natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Regulation No 2887/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that, during the procedure supervising the pricing for unbundled access to the local loop conducted by a national regulatory authority pursuant to Article 4 of that regulation, it is for the notified operator to provide the evidence that its rates respect the principle that rates are to be set on the basis of costorientation.
Uredbo št. 2887/2000 je treba razlagati tako, da mora v postopku nadzora nad oblikovanjem cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke, ki ga nacionalni regulativni organ vodi v skladu s členom 4 navedene uredbe, dokaz, da njegove cene upoštevajo načelo stroškovne naravnanosti cen, predložiti priglašeni obratovalec.
On the other hand, it is for the Member States to allocate the burden of proof between the national regulatory authority which made the decision to authorise the rates of the notified operator and the beneficiary challenging that decision.
Države članice pa morajo določiti, kakšna je porazdelitev dokaznega bremena med nacionalnim regulativnim organom, ki je sprejel odločitev o odobritvi cen priglašenega obratovalca, in upravičencem, ki to odločitev izpodbija.
It is also for the Member States to establish, in accordance with their rules of procedure and the Community principles of effectiveness and equivalence of judicial protection, the rules on the allocation of that burden of proof when a decision of the national regulatory authority authorising the rates of a notified operator for unbundled access to its local loop is challenged before the courts.
Države članice morajo v skladu s svojimi procesnimi pravili in ob upoštevanju skupnostnih načel učinkovitosti in enakovrednosti sodnega varstva določiti tudi pravila porazdelitve tega dokaznega bremena za primer sodnega izpodbijanja odločitve nacionalnega regulativnega organa o odobritvi cen priglašenega obratovalca za razvezani dostop do njegove krajevne zanke.
Case C-418/06 P
Zadeva C-418/06 P
(Appeal — EAGGF — Arable crop sector — Clearance of EAGGF accounts — Reliable and operational inspection system — Expenditure excluded from Community financing — Flatrate correction — Retrospective application of the rules relating to checks — Implicit obligations — Principle of proportionality — Legal certainty — Unlimited jurisdiction)
„Pritožba – EKUJS – Sektor polj�čin – Potrditev obračuna EKUJS – Zanesljiv in uporaben sistem nadzora – Odhodki, izključeni iz financiranja Skupnosti – Pav�alni popravek – Retroaktivna uporaba predpisov o nadzoru – Posredne obveznosti – Načelo sorazmernosti – Pravna varnost – Neomejena pristojnost“
I - 3051Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 24 April 2008 . . . . . . . . . . .
Mengozzija, predstavljeni 10. januarja 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Council Regulations No 729/70 and No 3508/92; Commission Regulations No 3887/92 and No 2419/2001)
Kmetijstvo – Skupna kmetijska politika – Financiranje prek EKUJS (uredbi Sveta št. 729/70 in št. 3508/92; uredbi Komisije št. 3887/92 in št. 2419/2001)
SUMMARY — CASE C-418/06 P
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-418/06 P
Agriculture — EAGGF — Clearance of accounts
Kmetijstvo – EKUJS – Potrditev obračuna
Agriculture — Common agricultural policy — EAGGF financing (Council Regulations No 729/70 and No 1258/99)
Kmetijstvo – Skupna kmetijska politika – Financiranje prek EKUJS (uredbi Sveta št. 729/70 in št. 1258/99)
Agriculture — EAGGF — Clearance of accounts (Council Regulation No 729/70)
Kmetijstvo – EKUJS – Potrditev obračuna (Uredba Sveta št. 729/70)
Agriculture — EAGGF — Clearance of accounts (Art. 229 EC)
Kmetijstvo – EKUJS – Potrditev obračuna (člen 229 ES)
Even if the Community rules on the granting of aid and premiums do not expressly require Member States to introduce supervisory measures and inspection procedures, such as that mentioned by the Commission during the clearance of EAGGF accounts, to reduce the area to be taken into account in the calculation of aid where the area declared is greater than the area entered in the computerised geographical information system (GIS) nevertheless that obligation may follow, in some cases implicitly, from the fact that under the rules in question it is for the Member States to organise an effective system of inspection and supervision.
