natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
(b) the quantities of denatured sugar;
(b) količin denaturiranega sladkorja;
(c) the quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup imported from nonmember countries as processed products.
(c) količin sladkorja, izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa, uvoženih iz držav nečlanic v obliki predelanih proizvodov.
There shall be subtracted from the sum referred to in the first subparagraph the sum of the quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup exported to nonmember countries as processed products and the quantities of basic products expressed as white sugar for which certificates for the production refunds referred to in Article 7(3) of Regulation … No 1260/2001 have been issued.’
Od vsote iz prvega pododstavka se od�teje vsota količin sladkorja, izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa, izvoženih v države nečlanice v obliki predelanih proizvodov, ter količin osnovnih proizvodov, izraženih kot beli sladkor, za katere so bila izdana potrdila za proizvodna nadomestila iz člena 7(3) Uredbe […] �t. 1260/2001.“
That provision was amended by Regulation No 1140/2003 as follows:
Ta določba je bila spremenjena z Uredbo �t. 1140/2003 tako, da je v njej določeno:
‘The quantities disposed of for consumption in the Community to be recorded under Article 15(1)(b) and (2)(a) of Regulation … No 1260/2001 shall be established by totalling the quantities, expressed as white sugar, of the sugars and syrups indicated in Article 1(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) and of isoglucose and inulin syrup:
„Količine, odprodane za potro�njo v Skupnosti, ki se beležijo po členu 15(1)(b) in (2)(a) Uredbe […] �t. 1260/2001, se določijo tako, da se se�tejejo količine sladkorjev in sirupov, izražene kot beli sladkor, iz člena 1(1)(a), (b), (c) in (d) ter izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa:
(d) contained in imported processed products; subtracting the quantities referred to in the first subparagraph, expressed as white sugar, of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup:
(d) ki jih vsebujejo uvoženi predelani proizvodi; od tega pa se od�tejejo količine sladkorja, izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa iz prvega pododstavka, izražene kot beli sladkor:
(d) for which certificates for production refunds as indicated in Article 7(3) of Regulation … No 1260/2001 have been issued.
(d) za katere so bila izdana potrdila za proizvodna nadomestila, kot je določeno v členu 7(3) Uredbe […] �t. 1260/2001.
Article 6(5) of Regulation No 314/2002 states:
V členu 6(5) Uredbe �t. 314/2002 je določeno:
‘The following shall be regarded within the meaning of Article 15(1)(d) of Regulation … No 1260/2001 as export obligations to be fulfilled during the current marketing year:
„V smislu člena 15(1)(d) Uredbe […] �t. 1260/2001 se za izvozno obveznost, ki jo je treba izpolniti v tekočem tržnem letu, �tejejo:
For the calculation of the foreseeable average loss referred to in Article 15(1)(d) of Regulation … No 1260/2001, the production refunds for the quantities of basic products expressed as white sugar for which certificates for the production refunds referred to in Article 7(3) of that Regulation have been issued during the course of the marketing year in question shall also be taken into account.’
Za izračun predvidene povprečne izgube iz člena 15(1)(d) Uredbe […] �t. 1260/2001 se upo�tevajo tudi proizvodna nadomestila za količine osnovnih proizvodov, izražene kot beli sladkor, za katere so bila v zadevnem tržnem letu izdana potrdila za proizvodna nadomestila iz člena 7(3) navedene uredbe.“
The actions in the main proceedings and the questions referred for preliminary rulings
Spori o glavni stvari in vprašanja za predhodno odločanje
Case C-5/06
Zadeva C­5/06
By decision of 22 October 2004, the Hauptzollamt Aachen calculated Jülich’s production levy by applying, in respect of the basic production levy for A and B sugar, the amount per tonne laid down in Article 1(a) of Regulation No 1775/2004 and, in respect of the B levy relating to B sugar, the amount per tonne referred to in Article 1(b) of that regulation.
Z odločbo z dne 22. oktobra 2004 je Hauptzollamt Aachen določil proizvodno dajatev za družbo Jülich, pri tem je v zvezi z osnovno proizvodno dajatvijo za sladkor A in B uporabil znesek v tonah iz člena 1(a) Uredbe �t. 1775/2004 ter v zvezi z dajatvijo B glede sladkorja B znesek v tonah iz člena 1(b) iste uredbe.
Upon the rejection of its complaint challenging that decision, Jülich brought an action before the Finanzgericht (Finance Court) Düsseldorf, claiming that Regulation No 1775/2004 was invalid on the ground that the Commission had erred in its calculation of the production levies.
Ker je bil ugovor, ki ga je vložila družba Jülich zoper to odločbo, zavrnjen, je ta družba vložila tožbo pri Finanzgericht Düsseldorf in uveljavljala, da Uredba �t. 1775/2004 ni veljavna, ker naj bi Komisija storila napake pri izračunu proizvodnih dajatev.
First, Jülich submitted, when calculating the exportable surplus the Commission had wrongly included the quantity of 504 205 tonnes of sugar exported from the Community in the form of processed goods, in respect of which no export refunds had been paid, since, moreover, the Community budget had suffered no loss in respect of that quantity.
Na eni strani naj bi napačno vključila v izračun presežka, ki se izvozi, količino 504.205 ton sladkorja, ki je bil iz Skupnosti izvožen v obliki predelanih proizvodov, za katere ni bilo odobreno nobeno nadomestilo, ker ta količina tudi ni povzročila izgube za proračun Skupnosti.
Second, it argued, in calculating the average loss, the Commission had failed to include that quantity.
Na drugi strani naj Komisija ne bi upo�tevala te iste količine pri izračunu povprečne izgube.
There was, Jülich submitted, no objective justification for using two different quantities for the purpose of calculating the exportable surplus and the average loss per tonne of sugar.
Noben objektivni razlog naj namreč ne bi utemeljeval upo�tevanja dveh različnih količin za izračun presežka, ki se izvozi, in povprečne izgube na tono sladkorja.
According to the national court, if the purpose of charging production levies were simply to require producers to meet the costs of disposing of surplus Community production, the act of setting levies without taking account of the fact that export refunds are paid only in respect of a portion of the sugar exported would go beyond what is necessary to achieve that aim.
Po mnenju predložitvenega sodi�ča, če je cilj zaračunavanja proizvodnih dajatev omejen na to, da proizvajalci sodelujejo pri financiranju stro�kov prodaje presežkov, ki izhajajo iz proizvodnje Skupnosti, presega določitev zneskov dajatev brez upo�tevanja okoli�čine, da so bila izvozna nadomestila plačana samo za del izvoženega sladkorja, okvire, ki so potrebni za doseganje tega cilja.
The Finanzgericht Düsseldorf decided, therefore, to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
Finanzgericht Düsseldorf je torej prekinilo odločanje in Sodi�ču v predhodno odločanje predložilo ta vpra�anja:
‘(1) Is Article 15 of [Regulation No 1260/2001] to be interpreted as meaning that, when determining the exportable surplus, account should be taken only of those export quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup in respect of which export refunds have actually been paid?
Ali je treba člen 15 [�t. 1260/2001] razlagati tako, da se pri izračunu presežkov, ki se izvozijo, lahko upo�tevajo le izvožene količine sladkorja, izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa, za katere so bila dejansko izplačana izvozna nadomestila?
Cases C-23/06 to C-36/06
Zadeve od C­23/06 do C­36/06
Saint Louis Sucre along with Sucreries du Marquenterre and Others are liable, as sugar manufacturing companies, to pay production levies on sugar.
Družbe Saint Louis Sucre ter Sucreries du Marquenterre in drugi morajo kot proizvajalci sladkorja plačevati proizvodne dajatve na sladkor.
Being of the opinion that the levies which they had paid for the marketing years 2001/02, 2002/03 and 2003/04 were too high, they applied for a partial refund of those levies by the Receveur principal des douanes et droits indirects de Gennevilliers, who was entrusted with their collection.
Ker so menile, da so plačale prevelike dajatve za tržna leta 2001/2002, 2002/2003 in 2003/2004, so pri Receveur principal des douanes et des droits indirects de Gennevilliers, ki je pristojen za njihovo pobiranje, zahtevale delno vračilo teh dajatev.
By decisions of the Receveur principal of 23 February 2005, the claims for reimbursement were rejected on the ground that the rates of the contested levies resulted from the application of Community legislation.
Z odločbami z dne 23. februarja 2005 je navedeni Receveur principal zavrnil ugovore, vložene zaradi vračila dajatev, ker so bile stopnje izpodbijanih dajatev določene na podlagi Skupnostne ureditve.
Accordingly, Saint Louis Sucre and Sucreries du Marquenterre and Others brought actions before the Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre (Regional Court, Nanterre) (France) seeking orders annulling the decisions and ordering partial reimbursement of the contested levies together with payment of default interest.
V teh okoli�činah so družbe Saint Louis Sucre ter Sucreries du Marquenterre in drugi vložile tožbe pri Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre, da bi se navedene odločbe razglasilo za nične in da bi se naložilo delno vračilo izpodbijanih dajatev, povečanih za zamudne obresti.
The applicants in the main proceedings claim that the relevant Community legislation laid down different accounting for sugar exported in the form of processed products not eligible for export refunds, first, by including it in the exportable surplus to be financed and, second, by excluding it from ‘the export obligations in question’ which enable ‘the average loss’ to be calculated in order to finance effectively the disposal of that surplus.
Tožeče stranke iz postopka v glavni stvari so uveljavljale, da upo�tevna Skupnostna ureditev predvideva različno obravnavanje sladkorja, izvoženega v obliki predelanih proizvodov, za katere se ne izplača izvoznih nadomestil, s tem da je na eni strani ta sladkor vključen v presežek, ki se izvozi in ki ga je treba financirati, na drugi strani pa je izključen iz količin „zadevnih izvoznih obveznosti“, na podlagi katerih se izračuna „povprečna izguba“ za učinkovito financiranje prodaje tega presežka.
Thus, they contend, the Commission overestimated the amount of the levies for the marketing years 2001/02, 2002/03 and 2003/04 and failed to comply with the self-financing objective imposed by the Council of the European Union.
Tako naj bi Komisija previsoko ocenila znesek dajatev za tržna leta 2001/2002, 2002/2003 in 2003/2004 ter naj ne bi spo�tovala cilja samofinanciranja, ki ga je določil Svet Evropske unije.
As a secondary point and on the same grounds, they challenge the validity of the regulations fixing, pursuant to Regulation No 314/2002, the amounts of the production levies for the marketing years at issue in the main proceedings.
Podredno so iz istih razlogov izpodbijale veljavnost uredb, ki na podlagi Uredbe �t. 314/2002 določajo zneske proizvodnih dajatev za tržna leta iz postopka v glavni stvari.
In the alternative, and should a wide definition of the concept of exportable surplus prevail, Saint Louis Sucre and Sucreries du Marquenterre and Others claim that the objective of strict self-financing laid down in Regulation No 1260/2001 has still not been complied with inasmuch as the Commission, which took into account in 2002 products exported without refunds in its annual calculations of the average loss, now overlooks in its calculations the fact that the constituent elements of the ‘exportable surplus’ and the calculation of the ‘average loss’ must be identical.
Podredno in če bi se uveljavila �iroka opredelitev presežka, ki se izvozi, so družbe Saint Louis Sucre ter Sucreries du Marquenterre in drugi uveljavljale, da cilj strogega samofinanciranja iz Uredbe �t. 1260/2001 �e vedno ne bo spo�tovan, če Komisija, ki je leta 2002 upo�tevala izvožene proizvode brez izplačanih nadomestil pri letnih izračunih povprečne izgube, ne bo pri svojih izračunih upo�tevala tega, da morajo biti elementi „presežka, ki se izvozi,“ in izračun „povprečne izgube“ enaki.
Against this background, the Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
V tem okviru je Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre prekinilo odločanje in Sodi�ču v predhodno odločanje predložilo ti vpra�anji:
‘(1) Is Article 6(4) of … Regulation … No 314/2002 and/or Regulations … No 1837/2002, No 1762/2003 and No 1775/2004 adopted to implement it invalid in the light of Article 15 of … Regulation … No 1260/2001 and in the light of the principle of proportionality, in that, with regard to calculation of the production levy, they do not provide for the exclusion from the “exportable surplus” of the sugar contained in processed products which are exported without export refunds?
1837/2002, 1762/2003 in 1775/2004, ki so bile sprejete za njeno izvedbo, neveljavni ob upo�tevanju člena 15 Uredbe �t. 1260/2001 […] in glede na načelo sorazmernosti, ker v tem členu ni določeno, da bi se pri izračunu proizvodne dajatve od ‚presežka, ki se izvozi‘, izključile količine sladkorja, ki so vsebovane v predelanih proizvodih, izvoženih brez izvoznih nadomestil?
The joining of Case C-5/06 and Cases C-23/06 to C-36/06
Združitev zadev C­5/06 in od C­23/06 do C­36/06
In view of the connections between Case C-5/06 and Cases C-23/06 to C-36/06, it is appropriate, in accordance with Article 43 of the Rules of Procedure, read in conjunction with Article 103 of those rules, to join those cases for the purpose of the judgment.
Glede na medsebojno povezanost zadev C-5/06 in od C-23/06 do C-36/06 jih je treba v skladu s členom 43 Poslovnika v povezavi s členom 103 Poslovnika združiti zaradi izdaje skupne sodbe.
The questions referred for preliminary rulings
Vprašanja za predhodno odločanje
As the questions referred by the two national courts for preliminary rulings are essentially the same, it is appropriate to deal with them by reference to the manner in which they are formulated in Case C-5/06.
Ker so vpra�anja za predhodno odločanje, ki sta jih postavili predložitveni sodi�či, v bistvu enaka, se jih bo preučilo tako, kot so oblikovana v zadevi C-5/06.
The question whether, pursuant to Article 15 of Regulation No 1260/2001, all the quantities of exported products which fall under that provision are, for the purpose of calculating the exportable surplus, to be subtracted from the consumption within the Community
Vprašanje, ali je treba na podlagi člena 15 Uredbe št. 1260/2001 pri izračunu presežka, ki se izvozi, od porabe v Skupnosti odšteti vse količine izvoženih proizvodov, za katere velja ta določba
4) laid down, as provided for in recital 9 in the preamble to Regulation No 1260/2001, that changes were to be made to the system of production levies in order to take account of recent developments in production, in particular ‘to provide the Community with the instruments necessary to ensure, in a fair yet efficient way, that the producers themselves meet in full the cost of disposing of the surpluses of Community production over consumption …’.
4) predvideno, kot v uvodni izjavi 9 Uredbe 1260/2001, da je treba sistem proizvodnih kvot prilagoditi, „da Skupnost pridobi potrebne instrumente, zato da se pravično, vendar učinkovito zagotovi, da proizvajalci sami v celoti pokrijejo stro�ke prodaje presežkov proizvodnje Skupnosti nad porabo […]“.
Article 28(1) of Regulation No 1785/81, which laid down the criteria for calculating the production levies on the production of A and B sugar and on A and B isoglucose, provided as follows:
V členu 28(1) Uredbe �t. 1785/81, v katerem so navedena merila za določitev proizvodnih dajatev na proizvodnjo sladkorja A in B ter izoglukoze A in B, je določeno:
‘Before the end of the 1981/82 to 1985/86 marketing years, there shall be recorded:
„Pred koncem vsakega izmed tržnih let od 1981/1982 do 1985/1986 se ugotovi:
(a) estimates of the production of A and B sugar and [of] A and B isoglucose attributable to the marketing year in question;
(a) predvideno proizvodnjo sladkorja A in B ter izoglukoze A in B, ki se pripi�e zadevnemu tržnemu letu;
(b) estimates of the quantities of sugar and isoglucose disposed of for consumption within the Community during the marketing year in question;
(b) predvideno količino sladkorja in izoglukoze, ki se v tekočem tržnem letu proda za porabo v Skupnosti;
(d) estimates [of] the average loss or the average revenue per tonne of sugar for export obligations to be fulfilled during the current marketing year.
(d) predvideno povprečno izgubo ali povprečni dohodek na tono sladkorja glede na izvozne obveznosti, ki jih je treba izpolniti v tekočem tržnem letu.
This average loss or average revenue shall be equal to the difference between the total amount of refunds and the total amount of levies on the total tonnage of export obligations in question;
Ta povprečna izguba ali povprečni dohodek ustreza razliki med skupnim zneskom nadomestil in skupnim zneskom dajatev glede na skupno tonažo zadevnih izvoznih obveznosti;
(e) estimates of the total loss or the total revenue obtained by multiplying the surplus referred to in (c) by the average loss or the average revenue referred to in (d).’
(e) predvideno skupno izgubo ali dohodek, ki se izračuna tako, da se presežek iz (c) pomnoži s povprečno izgubo ali dohodkom iz (d).“
That provision, although successively replaced by Article 33(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 of 13 September 1999 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 1999 L 252, p.
Ta določba je bila nadome�čena s členom 33(1) Uredbe Sveta (ES) �t. 2038/1999 z dne 13. septembra 1999 o skupni ureditvi trgov za sladkor (UL L 252, str.
1) and by Article 15(1) of Regulation No 1260/2001, has remained essentially unchanged.
1) in kasneje s členom 15(1) Uredbe �t. 1260/2001, vendar v bistvu ni bila spremenjena.
Article 5(5) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 of 8 June 1982 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector (OJ 1982 L 158, p.
V členu 5(5) Uredbe Komisije (EGS) �t. 1443/82 z dne 8. junija 1982 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za izvajanje sistema kvot v sektorju sladkorja (UL L 158, str.
17) provided that the quantities of sugar and isoglucose exported as processed products to nonmember countries were to be subtracted from the quantities of sugar and isoglucose included in the account of consumption within the Community.
17) je določeno, da se količine sladkorja in izoglukoze, izvožene v tretje države v obliki predelanih proizvodov, od�teje od količin sladkorja in izoglukoze, ki so vključene v porabo v Skupnosti.
It is, in particular, clear from the Court file relating to Cases C-23/06 to C-36/06 that, with regard to the exportable surplus, the Commission has consistently contended that this corresponds to production less disposals of sugar, since exports of sugar as processed products, regardless of whether or not they benefit from a refund, are included not in the consumption within the Community, but in the surplus.
Med drugim izhaja iz spisa v zvezi z zadevami od C-23/06 do C-36/06, da je glede presežka, ki se izvozi, Komisija vedno menila, da ta ustreza proizvodnji, zmanj�ani za prodajo sladkorja, ker je izvoz sladkorja v obliki predelanih proizvodov ne glede na to, ali se zanj izplačajo izvozna nadomestila, vključen v navedeni presežek in ne v porabo znotraj Skupnosti.
Article 15 of Regulation No 1260/2001, which lays down the criteria for calculating the production levies on the production of A and B sugar, A and B isoglucose and A and B inulin syrup, lays down, in Article 15(1)(a) to (c), that the exportable surplus is obtained by subtracting the forecast of the quantities of sugar, isoglucose and inulin syrup disposed of for consumption within the Community during the marketing year concerned from the forecast of the production of A and B sugar, A and B isoglucose and A and B inulin syrup attributable to the marketing year concerned.
V členu 15(1) od (a) do (c), Uredbe �t. 1260/2001, v katerem so navedena merila za določitev proizvodnih dajatev na proizvodnjo sladkorja A in B, izoglukoze A in B ter inulinskega sirupa A in B, je določeno, da je presežek, ki se izvozi, razlika med, na eni strani, predvideno proizvodnjo sladkorja A in B, izoglukoze A in B ter inulinskega sirupa A in B, ki se pripi�e zadevnemu tržnemu letu, ter, na drugi strani, predvideno količino sladkorja, izoglukoze in inulinskega sirupa, ki se v tekočem tržnem letu proda za porabo v Skupnosti.
Pursuant to Article 15(1)(d) of that regulation, the estimate of average loss is equal to the difference between the total amount of refunds and the total amount of levies on the total tonnage of export obligations in question.
Na podlagi člena 15(1)(d) iste uredbe predvidena povprečna izguba ustreza razliki med skupnim zneskom nadomestil in skupnim zneskom dajatev glede na skupno tonažo zadevnih izvoznih obveznosti.
The estimate of overall loss is, according to Article 15(1)(e) of Regulation No 1260/2001, obtained by multiplying the exportable surplus by the average loss.
Predvidena skupna izguba se v skladu s členom 15(1)(e) Uredbe �t. 1260/2001 izračuna tako, da se presežek, ki se izvozi, pomnoži s povprečno izgubo.
As the exportable surplus is the difference between Community production under quotas A and B and consumption within the Community, the latter is not intended to include the quantities of exported products, regardless of whether they have or have not benefited from export refunds.
Ker presežek, ki se izvozi, ustreza razliki med proizvodnjo Skupnosti ob upo�tevanju kvot A in B ter notranjo porabo, se v to porabo ne more vključiti količin izvoženih proizvodov ne glede na to, ali se za njih izplačajo izvozna nadomestila.
The quantities of exported products cannot be considered to have been disposed of for consumption within the Community, within the meaning of Article 15(1)(b) of Regulation No 1260/2001.
Količine izvoženih proizvodov se namreč ne more obravnavati kot količine, ki se prodajo za porabo v Skupnosti v smislu člena 15(1)(b) Uredbe �t. 1260/2001.
Thus, for example, the quantities of products which may be in stock at the end of the marketing year must be entered in the accounts as unconsumed quantities for the purpose of establishing the exportable surplus even though, by definition, they have not, at that stage, benefited from disposal support measures.
Tako je na primer treba količine proizvodov, ki so morebiti skladi�čene ob koncu tržnega leta, obravnavati kot neporabljene količine z namenom določitve presežka, ki se izvozi, čeprav per definitionem za njih v tej fazi �e ne veljajo ukrepi podpore prodaji.
The exportable surplus is not to be confused with the quantities of exported products.
Presežek, ki se izvozi, niso količine izvoženih proizvodov.
Those products, despite giving rise to refunds, do not always lead to financial costs for producers.
Čeprav so slednje podlaga za nadomestila, ne pomenijo vedno finančnega bremena za proizvajalce.
That is particularly the case where the quantity resulting, by definition, from the difference between initial stocks and Community production, on the one hand, and final stocks, on the other hand, is greater than the Community production and where the quantities of products giving entitlement to refunds do not exceed the difference between the Community production and that quantity.
To velja zlasti v primeru, ko je količina, ki per definitionem izhaja iz razlike med, na eni strani, začetnimi zalogami in proizvodnjo Skupnosti ter, na drugi strani, končnimi zalogami, vi�ja od proizvodnje Skupnosti in ko količine proizvodov, ki so podlaga za nadomestila, ne presegajo razlike med proizvodnjo Skupnosti in navedeno količino.