natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The terms user ‘affected’ or undertaking ‘affected’ for the purposes of Article 4(1) of Directive 2002/21 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, which grants any user or undertaking providing such networks and/or services a right to appeal against a decision taken by a national regulatory authority by which it is affected, and the term party ‘affected’ within the meaning of Article 16(3) of that directive, which grants to the latter, in the case of a decision to withdraw obligations placed on the undertaking (formerly) having significant power on the relevant market, the right to be given an appropriate period of notice of that withdrawal, must be interpreted as being applicable not only to an undertaking (formerly) having significant power on the relevant market which is subject to a decision of a national regulatory authority taken in the context of a market analysis procedure referred to in Article 16 of that directive and which is the addressee of that decision, but also to users and undertakings in competition with such an undertaking which are not themselves addressees of that decision, but the rights of which are adversely affected by it.
Pojem uporabnika ali „prizadetega“ podjetja v smislu člena 4(1) Direktive 2002/21 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve, s katerim je vsakemu uporabniku ali podjetju, ki zagotavlja taka omrežja in/ali storitve, podeljena pravica do pritožbe zoper odločbo, ki jo sprejme nacionalni regulativni organ in ki ga prizadeva, in pojem „zadevne“ stranke v smislu člena 16(3) te direktive, ki zadnjenavedenemu v primeru odločbe, ki se nana�a na preklic obveznosti, naloženih podjetju s (prej) pomembno tržno močjo na upo�tevnem trgu, podeljuje pravico, da je v ustreznem roku obve�čeno o tem preklicu, je treba razlagati tako, da se lahko nana�ata ne samo na podjetje s (prej) pomembno tržno močjo na upo�tevnem trgu, ki je predmet odločbe nacionalnega regulativnega organa, sprejete v postopku analize trga na podlagi člena 16 iste direktive in katere naslovnik je, ampak tudi na uporabnike in konkurente tega podjetja s (prej) pomembno tržno močjo, ki sami niso naslovniki te odločbe, vendar ta zadeva njihove pravice.
(see paras 43, 48, operative part 1)
(Glej točki 43, 48 in točko 1 izreka.)
(see para. 57, operative part 2)
(Glej točko 57 in točko 2 izreka.)
‘the TCK’) pursuant to Paragraph 37 of the 2003 Telekommunikationsgesetz (Law on Telecommunications) (BGBl. I No 70/2003; ‘the TKG’).
1 predstavljeni 15. februarja 2007 se mu prizna položaj stranke in pravica do vpogleda v dokumentacijo v okviru postopka analize trga, ki jo je izvajala Telekom-Control-Kommission (v nadaljevanju: regulativni organ ali TCK)
In this reference for a preliminary ruling, the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Higher Administrative Court) (Austria) has put two questions to the Court concerning the interpretation of Articles 4 and 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive). 2
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Avstrija) je s tem predlogom za sprejetje predhodne odločbe postavilo Sodi�ču dve vpra�anji glede razlage členov 4 in 16 Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 2002/21/ES z dne 7. marca 2002 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve (okvirna direktiva) 2.
According to Paragraph 37 of the TKG, entitled ‘Market analysis procedure’:
Člen 37 TKG z naslovom „Postopek analize trga“ določa:
I — Facts of the case, legal framework and questions referred to the Court
I – Dejansko stanje, pravni okvir in vprašanji za predhodno odločanje
The regulatory authority shall, of its own motion, carry out at regular intervals, but at least every two years, an analysis of the relevant markets established by the regulation pursuant to Paragraph 36(1), taking account of the provisions of the European Communities.
Regulativni organ v rednih časovnih obdobjih, ki niso dalj�a od dveh let, ob upo�tevanju predpisov Evropskih skupnosti, izvaja analizo upo�tevnih trgov, ki so opredeljeni na podlagi predpisa, ki ga predvideva člen 36(1).
The objective of this procedure shall be, after it has been decided whether, on a specific relevant market, one or more undertakings have significant market power or whether effective competition exists on that market, to withdraw, maintain, amend or impose specific obligations.
Cilj postopka je, potem ko je že ugotovljeno, ali ima eno ali več podjetij pomembno tržno moč ali pa na trgu vlada dejanska konkurenca, da se prekličejo, ohranijo, spremenijo ali naložijo posebne regulativne obveznosti.
Tele2 UTA Communications GmbH (‘the applicant’ or ‘Tele2’) is an Austrian undertaking providing electronic communications networks and services.