Čeprav skupnostna ureditev v zvezi z odobritvijo pomoči državam članicam izrecno ne nalaga, naj sprejmejo ukrepe za spremljanje in podrobna pravila za nadzor, kot so ukrepi in pravila, na katere se je sklicevala Komisija pri potrditvi obračuna EKUJS, za zmanj�anje povr�ine, ki jo je treba upo�tevati pri izračunu pomoči, ko je prijavljena povr�ina večja od povr�ine, vnesene v računalni�ke geografske informacijske sisteme RGIS, ta obveznost lahko tudi posredno izhaja vsaj iz dejstva, da morajo na podlagi obravnavane ureditve države članice organizirati učinkovit sistem nadzora in spremljanja.
checks preceding on-the-spot checks must be carried out in such a way as to enable the national authorities to draw all the possible conclusions, be they matters of certainty or of doubt, regarding compliance with the conditions for granting aid and premiums.
opravi pred nadzorom na kraju samem, mora biti po drugi strani opravljen tako, da nacionalnim organom omogoči vse mogoče ugotovitve, najsi gre za gotova ali negotova dejstva, zato da se upo�tevajo pogoji za odobritev pomoči.
Neither the areas declared nor those extracted from the GIS can be confirmed as accurate without on-the-spot checks or any other additional checks.
Ker pa nadzor na kraju samem ali kakr�na koli druga dodatna preverjanja niso bila opravljena, niti prijavljenih povr�in niti povr�in, ki izhajajo iz RGIS, ni mogoče �teti za natančne.
Therefore, the contradiction between those two sources of information is likely to constitute an anomaly indicating a risk of loss for the EAGGF which requires the Member State concerned to adopt checking measures, whether on-the-spot checks or any other additional checks.
Neskladnost med tema viroma informacij bi torej lahko pomenila nepravilnost, ki kaže na nevarnost izgub za EKUJS, zaradi česar bi zadevna država članica morala sprejeti ukrepe za nadzor, ali nadzor na kraju samem ali drugo dodatno preverjanje.
On the one hand, administrative checks and on-the-spot checks were designed by the Community legislature as two means of verification which, although separate, complement each other.
Po eni strani je namreč zakonodajalec Skupnosti upravni nadzor in nadzor na kraju samem zasnoval kot dve sredstvi za pregledovanje, ki se dopolnjujeta, čeprav sta različni.
On the other hand, such administrative
Ta upravni nadzor, ki se
(see paras 68, 70, 72, 73, 75)
(Glej točke 68, 70, 72, 73 in 75.)
application of implicit rules, provided compliance with those implicit rules is required in order to comply with an explicit rule.
Pav�alni popravek je mogoče uporabiti, tudi če je ugotovljeno, da posredna pravila niso bila uporabljena, če je upo�tevanje posrednih pravil potrebno, da bi bilo upo�tevano izrecno pravilo.
(see paras 124, 126)
(Glej točki 124 in 126.)
When preparing decisions regarding the clearance of EAGGF accounts, each case must in principle be assessed individually to determine whether, as regards operations financed by the EAGGF, the Member State in question, acted in accordance with the requirements of Community law and, if it failed to do so, to what extent.
Med sprejemanjem odločb glede potrditve obračuna EKUJS je načeloma treba vsak primer obravnavati ločeno, da bi se ugotovilo, ali je zadevna država članica med izvedbo dejavnosti, ki jih financira EKUJS, upo�tevala zahteve, ki izhajajo iz prava Skupnosti, in koliko jih ni izpolnila.
A Member State may plead breach of the principle of equal treatment only if the cases it cites are at least comparable as regards all the elements which characterise them, including, in particular, the period during which the expenditure was incurred, the sectors concerned and the nature of the irregularities complained of.
Država članica se lahko sklicuje na kr�itev načela enakega obravnavanja le, če so primeri, na katere se sklicuje, vsaj primerljivi glede na vse njihove značilnosti, med katerimi so zlasti obdobje, med katerim so bili odhodki izvedeni, zadevni sektorji in narava očitanih nepravilnosti.
Prohibited discrimination can arise where comparable situations are treated differently, unless such treatment is objectively justified.
Do prepovedane diskriminacije lahko pride, ko se primerljivi položaji obravnavajo različno, razen če je tako obravnavanje objektivno utemeljeno.
The situation of a Member State which has, as a result of a system set up voluntarily, relevant information which other Member States do not have is not comparable with the situation of the latter.
Položaj države članice, ki zahvaljujoč sistemu, ki ga je prostovoljno uvedla, razpolaga s pomembnimi informacijami, s katerimi druge države članice ne razpolagajo, pa ni primerljiv s položajem teh drugih držav članic.
(see paras 91-94)
(Glej točke od 91 do 94.)
In connection with the procedure for the clearance of EAGGF accounts, although it is for the Commission to prove that Community rules have been infringed, once it has established such an infringement it is for the Member State to demonstrate, if appropriate, that the Commission made an error as to the financial consequences to be attached to that infringement.
V okviru postopka potrditve obračuna EKUJS, čeprav mora Komisija dokazati kr�itev pravil Skupnosti, mora država članica, potem ko je ta kr�itev ugotovljena, dokazati, da je Komisija storila napako glede finančnih posledic kr�itve.
In that regard, where, instead of disallowing all the expenditure affected by the infringement, the Commission has endeavoured to establish rules for treating irregularities differently depending on the extent of the shortcomings in the checks and the degree of risk to the EAGGF, it is for the Member State to show that those criteria are arbitrary and unfair.
Če si je v zvezi s tem Komisija, namesto da bi zavrnila vse odhodke, ki jih zadeva kr�itev, prizadevala vzpostaviti pravila za različno obravnavanje kr�itev glede na obseg pomanjkljivosti pri nadzorih in stopnjo tveganja za EKUJS, mora država članica dokazati, da so ta merila samovoljna in nepravična.
In the matter of the clearance of EAGGF accounts, the fact that a procedure is open to improvement does not in itself justify a financial correction.
Glede potrditve obračuna EKUJS dejstvo, da naj bi se postopek izpopolnjeval, samo po sebi ne upravičuje finančnega popravka. Potrebna je pomembna
(see paras 135, 138)
(Glej točki 135 in 138.)
There was no provision in respect of the EAGGF conferring unlimited jurisdiction on the Community courts under Article 229 EC.
Nobena določba sodi�čem Skupnosti ne daje neomejene pristojnosti v zvezi z EKUJS v skladu s členom 229 ES.
Recognising that those courts have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of the amounts of financial corrections imposed by the Commission in connection with the procedure for the clearance of EAGGF accounts
Neomejena pristojnost teh sodi�č glede zneskov finančnih popravkov, ki jih je določila Komisija v okviru postopka potrditve obračuna EKUJS, se ne more opirati na trditev, da so ti finančni popravki kazenske narave.
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERALMENGOZZI delivered on 10 January 2008 1
SKLEPNI PREDLOGI GENERALNEGA PRAVOBRANILCAPAOLA MENGOZZIJA, predstavljeni 10. januarja 2008 1 kmetijske politike 4med drugim financira intervencijske ukrepe za ureditev kmetijskih trgov, sprejete skladno s predpisi Skupnosti v okviru skupne ureditve kmetijskih trgov.
(‘the appellant’) seeks to have set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 25 July 2006 (‘the judgment under appeal’), 2 by which that court dismissed its application, principally, for the annulment of Commission Decision 2004/136/EC 3of 4 February 2004, in so far as that decision imposed on the appellant a flatrate reduction of 2% of the expenditure declared for the purposes of financing through the European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee Section, for the financial years 2000-2002, or, in the alternative, a reduction in the amount of the expenditure excluded from such financing.
Kraljevina Belgija (v nadaljevanju tudi: pritožnica) s to pritožbo predlaga razveljavitev sodbe Sodi�ča prve stopnje z dne 25. julija 2006 (v nadaljevanju: izpodbijana sodba), 2 s katero je bila zavrnjena njena tožba za razglasitev ničnosti Odločbe Komisije 2004/136/ES 3 z dne 4. februarja 2004 v delu, v katerem za pritožnico določa dvoodstotno pav�alno zmanj�anje odhodkov, prijavljenih zaradi financiranja s strani Jamstvenega oddelka Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada (EKUJS), za poslovna leta od 2000 do 2002, ali podredno, zmanj�anje zneska odhodkov, izključenih iz financiranja.
I — Legislative background
I – Pravni okvir
According to the Community rules on the financing of the common agricultural
Jamstveni oddelek EKUJS v skladu z ureditvijo Skupnosti o financiranju skupne
4 — Pertinent in this case are Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of the Council of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ, English Special Edition 1970 (I), p.
4 – V obravnavanem primeru izstopata Uredba Sveta (EGS) �t. 729/70 z dne 21. aprila 1970 o financiranju skupne kmetijske politike (UL L 94, str. 13) in glede odhodkov po 1. januarju 2000 Uredba Sveta (ES) �t.
Those regulations are no longer in force since, as of 1 January 2007, Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 2005 L 209, p.
Ti uredbi ne veljata več, zdaj velja, in sicer od 1. januarja 2007, Uredba Sveta (ES) �t. 1290/2005 z dne 21. junija 2005 o financiranju skupne kmetijske politike (UL L 209, str. 1).
1 — Original language: Italian.2 — Case T-221/04 Belgium v Commission.
2 – Sodba v zadevi Belgija proti Komisiji (T-221/04, neobjavljena v ZOdl.).
3 — Decision excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2004 L 40, p. 31).
3 – Odločba o izključitvi nekaterih odhodkov držav članic iz jamstvenega oddelka Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada (EKUJS) iz financiranja Skupnosti (UL L 40, str. 31).
(d) aid applications;
(d) zahtevke za pomoč;
(e) an integrated control system’.
(e) integrirani nadzorni sistem“.
Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 of 27 November 1992 establishing an integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes 8 requires each Member State to set up such an integrated system, which in the crop sector must apply, in particular, to the Community support system for producers of certain arable crops.
Člen 1 Uredbe Sveta (EGS) �t. 3508/92 z dne 27. novembra 1992 o vzpostavitvi integriranega upravnega in nadzornega sistema za nekatere programe pomoči Skupnosti 8vsem državam članicam nalaga vzpostavitev takega integriranega sistema, ki ga je treba uporabljati zlasti v sektorju rastlinske predelave za skupnostni sistem podpor za proizvajalce nekaterih polj�čin.
According to Article 2 of the regulation, ‘[t]he integrated system shall comprise the following elements:
V skladu s členom 2 te uredbe vključuje „[i]ntegrirani sistem […] naslednje elemente:
(a) a computerised data base;
(a) računalni�ko zbirko podatkov;
(b) an alphanumeric identification system for agricultural parcels;
(b) alfanumerični identifikacijski sistem za enote rabe ali poljine;
According to Article 4 of Regulation No 3508/92:
Člen 4 Uredbe �t. 3508/92 določa:
(c) an alphanumeric system for the identification and registration of animals;
(c) alfanumerični sistem za identifikacijo in registracijo živali;
‘The alphanumeric identification system for agricultural parcels shall be established on the basis of land registry maps and
„Alfanumerični identifikacijski sistem za enote rabe ali poljine se vzpostavi na podlagi katastrskih načrtov in drugih katastrskih dokumentov, drugega kartografskega materiala ali letalskih oziroma satelitskih
BELGIUM v COMMISSION documents, other cartographic references or of aerial photographs or satellite pictures or other equivalent supporting references or on the basis of more than one of these elements.’
BELGIJA PROTI KOMISIJI posnetkov ali drugih enakovrednih dodatnih dokazil oziroma na podlagi več teh elementov.“
Administrative checks shall be supplemented by on-the-spot checks covering a sample of agricultural holdings.
Upravni nadzor se dopolni z nadzorom na kraju samem na vzorcu izbranih kmetijskih gospodarstev.
For all these checks, Member States shall draw up a sampling plan.
Za vse te nadzore izdelajo države članice načrt vzorčenja.
Regulation No 1593/2000 replaced the text of that article as follows:
1593/2000 je bilo besedilo tega člena nadome�čeno z naslednjim:
Each Member State shall designate an authority responsible for coordinating the checks provided for in this Regulation.
Vsaka država članica imenuje organ, ki je odgovoren za koordinacijo nadzorov, predvidenih s to uredbo.
‘An identification system for agricultural parcels shall be established on the basis of maps or land registry documents or other cartographic references.
Pri tem se bodo uporabljale metode računalni�kih geografskih informacijskih sistemov, vključujoč po možnosti letalske ali satelitske ortoposnetke s homogenim standardom, ki zagotavlja natančnost, ustrezno kartografskemu merilu najmanj 1:10000.“
Article 7 of Regulation No 3508/92 provides that ‘[t]he integrated control system shall cover all aid applications submitted, in particular as regards administrative checks, on-the-spot checks and, if appropriate, verification by aerial or satellite remote sensing’.
Člen 7 Uredbe �t. 3508/92 določa, da zajema „[i]ntegrirani nadzorni sistem […] vse predložene zahtevke za pomoč, zlasti glede upravnega nadzora, nadzora na kraju samem in preverjanja z daljinskim zaznavanjem z uporabo letalskih ali satelitskih posnetkov, če je to primerno“.
Article 8 then provides that:
Člen 8 te uredbe določa:
Member States shall carry out administrative checks on aid applications.
Države članice opravljajo upravni nadzor zahtevkov za pomoč.
Article 2 of that regulation should have been applied in Belgium.
Z Uredbo �t.
Subsequently, Regulation No 1593/2000 added to Article 13(1), in particular, a subparagraph (c), which sets at 1 January 2005 at the latest the date by which ‘the geographical part of the parcel identification system, as provided for in Article 4’ should apply in the different Member States.
1593/2000 je bila nato v zgoraj navedeni člen 13(1) dodana točka (c), ki določa, da se integrirani sistem uporablja najpozneje od 1. januarja 2005 v različnih državah članicah „glede geografskega dela identifikacijskega sistema za enote rabe ali poljine v skladu s členom 4“.
On-the-spot checks shall cover at least a significant percentage of applications.
Nadzor na kraju samem zajema vsaj znatni vzorec zahtevkov.
The significant percentage shall represent at least:
Ta vzorec mora zajemati najmanj:
— 5 % of “area” aid applications. However, this percentage shall be reduced to 3% for area aid applications numbering more than 700 000 per Member State in the calendar year.
5 % zahtevkov za pomoč na povr�ino, vendar pa se ta odstotek zmanj�a na 3 % za zahtevke za pomoč na povr�ino, če njihovo �tevilo presega 700.000 na državo članico in koledarsko leto.
Administrative and on-the-spot checks shall be made in such a way as to ensure effective verification of compliance with the terms under which aids and premiums are granted.
Upravni nadzor [in nadzor] na kraju samem se izvaja tako, da se lahko zanesljivo preveri, ali so bili upo�tevani pogoji, pod katerimi se pomoč odobri.
The administrative checks referred to in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 shall include in particular:
Upravni nadzor iz člena 8(1) Uredbe (EGS) �t. 3508/92 vsebuje zlasti:
Should on-the-spot checks reveal significant irregularities in a region or part of a region, the competent authority shall make additional checks during the current year in that area and shall increase the percentage of applications to be checked in the following year.
Če pregledi na kraju samem pokažejo bistvene nepravilnosti v regiji ali delu regije, pristojni organi opravijo dodaten nadzor v tekočem letu in za to regijo ali del regije povi�ajo odstotek zahtevkov, ki jih je treba preveriti v naslednjem letu.
(a) cross-checks on parcels and animals declared in order to ensure that aid is not granted twice in respect of the same calendar year without justification;
a) navzkrižno preverjanje prijavljenih enot rabe ali poljin in živali, da bi se preprečila neupravičena večkratna odobritev iste pomoči za isto koledarsko leto;
Applications subjected to on-the-spot checking shall be selected by the competent
Zahtevke, ki so predmet nadzora na kraju samem, določi pristojni organ zlasti na
13 — Concerns checks on bovine animals only.
13 – Zadeva samo preglede živega goveda.
… authority on the basis of a risk analysis and an element of representativeness of the aid applications submitted.
[…] podlagi analize tveganj ter dejavnika reprezentativnosti vloženih zahtevkov za pomoč.
The risk analysis shall take account of:
Analiza tveganj upo�teva:
— the amount of aid involved;
�tevilo parcel, povr�ino ali �tevilo živali, za katere se pomoč zahteva;
Agricultural parcel areas shall be determined by any appropriate means defined by the competent authority which ensure measurement of a precision at least equivalent to that required for official measurements under the national rules.
Povr�ine enot rabe ali poljin se ugotovijo s katerim koli primernim načinom, ki ga je predvidel pristojni organ, in ki zagotavlja meritve vsaj z enakovredno natančnostjo, kot se zahteva za uradne meritve skladno z nacionalnimi določbami.
The competent authority shall set a tolerance margin taking account of the measuring method used, the accuracy of the official documents available, local factors (such as slope, shape of parcel) and the provisions of the following subparagraph.
Pristojni organ določi tolerančno mejo, upo�tevajoč uporabljeno metodo merjenja, natančnost razpoložljivih uradnih dokumentov, lokalne dejavnike, kot so nagib in oblika enote rabe ali poljine ter določbe naslednjega odstavka.
— changes from the previous year;
– napredek v primerjavi s prej�njim letom;
— the findings of checks made in past years;
– ugotovitve nadzorov prej�njih letih;
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2801/1999 of 21 December 1999 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 15
Z Uredbo Komisije (ES) �t. 2801/99 z dne 21. decembra 1999 o spremembi Uredbe �t.
— other factors to be defined by the Member State; replaced the text of the abovementioned Article 6(2), as of 1 January 2000, by the following: of
3887/92 15 je bilo od 1. januarja 2000 besedilo zgorajnavedenega člena 6(2) nadome�čeno s tem besedilom: druga merila, ki jih določijo države članice;
14 — Council Regulation of 21 April 1997 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products (OJ 1997 L 117, p. 1).
14 – Uredba Sveta z dne 21. aprila 1997 o uvedbi sistema za identifikacijo in registracijo govedi ter ureditvi označevanja govejega mesa in proizvodov iz govejega mesa (UL L 117, str. 1).
Article 7(1) of Regulation No 3887/92 provides as follows:
Člen 7(1) Uredbe �t.
(a) cross-checks on declared parcels and animals in order to ensure that the same aid is not granted more than once in respect of the same calendar/marketing year and to prevent any undue cumulation of aid granted under Community aid schemes involving declarations of areas;
3887/92 določa: a) navzkrižno preverjanje prijavljenih enot rabe ali polj in živali, da bi se preprečila večkratna odobritev iste pomoči za isto koledarsko ali tržno leto ter neupravičeno kopičenje pomoči, odobrene v okviru programov pomoči Skupnosti v zvezi s prijavljenimi povr�inami;
‘Should a Member State decide to use remote sensing on all or part of the sample referred to in Article 6(3), it shall:
„Če se država članica odloči nadzorovati vzorec ali del vzorca iz člena 6(3) z daljinskim zaznavanjem, opravlja: