fact that a proposed concentration may be subject to Community and/or national rules governing the provision of certain information regarding the proposed transaction vis-à-vis the notifying parties’ employees and their representatives (Section 1.7); and a requirement to specify the value of the transaction (Section 3).
HHI na prizadetih trgih; vrsto informacij, zahtevanih v zvezi s splošnimi tržnimi pogoji (oddelek 8), ter dodatne zahteve glede informacij o predvidljivem prihodnjem razvoju dogodkov, kot so na primer proizvodi, ki jih razvijajo, načrti za širitev zmogljivosti in načrti za vstop na trge.
A new section on information relating to e ciencies (Section 9) has been introduced. e section specifies that submitting information on e ciencies is voluntary and that parties are not required to o er any justification for not completing this section. e section on ancillary restrictions has been removed in line with the new provision in the merger regulation to the e ect that the Commission will not normally deal with such issues.
Oddelek o pomožnih omejitvah je bila odstranjen v skladu z novo določbo uredbe o združitvah, da Komisija takšnih vprašanj po navadi ne bo obravnavala.
Enlargement also made it necessary to require the notifying parties to provide a further 10 copies of each notification to be submitted to the Commission in order for a notification to be considered complete (124).
Zaradi širitve je treba od priglasiteljev zahtevati nadaljnjih 10 izvodov vsake priglasitve, predložene Komisiji, da priglasitev velja za popolno (124).
Article 19(1) provides that the deadline for the submission of commitments in Phase I should be 20 working days, and Article 19(2) provides that the deadline for the submission of commitments in Phase II should be 65 working days from the date of initiation of proceedings.
Člen 19(1) določa, da je rok za predložitev zavez v fazi I 20 delovnih dni, člen 19(2) pa, da je rok za predložitev zavez v fazi II 65 delovnih dni od datuma začetka postopka.
Where the deadline for the adoption of an Article 8(2)
Kadar se rok za sprejetje odločbe iz člena 8(2) podaljša na zahtevo strank v skladu s členom 10(3), se tudi rok za predložitev zavez podaljša za enako število delovnih dni.
Bringing the total number to one original and 35 copies of the form CO.
Skupno število je en original in 35 izvodov obrazca CO.
Report on competition policy 2004 — Volume 1 decision is extended at the request of the parties pursuant to Article 10(3), the deadline for the submission of commitments should also be extended by the same number of working days.
Poročilo o politiki konkurence za leto 2004 – Zvezek 1
Notifying parties are also required, pursuant to Article 18(3) of the new IR, to identify the business secrets or other confidential information in the documents or parts of documents which they have produced. ey should also identify the undertakings with regard to which such documents are to be considered confidential. is requirement to identify confidential information also applies to any part of a statement of objections, case summary or a decision adopted by the Commission which in the view of the parties contains business secrets.
Od priglasiteljev se v skladu s členom 18(3) nove izvedbene uredbe tudi zahteva, da opredelijo poslovne skrivnosti ali druge zaupne informacije v predloženih dokumentih ali delih dokumentov. Poleg tega naj bi navedli tudi podjetja, v zvezi s katerimi takšni dokumenti veljajo za zaupne.
As in the case of third parties, notifying parties are required to provide an explanation for their claim of confidentiality and to provide a non-confidential version of the relevant document.
Ta zahteva za opredelitev zaupnih informacij velja tudi za kateri koli del obvestila o nasprotovanju, povzetka primera ali odločbe, ki jo je sprejela Komisija, ki po mnenju strank vsebuje poslovne skrivnosti.
Article 3 provides that the language of the original proceeding shall also be the language of ‘any subsequent proceedings relating to the same concentration’. e aim of this measure is to ensure that any proceedings relating to one and the same concentration are dealt with in the same language. is would be the case, for example, where a matter has to be re-examined following a ruling of the Court of Justice, or where proceedings are brought pursuant to Article 14 of the new merger regulation for submission of incorrect information in a notification. cation.
Namen tega ukrepa je zagotoviti, da se vsak postopek v zvezi z eno in isto koncentracijo obravnava v istem jeziku. To se na primer dogaja, kadar je treba zadevo znova preučiti po odločbi Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti oziroma kadar se postopki v skladu s členom 14 nove uredbe o združitvah začnejo zaradi predložitve netočnih informacij v priglasitvi.
Article 5 has been amended to clarify which information should be included in the category of information which ‘must be communicated to the Commission without delay’ a er notification.
Člen 5 je bil spremenjen, da bi pojasnili, katere informacije je treba vključiti v kategorijo informacij, ki jih je po priglasitvi „treba nemudoma sporočiti Komisiji“.
Such information includes not only, as previously, ‘material changes in the facts contained in the notification’, but also ‘new information coming to light subsequent to the notification which the parties know or ought to know and which would have had to be notified if known at the time of notification’. cation’.
Takšne informacije ne obsegajo samo „vsebinskih sprememb dejstev iz priglasitve“ kot prej, temveč tudi „nove informacije, odkrite po priglasitvi, ki jih stranke poznajo oziroma bi jih morale poznati in ki bi jih bilo treba, če bi bile znane, sporočiti ob priglasitvi“.
New short form CO
Novi kratki obrazec CO
(a) a joint venture has no or negligible economic activity in the European Economic Area;
(a) skupno podjetje ne izvaja nobene gospodarske dejavnosti v Evropskem gospodarskem prostoru ali kadar je ta dejavnost zanemarljiva;
(b) none of the parties to the concentration is engaged in business activities in the same relevant product and geographic market (no horizontal overlap), or in a market which is upstream or downstream of a market in which another party to the concentration is engaged (no vertical relationship);
II – Nadzor združevanja na trg, na katerem je dejaven drugi udeleženec v koncentraciji (ni vertikalnega razmerja);