natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
To entrust a legal person such as ELPA, which itself organises and commercially exploits motorcycling events, the task of giving the competent administration its consent to applications for authorisation to organise such events, is tantamount de facto to conferring upon it the power to designate the persons authorised to organise those events and to set the conditions in which those events are organised, thereby placing that entity at an obvious advantage over its competitors (see, by analogy, Case C-202/88 France v Commission [1991] ECR I-1223, paragraph 51, and Case C-18/88 GB Inno BM [1991] ECR I-5941, paragraph 25).
Zaupati pravni osebi, kot je ELPA, ki sama organizira in tržno izkori�ča motociklistična tekmovanja, nalogo, da izda upravnemu organu soglasje k vlogi za dovoljenje za organizacijo takih tekmovanj, pomeni de facto podeliti ji pooblastilo, da določi osebe, poobla�čene za organizacijo navedenih tekmovanj, in pogoje, v katerih se ta organizirajo, ter s tem podeliti tej organizaciji očitno prednost pred njenimi konkurenti (glej po analogiji sodbi z dne 19. marca 1991 v zadevi Francija proti Komisiji, C-202/88, Recueil, str. I-1223, točka 51, in z dne 13. decembra 1991 v zadevi GB-Inno-BM, C-18/88, Recueil, str.
Such a right may therefore lead the undertaking which possesses it to deny other operators access to the relevant market.
I-5941, točka 25). Podjetje, ki ima tako pravico, lahko prepreči dostop drugih izvajalcev na zadevni trg.
That situation of unequal conditions of competition is also highlighted by the fact, confirmed at the hearing before the Court, that, when ELPA organises or participates in the organisation of motorcycling events, it is not required to obtain any consent in order that the competent administration grant it the required authorisation.
Ta položaj neenakih konkurenčnih pogojev potrjuje tudi dejstvo, ugotovljeno na obravnavi na Sodi�ču, da se, ko ELPA organizira ali sodeluje pri organizaciji motociklističnih tekmovanj, od nje ne zahteva, naj pridobi soglasje, da ji pristojni organ podeli potrebno dovoljenje.
Furthermore, such a rule, which gives a legal person such as ELPA the power to give consent to applications for authorisation to organise motorcycling events without that power being made subject by that rule to restrictions, obligations and review,
Dalje taka ureditev, ki podeli pravni osebi, kot je ELPA, pooblastilo za izdajo soglasja k vlogi za dovoljenje za organizacijo takih tekmovanj, ne da bi bili določeni meje, obveznosti in nadzor nad izvajanjem tega pooblastila, lahko privede pravno osebo,
MOTOE could lead the legal person entrusted with giving that consent to distort competition by favouring events which it organises or those in whose organisation it participates.
MOTOE pristojno za izdajo tega soglasja, do izkrivljanja konkurence, s tem da daje prednost tekmovanjem, ki jih sama organizira ali pri katerih sodeluje.
In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the questions referred must be that a legal person whose activities consist not only in taking part in administrative decisions authorising the organisation of motorcycling events, but also in organising such events itself and in entering, in that connection, into sponsorship, advertising and insurance contracts, falls within the scope of Articles 82 EC and 86 EC.
Glede na navedeno je treba na postavljeni vpra�anji odgovoriti, da za pravno osebo, ki ne opravlja le dejavnosti soodločanja pri upravnih odločbah, s katerimi se dovoli organizacija motociklističnih tekmovanj, temveč tudi sama organizira taka tekmovanja in v tem okviru sklepa sponzorske pogodbe, pogodbe o ogla�evanju in zavarovalne pogodbe, veljata člena 82 ES in 86 ES.
Those articles preclude a national rule which confers on a legal person, which organises motorcycling events and enters, in that connection, into sponsorship, advertising and insurance contracts, the power to give consent to applications for authorisation to organise such competitions, without that power being made subject to restrictions, obligations and review.
Ta člena nasprotujeta nacionalni ureditvi, ki podeljuje pravni osebi, ki organizira motociklistična tekmovanja in v tem okviru sklepa sponzorske pogodbe, pogodbe o ogla�evanju in zavarovalne pogodbe, pooblastilo za izdajo soglasja k vlogi za dovoljenje za organizacijo takih tekmovanj, ne da bi bili določeni meje, obveznosti in nadzor nad izvajanjem tega pooblastila.
Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the referring court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court.
Ker je ta postopek za stranki v postopku v glavni stvari ena od stopenj v postopku pred predložitvenim sodi�čem, to odloči o stro�kih.
A legal person whose activities consist not only in taking part in administrative decisions authorising the organisation of motorcycling events, but also in organising such events itself and in entering, in that connection, into sponsorship,
Za pravno osebo, ki ne opravlja le dejavnosti soodločanja pri upravnih odločbah, s katerimi se dovoli organizacija motociklističnih tekmovanj, temveč tudi sama organizira taka tekmovanja in v tem okviru sklepa sponzorske pogodbe,
2008 — CASE C-49/07 advertising and insurance contracts, falls within the scope of Articles 82 EC and 86 EC.
2008 – ZADEVA C-49/07 pogodbe o oglaševanju in zavarovalne pogodbe, veljata člena 82 ES in 86 ES.
Those articles preclude a national rule which confers on a legal person, which organises motorcycling competitions and enters, in that connection, into sponsorship, advertising and insurance contracts, the power to give consent to applications for authorisation to organise such competitions, without that power being made subject to restrictions, obligations and review.
Ta člena nasprotujeta nacionalni ureditvi, ki podeljuje pravni osebi, ki organizira motociklistična tekmovanja in v tem okviru sklepa sponzorske pogodbe, pogodbe o oglaševanju in zavarovalne pogodbe, pooblastilo za izdajo soglasja k vlogi za dovoljenje za organizacijo takih tekmovanj, ne da bi bili določeni meje, obveznosti in nadzor nad izvajanjem tega pooblastila.
Case C-215/06
Zadeva C-215/06
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — No assessment of the environmental effects of projects within the scope of Directive 85/337/EEC — Regularisation after the event)
„Neizpolnitev obveznosti države – Neizvedba presoje vplivov projektov, ki spadajo na področje uporabe Direktive 85/337/EGS, na okolje – Naknadna legalizacija“
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 3 July 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sodba Sodi�ča (drugi senat) z dne 3. julija 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Council Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 97/11, Arts 2(1) and 4(1) and (2))
(Direktiva Sveta 85/337, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, členi 1(2), 2(1) in 4(1) in (2) ter prilogi I in II)
Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — Directive 85/337
Okolje – Presoja vplivov nekaterih projektov na okolje – Direktiva 85/337 (Direktiva Sveta 85/337, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, člena 2(1) in 4(1) in (2))
SUMMARY — CASE C-215/06
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-215/06
Environment — Assessment of the effects of certain projects on the environment — Directive 85/337
Okolje – Presoja vplivov nekaterih projektov na okolje – Direktiva 85/337
(Council Directive 85/337, as amended by Directive 97/11, Arts 2, 4 and 5 to 10 and Annexes II, points 3(i), and 13, and III)
(Direktiva Sveta 85/337, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, členi 2, 4 in od 5 do 10 ter prilogi II, točki 3(i) in 13 ter III)
A literal analysis of that kind of Article 2(1) is moreover consonant with the objective pursued by that directive, set out in particular in recital 5 of the preamble to Directive 97/11, according to which ‘projects for which an assessment is required should be subject to a requirement for development consent the assessment should be carried out before such consent is granted’.
Ker je izraz v zvezi z dovolitvijo nosilcu projekta, da izvede projekt na podlagi soglasja za izvedbo, ki ga izda pristojni organ, iz člena 1(2) Direktive 85/337 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, nedvoumen, je treba člen 2(1) navedene direktive nujno razumeti tako, da pomeni, da oseba ne more začeti del v zvezi z zadevnim projektom, če ni zahtevala in pridobila potrebnega soglasja ter predhodno izvedla presoje vplivov na okolje, ko se ta zahteva, ker sicer ne bi spo�tovala zahtev navedene direktive.
(see paras 50-53)
(Glej točke od 50 do 53.)
A Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Directive 85/337 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 97/11, which after the event gives to retention permission, which can be issued even where no exceptional circumstances are proved, the same effects as those attached to a planning permission preceding the carrying out of works and development, when, pursuant to Articles 2(1) and 4(1) and (2) of that directive, projects for which an environmental impact assessment is required must be identified and then — before the grant of development consent and, therefore, necessarily before they are carried out — must be subject to an application for development consent and to such an assessment.