Tele2 UTA Telecommunication GmbH (v nadaljevanju: tožeča stranka ali Tele2) je avstrijsko podjetje, ki se ukvarja z dobavljanjem omrežja in storitev elektronskih komunikacij.
On 16 July 2004 it requested that it be granted the status of a party and to have access to the file in administrative market analysis proceedings being carried out by the Telekom-Control-Kommission (‘the regulatory authority’ or
Na podlagi člena 37 zakona o telekomunikacijah iz leta 2003 (Telekommunikationsgesetz, BGBl. I, 70/2003, v nadaljevanju: TKG) je 16. julija 2004 zaprosilo, da
33 (‘the Framework Directive’).
33 (v nadaljevanju: okvirna direktiva).
Where the regulatory body decides in this procedure that one or more undertakings
Če regulativni organ v tem postopku ugotovi, da ima eno ali več podjetij
Subparagraphs 1, 2, 3 and 5 shall apply as appropriate.
Smiselno se uporabljajo odstavki 1, 2, 3 in 5.
have significant market power on the relevant market and consequently no effective competition exists, it shall impose on that undertaking or those undertakings appropriate specific obligations pursuant to Paragraphs 38 to 46 or Paragraph 47(1).
pomembno tržno moč na upo�tevnem trgu in zaradi tega trg ni konkurenčen, temu ali tem podjetjem naloži posebne ustrezne regulativne obveznosti, kot določajo členi od 38 do 46 ali člen 47(1).
Existing specific obligations on undertakings shall, in so far as they concern the relevant markets, be amended or re-imposed by the regulatory authority in accordance with the results of the procedure, taking account of the regulatory objectives.
Regulativni organ na podlagi izida postopka in ob upo�tevanju ciljev predpisa spremeni oziroma ponovno naloži že obstoječe regulativne obveznosti, ki se nana�ajo na določen trg.
Only undertakings in respect of which specific obligations are imposed, amended or withdrawn shall have the status of party to these proceedings.
Samo podjetja, katerim so naložene, spremenjene ali preklicane posebne regulativne obveznosti, imajo položaj stranke v postopku.
Users and operators of communications services and networks shall be required to cooperate in proceedings conducted pursuant to Paragraphs 36 and 37 to the extent laid down in Paragraph 90.
Uporabniki in lastniki oziroma ponudniki telekomunikacijskih storitev ali omrežij morajo sodelovati v postopku, določenem v členih 36 in 37, kot je določeno v členu 90.
Where the regulatory authority decides on the basis of the procedure that effective competition exists on the relevant market and consequently no undertaking has significant market power, it may not — with the exception of Paragraph 47(2) — impose any obligations under subparagraph 2. In this case, the procedure relating to this market shall be discontinued by order of the regulatory authority without any formality having to be completed and that order shall be published.
Če regulativni organ na podlagi postopka ugotovi, da na upo�tevnem trgu vlada dejanska konkurenca in da nobeno podjetje nima prevladujočega vpliva na trgu, ne sme naložiti regulativnih obveznosti na podlagi člena 2, razen izjemoma na podlagi čle -na 47(2); v tem primeru regulativni organ izda odločbo, ki se mora objaviti, s katero se postopek zaključi.
In so far as specific obligations exist on this market, they shall be withdrawn by that order.
Če na tem trgu za podjetja �e veljajo posebne regulativne obveznosti, se odpravijo z odločbo.
An appropriate period of no more than six months, laying down the time from which the withdrawal is effective, shall also be laid down in that order.
V tej odločbi mora biti prav tako določen razumen rok, v katerem se odpravijo regulativne obveznosti, ki pa ne sme biti dalj�i od �estih mesecev.
The regulatory authority shall publish orders issued pursuant to subparagraphs 2 to 4 and shall communicate a copy thereof to the European Commission.
Regulativni organ mora objaviti odločbe, izdane na podlagi odstavkov od 2 do 4 in izročiti prepis teh odločb Evropski komisiji.
In the case of transnational markets identified by decision of the European Commission, the national regulatory authorities concerned shall carry out a market analysis
V primeru nadnacionalnih trgov, ki so opredeljeni v odločbi Evropske komisije, zadevni nacionalni regulativni organi izvajajo
Paragraph 37 of the TKG concerning the market analysis procedure implements Article 16 of the Framework Directive, also entitled ‘Market analysis procedure’, which provides as follows:
Člen 37 TKG o postopku analize trga, s katerim se prena�a člen 16 okvirne direktive z enakim naslovom „Postopek analize trga“, določa:
Where a national regulatory authority concludes that the market is effectively competitive, it shall not impose or maintain any of the specific regulatory obligations referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article.
Če nacionalni regulativni organ ugotovi, da na trgu vlada dejanska konkurenca, ne naloži ali ne ohrani nobene od posebnih regulativnih obveznosti iz odstavka 2 tega člena.
In cases where sector specific regulatory obligations already exist, it shall withdraw such obligations placed on undertakings in that relevant market.
Kadar že obstajajo sektorske regulativne obveznosti, jih za podjetja na tem upo�tevnem trgu prekliče.
As soon as possible after the adoption of the recommendation or any updating thereof, national regulatory authorities shall carry out an analysis of the relevant markets, taking the utmost account of the guidelines.
Nacionalni regulativni organi čimprej po sprejetju priporočila ali njegove morebitne dopolnitve izvedejo analizo upo�tevnih trgov, pri čemer dosledno upo�tevajo smernice.
Where a national regulatory authority determines that a relevant market is not effectively competitive, it shall identify undertakings with significant market power on that market in accordance with Article 14 and the national regulatory authority shall on such undertakings impose appropriate specific regulatory obligations referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article or maintain or amend such obligations where they already exist.
Če nacionalni regulativni organ ugotovi, da na upo�tevnem trgu ni dejanske konkurence, v skladu s členom 14 opredeli podjetja s pomembno tržno močjo na tem trgu in tem podjetjem naloži ustrezne posebne regulativne obveznosti iz odstavka 2 tega člena ali ohrani ali spremeni take obveznosti, kjer že obstajajo.
Where a national regulatory authority is required under Articles 16, 17, 18 or 19 of Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive), or Articles 7 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC [of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services] 3[‘the Access Directive’] to determine whether to impose, maintain, amend or withdraw obligations on undertakings, it shall determine on the basis of its market analysis referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article whether a relevant market is effectively competitive.
Kadar se od nacionalnega regulativnega organa po členu 16, 17, 18 ali 19 Direktive 2002/22/ES (Direktiva o univerzalnih storitvah) ali po členu 7 ali 8 Direktive 2002/19/ES [Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o dostopu do elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij in pripadajočih naprav ter o njihovem medomrežnem povezovanju (Direktiva o dostopu)] 3(v nadaljevanju: Direktiva o dostopu) zahteva, naj odloči, ali je treba za podjetja naložiti, ohraniti, spremeniti ali preklicati obveznosti, organ na podlagi svoje analize trga iz odstavka 1 tega člena odloči, ali na upo�tevnem trgu vlada dejanska konkurenca.
In the case of transnational markets identified in the Decision referred to in Article 15(4), the national regulatory authorities concerned shall jointly conduct the market analysis taking the utmost account of the guidelines and decide on any imposition, maintenance, amendment or withdrawal of regulatory obligations referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article in a concerted fashion.
Pri nadnacionalnih trgih, opredeljenih v odločbi iz člena 15(4), zadevni nacionalni regulativni organi skupaj izvedejo analizo trga, pri čemer dosledno upo�tevajo smernice, in se sporazumno odločijo o naložitvi, ohranitvi, spremembi ali preklicu regulativnih obveznosti iz odstavka 2 tega člena.
Measures taken according to the provisions of paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of this Article shall be subject to the procedures referred to in Articles 6 and 7.’ the appropriate expertise available to it to enable it to carry out its functions.
Za ukrepe, sprejete v skladu z določbami odstavkov 3, 4 in 5 tega člena, se uporabljajo postopki iz členov 6 in 7.“ imeti ustrezno strokovno znanje in izku�nje, da lahko izvaja svoje naloge.
Member States shall ensure that the merits of the case are duly taken into account and that there is an effective appeal mechanism.
Države članice zagotovijo, da se vsebina same zadeve primerno upo�teva in da je na voljo učinkovit pritožbeni mehanizem.
Pending the outcome of any such appeal, the decision of the national regulatory authority shall stand, unless the appeal body decides otherwise’.
Do končanja vsakega takega pritožbenega postopka velja odločba nacionalnega regulativnega organa, razen če pritožbeni organ ne odloči drugače.“
By a decision of 6 September 2004, the regulatory authority turned down Tele2’s request to be granted the status of a party to the market analysis proceedings the ground that, under Paragraph 37(5) of the TKG, only undertakings in respect of which specific obligations had been imposed, amended or withdrawn, and such undertakings alone, could be parties to market analysis proceedings, which was specifically not the case in regard to the applicant.
Regulativni organ je z odločbo z dne 6. septembra 2004 zavrnil zahtevo družbe Tele2 za priznanje položaja stranke v postopku analize trga z obrazložitvijo, da so na podlagi člena 37(5) TKG stranke v postopku analize trga lahko le podjetja, katerim so bile naložene, spremenjene ali preklicane posebne regulativne obveznosti, medtem ko pri tožeči stranki ni �lo za tak primer.
According to the applicant, a decision adopted by the TCK in the course of market analysis proceedings constitutes a decision within the meaning of the Framework Directive which ‘affects’ not only the particular undertaking in respect of which specific regulatory obligations were imposed, amended or withdrawn but also its competitors.
Po mnenju tožeče stranke je odločba TCK, sprejeta v okviru postopka analize trga, odločba v smislu okvirne direktive, ki „prizadene“ ne le konkretno podjetje, ki so mu bile naložene, spremenjene ali preklicane posebne regulativne obveznosti, temveč tudi njegove konkurente.
The result of that market analysis directly determines the rights which a competitor of the dominant undertaking has in respect of that undertaking.
Rezultat analize trga neposredno vpliva na pravice, ki jih imajo konkurenti prevladujočega podjetja v razmerju do slednjega.
The applicant lodged an appeal against that decision before the Verwaltungsgerichtshof on the ground that the national provision in Paragraph 37(5) of the TKG was contrary to Article 4(1) of the Framework Directive, which provides for a ‘right of appeal’.
Tožeča stranka je zoper to odločbo pri Verwaltungsgerichtshof vložila tožbo, v kateri je zatrjevala, da naj bi bil člen 37(5) TKG v nasprotju s členom 4(1) okvirne direktive, ki določa „pravico do pritožbe“.
According to the latter provision, ‘Member States shall ensure that effective mechanisms exist at national level under which any user or undertaking providing electronic communications networks and/or services who is affected by a decision of a national regulatory authority has the right of appeal against the decision to an appeal body that is independent of the parties involved.
Na podlagi slednjega člena „[d]ržave članice poskrbijo, da so na nacionalni ravni na voljo učinkoviti mehanizmi, po katerih ima vsak uporabnik ali podjetje, ki zagotavlja elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in/ali storitve ter je prizadet z odločbo nacionalnega regulativnega organa, pravico do pritožbe zoper odločbo pri pritožbenem organu, ki je neodvisen od udeleženih strank.
This body, which may be a court, shall have
Ta organ, ki je lahko sodi�če, mora
For its part, the defendant authority takes the view that Article 4(1) of the Framework Directive provides no indication as to who is ‘affected’ by a specific decision.
Regulativni organ meni, da v členu 4(1) okvirne direktive ni opredeljeno, kdo je „prizadet“ s konkretno določbo.
The mandatory consultation procedure under Article 6 of the Framework Directive guarantees that competitors of the undertaking directly affected are integrated into the market analysis procedure.
Obvezen postopek posvetovanja, določen v členu 6 okvirne direktive, zagotavlja, da so konkurenti neposredno prizadetega podjetja vključeni v postopek analize trga.
Article 6, entitled ‘Consultation and transparency mechanism’ provides that ‘[e]xcept in cases falling within Articles 7(6), 20 or 21, Member States shall ensure that where national regulatory authorities intend to take measures in accordance with this Directive or the specific directives which have a significant impact on the relevant market, they give interested
Ta člen z naslovom „Mehanizmi posvetovanja in preglednosti“ določa, da „razen v primerih iz členov 7(6), 20 ali 21 države članice zagotovijo, da nacionalni regulativni organi, kadar nameravajo sprejeti ukrepe v skladu s to direktivo ali posebnimi direktivami, ki bodo imeli znaten vpliv na zadevni trg, zainteresiranim strankam dajo možnost, da v primernem roku izrazijo svoje stali�če
The results of the consultation procedure shall be made publicly available by the national regulatory authority, except in the case of confidential information in accordance with Community and national law on business confidentiality’.
Ali člen 4 Direktive 2002/21/ES nasprotuje nacionalni določbi, ki predpisuje, da ima zgolj podjetje, kateremu so naložene, spremenjene ali preklicane posebne regulativne obveznosti, položaj stranke v postopku analize trga?“
Under those conditions, having regard to the need to interpret Articles 4(1) and 16(3) of the Framework Directive, the Verwaltungsgerichtshof decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following two questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
Ali se člena 4 in 16 Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 2002/21/ES z dne 7. marca 2002 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve (okvirna direktiva) razlagata tako, da se za ‚prizadete stranke‘ �teje tudi taka podjetja, ki konkurirajo na upo�tevnem trgu, in katerim niso naložene, ohranjene ali spremenjene posebne regulativne obveznosti v okviru postopka analize trga?
The main proceedings originated in a request by Tele2 to the TCK that it be granted the status of a party, in other words, that it be granted the right to take part in the market analysis proceedings conducted by the regulatory authority.
Postopek v glavni stvari se nana�a na zahtevo družbe Tele2, naslovljeno na TCK, da se ji prizna položaj stranke oziroma da se ji omogoči sodelovanje v postopku analize trga, ki jo izvaja regulativni organ.
As can be seen from the order for reference, under Austrian administrative law, the status of a party to market analysis proceedings involves, among other things, the right to consult the file, the right to be informed of the results of the procedure for administration of the evidence and to comment on it, and the right of appeal.
Kot izhaja iz predložitvenega sklepa, ima stranka v postopku analize trga na podlagi avstrijskega upravnega prava med drugim tudi pravico do vpogleda v spis, pravico do seznanitve z rezultati izvajanja dokazov in predstavitve svojih stali�č glede teh rezultatov ter pravico do pravnega sredstva.
It follows that, under Austrian law, only those who have the status of party to market analysis proceedings have a right of appeal.
Po avstrijskem pravu imajo pravico do pravnega sredstva samo tisti, ki imajo položaj stranke v postopku analize trga.
It is that link in Austrian law between the status as a party and the right of appeal which explains the relevance of the first question inasmuch as it concerns the question whether Article 4 of the Framework Directive requires that an undertaking such as the applicant in the main proceedings be granted a right of appeal, in the circumstances of this case, against decisions adopted by the national regulatory authority in the course of market analysis proceedings.
Ta zveza med položajem stranke in pravico do vlaganja pravnega sredstva po avstrijskem pravu utemeljuje pomembnost prvega vpra�anja glede tega, ali iz člena 4 okvirne direktive izhaja, da ima podjetje, kot v primeru tožeče stranke v postopku v glavni stvari, v okviru postopka analize trga pravico do pravnega sredstva zoper odločbo nacionalnega regulativnega organa.
The national court’s first question to the Court of Justice is thus essentially whether Article 4 of the Framework Directive must be interpreted as conferring on undertakings such as the applicant in the main proceedings a right of appeal against decisions of a regulatory body such as the TCK.
S prvim vpra�anjem predložitveno sodi�če v bistvu spra�uje, ali je člen 4 okvirne direktive mogoče razlagati tako, da ima podjetje, kot je tožeča stranka v postopku v glavni stvari, pravico do vlaganja pravnega sredstva zoper odločbo regulativnega organa, kot je v tem primeru TCK.
In the context of that question, it also must be determined whether the concept of ‘parties affected’ set out in Article 16(3) of the Framework Directive includes undertakings such as the applicant in the main proceedings.
V okviru tega vpra�anja se zastavlja tudi vpra�anje, ali je „stranka, ki jo zadeva preklic obveznosti“, kot izhaja iz člena 16(3) okvirne direktive, lahko podjetje, kot je tožeča stranka v postopku v glavni stvari.
By its second question, the national court seeks to ascertain whether it follows from Article 4 of the Framework Directive that, if an undertaking such as the applicant in the main proceedings has a right of appeal against decisions adopted by a regulatory authority in the course of an administrative market analysis, it must also be entitled to take part in the non-adversarial proceedings as a party.
Z drugim vpra�anjem pa predložitveno sodi�če želi izvedeti, ali iz člena 4 okvirne direktive izhaja, da ima podjetje, kot je tožeča stranka v postopku v glavni stvari, če ima pravico do vlaganja pravnega sredstva zoper odločbe regulativnega organa v postopku analize trga, tudi pravico do sodelovanja v postopku kot stranka.
A — The first question
A – Prvo vprašanje
Does Article 4 of the Framework Directive provide judicial protection to persons who are not the persons to whom a regulatory authority’s decision is addressed but
Ali člen 4 okvirne direktive zagotavlja sodno varstvo tudi osebam, na katere se odločba regulativnega organa ne nana�a, vendar ima odločba za njih negativne posle-