Ta presoja velja za vse projekte, ki spadajo na področje uporabe te direktive, tako za tiste, ki so navedeni v njeni prilogi I in za katere se vedno izvede presoja na podlagi členov 2(1) in 4(1) te direktive, kot tudi za tiste, ki so navedeni v prilogi II k navedeni direktivi in za katere se na tej podlagi in v skladu s členom 4(2) te direktive izvede presoja vplivov le, če se zanje glede na pragove in merila, ki jih postavi država članica, in/ali na podlagi preverjanja za vsak primer posebej predvideva, da bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje.
That analysis is valid for all projects within the scope of that directive, whether they fall under Annex I and must therefore systematically be subject to an assessment pursuant to Articles 2(1) and 4(1), or whether they fall under Annex II of that directive and as such, and in accordance with Article 4(2), are subject to an impact assessment only if, in the light of thresholds or criteria set by the Member State and/or on the basis of a case-by-case examination, they are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Ne izpolni svojih obveznosti iz Direktive 85/337 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, država članica, ki naknadno določi iste učinke za legalizacijo, ki se jo lahko odobri, tudi če se ne dokaže izjemnih okoli�čin, kot so učinki dovoljenja za prostorsko načrtovanje, ki je predhodno izvedbi del in prostorskemu načrtovanju, čeprav je treba projekte, za katere se zahteva presoja vplivov na okolje, na podlagi členov 2(1) ter 4(1) in (2) navedene direktive opredeliti in nato v zvezi z njimi pred izdajo soglasja za izvedbo, in torej nujno pred njihovo izvedbo, zahtevati soglasje za izvedbo in opraviti navedeno presojo.
While Community law cannot preclude the applicable national rules from allowing, in certain cases, the regularisation of operations or measures which are unlawful in the light of Community law, such a possibility should be subject to the condition that it does not offer the persons concerned the opportunity to circumvent the Community rules or to dispense with applying them, and that it should remain the exception.
Če namreč pravo Skupnosti ne more preprečiti, da je z veljavnimi nacionalnimi pravili v nekaterih primerih dovoljeno legalizirati ravnanja in akte, s katerimi se kr�ijo ta pravila, mora za tako možnost veljati pogoj, da je zadevnim osebam onemogočeno, da bi ob�le pravila Skupnosti ali jih ne bi uporabile, in da mora ta možnost ostati izjemna.
projects on the environment if it has failed to take all measures necessary to ensure that the grant of development consents relating to the first two phases of construction of a wind farm was preceded by an environmental impact assessment in conformity with Articles 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337 and which merely attached to the applications for consent environmental impact statements which did not satisfy those requirements.
ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se pred izdajo soglasij za izvedbo v zvezi s prvima dvema fazama gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn opravi presoja vplivov na okolje v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337, in ki se je pri zahtevah za soglasje za izvedbo omejila na predložitev izjav o vplivih na okolje, ki ne ustrezajo tem zahtevam.
A system of after-the-event regularisation may have the effect of encouraging developers to forgo ascertaining whether intended projects satisfy the criteria of Article 2(1) of that directive, and consequently, not to undertake the action required for identification of the effects of those projects on the environment and for their prior assessment.
Kajti sistem naknadne legalizacije ima lahko tak učinek, da spodbuja nosilce projektov, da ne preverijo, ali predlagani projekti izpolnjujejo merila iz člena 2(1) te direktive, in da torej ne začnejo postopkov, ki so potrebni za opredelitev vplivov navedenih projektov na okolje in za njihovo predhodno presojo.
The first recital of the preamble to Direct- ive 85/337, however, states that it is necessary for the competent authority to take effects on the environment into account at the earliest possible stage in all the technical planning and decisionmaking processes, the objective being to prevent the creation of pollution or nuisances at source rather than subsequently trying to counteract their effects.
V skladu s prvo uvodno izjavo spremenjene Direktive 85/337 pa je nujno, da v postopku sprejemanja odločitev pristojni organ upo�teva vplive na okolje v najzgodnej�i možni fazi v vseh postopkih tehničnega načrtovanja in sprejemanja odločitev, ker je cilj preprečevati povzročanje onesnaževanja ali motenj pri izvoru, ne pa posku�ati naknadno zmanj�ati njihove vplive.
(see paras 57, 58, 61)
(Glej točke 57, 58 in 61.)
A Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2, 4 and 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
Ne izpolni svojih obveznosti iz členov 2, 4 in od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje država članica, ki
In that regard, while installations for the harnessing of wind power for energy production are not listed in either Annex I or Annex II to Directive 85/337, the first two phases of construction of the wind farm required a number of works, including the extraction of peat and of minerals other than metalliferous and energy-producing minerals, and also road construction, which works are listed in Annex II to that directive, respectively in point 2(a) and (c) and in point 10(d).
V zvezi s tem, čeprav naprave za izkori�čanje energije vetra za proizvodnjo elektrike niso navedene niti v prilogi I niti v prilogi II k Direktivi 85/337, je bilo za ti prvi dve fazi gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn treba izvesti različna dela, med katerimi so pridobivanje �ote ter mineralnih snovi razen kovinskih mineralnih snovi in mineralnih energetskih surovin ter gradnja cest, ki so na�teta v navedeni prilogi II, točka 2(a) in (c) oziroma točka 10(d).
The fact that the projects falling under Annex II to that directive may be of secondary importance vis-à-vis the wind farm construction project taken as a whole does not mean that, by virtue of that fact alone, those projects are not likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Vendar dejstvo, da imajo projekti, na katere se nana�a priloga II k navedeni direktivi, drugoten pomen v primerjavi s projektom gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn kot celote, ne pomeni, da navedeni projekti zaradi tega ne bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje.
The purpose of carrying out an environmental impact assessment in conformity with the requirements of Directive 85/337 is to identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner the direct and indirect effects of a project on factors such as fauna and flora, soil
Namen izvedbe presoje vplivov na okolje v skladu z zahtevami Direktive 85/337 je namreč, da se primerno opredeli, opi�e in oceni neposredne in posredne vplive posameznega projekta na dejavnike, kot so živalstvo in rastlinstvo, tla in
SUMMARY — CASE C-215/06 and water and the interaction of those factors.
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-215/06 voda, ter medsebojni vpliv teh različnih dejavnikov.
of wind power for energy production (wind farms) and point 13 of that annex refers to any change or extension of projects listed in Annex II, already authorised, executed or in the process of being executed, which may have significant adverse effects on the environment.
izkori�čanje energije vetra za proizvodnjo elektrike (polja vetrnih elektrarn) in v točki 13 navedene priloge vsaka sprememba ali raz�iritev projektov, na�tetih v isti prilogi, ki so že dovoljeni, izvedeni ali se izvajajo in lahko imajo pomembne �kodljive vplive na okolje.
(see paras 96, 101, 104, 105, 112, operative part)
(Glej točke 96, 101, 104, 105, 112 in izrek.)
A Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2, 4 and 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 97/11, if it has failed to take all measures necessary to ensure that the grant of the amending consents and the consent relating to the third phase of construction of a wind farm was preceded by an assessment of their effects on the environment, and which merely attached to the applications for consent environmental impact statements which did not satisfy those requirements.
Ne izpolni svojih obveznosti iz členov 2, 4 in od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/11, država članica, ki ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se pred izdajo soglasij k spremembam in soglasja v zvezi s tretjo fazo gradnje polja vetrnih elektrarn opravi presoja njihovih vplivov na okolje, in ki se je omejila na predložitev izjav o vplivih na okolje, ki ne ustrezajo tem zahtevam.
In addition, the relevant selection criteria in Annex III to that directive, which are applicable to the projects listed in Annex II to that directive and are referred to in Article 4(3) of that directive, include the risk of accidents having regard inter alia to the technologies used.
Poleg tega je med ustreznimi izbirnimi merili, določenimi v prilogi III k navedeni direktivi, ki veljajo za projekte, na�tete v prilogi II k tej direktivi, in na katere se sklicuje člen 4(3) navedene direktive, navedeno tveganje nastanka nesreč ob upo�tevanju zlasti uporabljene tehnologije.
Noteworthy among those criteria is the environmental sensitivity of the geographical area, which must be considered having regard, inter alia, to ‘the absorption capacity of the natural environment’, paying particular attention to mountain and forest areas.
Med temi merili je treba omeniti okoljsko občutljivost geografskega območja, ki jo je treba obravnavati zlasti ob upo�tevanju „absorpcijske sposobnosti naravnega okolja“, pri čemer je treba posebno pozornost nameniti gorskim in gozdnim območjem.
(see paras 108, 109, 111, 112, operative part)
(Glej točke 108, 109, 111, 112 in izrek.)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)
SODBA SODIŠČA (drugi senat) z dne 3. julija 2008 *
ACTION under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 11 May 2006,
V zadevi C-215/06, zaradi tožbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti na podlagi člena 226 ES, vložene 11. maja 2006,
JUDGMENT OF 3. 7.
SODBA Z DNE 3. 7.
2008 — CASE C-215/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-215/06
Advocate General: J. Mazák, Registrar: B. Fülöp, Administrator, having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 14 February 2008, having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion, gives the following
Fülöp, administrator, na podlagi pisnega postopka in obravnave z dne 14. februarja 2008, na podlagi sklepa, sprejetega po opredelitvi generalnega pravobranilca, da bo v zadevi razsojeno brez sklepnih predlogov, izreka naslednjo
By its action the Commission of the European Communities seeks a declaration from the Court that:
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti s tožbo predlaga, naj Sodi�če ugotovi, da Irska:
— by failing to adopt all measures necessary to ensure that projects which are within the scope of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment
– s tem da ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se, preden so v celoti ali deloma izvedeni, presodi, ali je za projekte, ki spadajo na področje
COMMISSION v IRELAND of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p.
KOMISIJA PROTI IRSKI uporabe Direktive Sveta 85/337/EGS z dne 27. junija 1985 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje (UL L 175, str.
40) either before or after amendment by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (OJ 1997 L 73, p.
40) v različici pred spremembami, uvedenimi z Direktivo Sveta 97/11/ES z dne 3. marca 1997 (UL L 73, str.
5) are, before they are executed in whole or in part, first, considered with regard to the need for an environmental impact assessment and, secondly, where those projects are likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of their nature, size or location, that they are made subject to an assessment with regard to their effects in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337, and
5), in v različici po njih, treba izvesti presojo vplivov na okolje, in da se izvede presoja njihovih vplivov v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337, če bodo verjetno pomembno vplivali na okolje zaradi svoje narave, velikosti ali lokacije, in
— by failing to adopt all measures necessary to ensure that the development consents given for, and the execution of, wind farm developments and associated works at Derrybrien, County Galway, were preceded by an assessment with regard to their environmental effects in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of Directive 85/337,
– s tem da ni sprejela vseh potrebnih ukrepov za zagotovitev, da se pred izdajo soglasij za gradnjo polja vetrnih elektrarn in za povezana dela v Derrybrienu v okrožju Galway ter pred izvedbo del opravi presoja vplivov projekta na okolje v skladu s členi od 5 do 10 Direktive 85/337, ni izpolnila svojih obveznosti iz členov 2, 4 in od 5 do 10 navedene direktive.
By its action the Commission seeks a declaration that Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 85/337 both in its original version and in the version as amended by Directive 97/11.
Komisija s svojo tožbo želi, da se ugotovi, da Irska ni izpolnila svojih obveznosti na podlagi Direktive 85/337 v prvotni različici in v različici, ki izhaja iz sprememb, uvedenih z Direktivo 97/11.
The wording of Article 1(2) and (3) of Directive 85/337 is as follows:
V členu 1(2) in (3) Direktive 85/337 je določeno:
“project” means
‚projekt‘ pomeni:
“development consent” means: the decision of the competent authority or authorities which entitles the developer to proceed with the project.
‚soglasje za izvedbo‘ pomeni: odločitev pristojnega organa ali organov, ki dovoljuje nosilcu projekta izvedbo projekta.
The competent authority or authorities shall be that or those which the Member States designate as responsible for performing the duties arising from this Directive.’
Pristojni organ ali organi so tisti, ki jih države članice določijo kot odgovorne za opravljanje dolžnosti iz te direktive.“
Article 2(1) and (2) and the first subparagraph of Article 2(3) of Directive 85/337 provide:
V členu 2, od (1) do (3), prvi pododstavek, Direktive 85/337 je določeno: