natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Measures aimed at regulating the exercise of exclusive television broadcasting rights to events of major importance for society, adopted by a Member State and approved by a Commission decision finding them to be compatible with Community law, impose certain restrictions on television broadcasters.
Ukrepi, namenjeni reguliranju izvr�evanja ekskluzivnih pravic televizijskega raz�irjanja dogodkov velikega družbenega pomena, ki jih je sprejela država članica in ki so bili odobreni z odločbo Komisije, ki ugotavlja njihovo skladnost s pravom Skupnosti, izdajateljem televizijskih programov nalagajo določeno �tevilo omejitev.
Since those restrictions are linked to the circumstances in which those broadcasters acquire the television broadcasting rights to designated events from the holder of the exclusive television rights, the effect of the measures adopted by that Member State and of the decision approving them is to subject the rights held by a company which has acquired the television broadcasting rights to new restrictions which did not exist when it acquired those rights and which render their exercise more difficult.
Glede na to, da so te omejitve vezane na pogoje, pod katerimi ti izdajatelji pridobijo pravice televizijskega prenosa dogodkov s seznama od družbe, ki je imetnik pravic raz�irjanja televizijskih programov, imajo ukrepi, ki jih je sprejela ta država članica, in odločba, s katero so bili odobreni, za posledico uskladitev pravic, ki jih ima družba, ki je pridobila pravice televizijskega prenosa, z novimi omejitvami, ki niso obstajale v trenutku, ko je ta družba pridobila navedene pravice, in ki otežijo njihovo izvr�evanje.
Thus, such a Commission decision directly affects the legal situation of the holder of those rights.
Tako taka odločba Komisije neposredno vpliva na pravni položaj imetnika teh pravic.
Moreover, the prejudice to that right-holder’s legal situation is due solely to the requirement to attain the result determined by those measures and the Commission decision, without the national authorities having any discretion, which could affect that situation, in the implementation of that decision.
Poleg tega je vzrok poseganja v pravni položaj navedenega imetnika pravic le zahteva po dosegu tega rezultata, ki je določen s temi ukrepi in z odločbo Komisije, pri čemer nacionalni organi nimajo nobene diskrecijske pravice pri izvajanju te odločbe, ki lahko vpliva na ta položaj.
(see paras 50-52, 59, 62, 63)
(Glej točke od 50 do 52, 59, 62 in 63.)
(see paras 70-72)
(Glej točke od 70 do 72.)
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERALBOT delivered on 18 October 2007 1
SKLEPNI PREDLOGI GENERALNEGA PRAVOBRANILCAYVESA BOTA, predstavljeni 18. oktobra 2007 1
The legal framework for the present appeal is provided by Council Directive 89/552/EEC, 2which covers television broadcasting activities in the common market and is intended to ensure the free movement of television services between the Member States.
Pravni okvir te pritožbe je Direktiva Sveta 89/552/EGS 2o televizijski radiodifuziji na skupnem trgu, ki je namenjena zagotavljanju prostega pretoka televizijskih storitev med državami članicami.
If the Commission considers that those measures do comply, it publishes them in the Official Journal of the European Com­munities and such publication obliges the other Member States to ensure that television broadcasters established in their territory comply with them, if they broadcast to the Member State which established the measures.
Če Komisija ugotovi skladnost teh ukrepov, jih objavi v Uradnem listu Evropskih skupnosti, pri čemer ta objava za druge države članice učinkuje kot obveznost, v skladu s katero morajo združenja za televizijsko radiodifuzijo, ki so ustanovljena na njihovem ozemlju in oddajajo v državo članico, ki jih je določila, te ukrepe spo�tovati.
In its judgment of 15 December 2005 in Infront WM v Commission, 3the Court of
V sodbi z dne 15. decembra 2005 v zadevi Infront WM proti Komisiji 3je
Article 3a of the Directive enables a Member State to decide that events which it considers to be particularly important for society, such as the Olympic Games or the football World Cup, must be broadcast in its territory on free television accessible to a high proportion of the population.
Člen 3a Direktive državi članici omogoča sprejeti odločbo, da se morajo dogodki, ki jih �teje za družbeno posebej pomembne, kot so olimpijske igre in svetovno prvenstvo v nogometu, na njenem ozemlju oddajati na televizijskem programu, ki je prosto dostopen visokemu deležu prebivalstva.
That article provides that the measures taken by a Member State for that purpose must be notified to the Commission of the European Communities which is to verify their compliance with Community law.
Ta člen določa, da je treba o sprejetih ukrepih države članice obvestiti Komisijo Evropskih skupnosti, ki preveri njihovo skladnost s pravom Skupnosti.
First Instance of the European Communities held that the action brought by Infront WM AG, formerly KirchMedia WM AG, 4 against the decision of 28 July 2000 adopted by the Commission under Article 3a of the Directive was admissible and well-founded. That decision had found the measures notified by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to be in compliance with Community law.
Sodi�če prve stopnje za dopustno razglasilo in ugodilo tožbi družbe Infront WM AG, prej KirchMedia WM AG 4zoper odločbo Komisije z dne 28. julija 2000, sprejeto v skladu s členom 3a Direktive, s katero je bila ugotovljena skladnost ukrepov Združenega kraljestva Velika Britanija in Severna Irska s pravom Skupnosti.
2 — Directive of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 1989 L 298, p.
2 – Direktiva Sveta z dne 3. oktobra 1989 o usklajevanju nekaterih zakonov in drugih predpisov držav članic o opravljanju dejavnosti raz�irjanja televizijskih programov (UL L 298, str.
60) (hereinafter ‘the Directive’).
60, imenovana Direktiva o „televiziji brez meja“, v nadaljevanju: Direktiva).
Article 3a of the Directive was inserted by Directive 97/36.
Člen 3a je bil vstavljen z Direktivo 97/36.
It is worded as follows:
Njegovo besedilo je naslednje:
The Court of First Instance held that the decision by which the Commission found the measures to be compliant was a challengeable act.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je presodilo, da je odločba Komisije o ugotovitvi te skladnosti akt, ki ga je mogoče izpodbijati.
It also held that Infront, which engages in the purchase and resale of rights to broadcast sporting events, was directly and individually concerned by that decision, since it was the holder, for the countries of Europe for the years 2002 and 2006, of the exclusive broadcasting rights in respect of the football World Cup finals organised by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and those events were included among the events of major importance referred to in the measures notified to the Commission by the United Kingdom.
Prav tako je presodilo, da je ta odločba neposredno in posamično zadevala družbo Infront, ki je kupovala in preprodajala pravice prenosa �portnih dogodkov, saj je bila imetnica izključnih pravic prenosa sklepnega dela svetovnega prvenstva v nogometu za države evropske celine za leti 2002 in 2006, ki ga organizira Mednarodna nogometna zveza (FIFA), ta dogodka pa sta sodila med dogodke velikega družbenega pomena, kot so bili navedeni v ukrepih, o katerih je Združeno kraljestvo Velika Britanija in Severna Irska (v nadaljevanju tudi: Združeno kraljestvo) obvestilo Komisijo.
In the present appeal, the Commission does not challenge the Court of First Instance’s analysis according to which the decision which the Commission is required to take as part of the procedure under Article 3a of the Directive does constitute a challengeable act.
Komisija v tej pritožbi ne prereka analize Sodi�ča prve stopnje, na podlagi katere je bilo ugotovljeno, da je mogoče izpodbijati odločbo, ki jo je bila Komisija dolžna sprejeti v postopku iz člena 3(a) Direktive.
On the other hand, it disputes the assessment that Infront was directly and individually concerned by the decision finding that the measures notified by the United Kingdom complied with Community law.
Prereka pa presojo, da se je odločba o skladnosti ukrepov, ki jih je sporočilo Združeno kraljestvo, neposredno in posamično nana�ala na družbo Infront.
Each Member State may take measures in accordance with Community law to ensure that broadcasters under its jurisdiction do not broadcast on an exclusive basis events which are regarded by that Member State as being of major importance for society in such a way as to deprive a substantial proportion of the public in that Member State of the possibility of following such events via live coverage or deferred coverage on free television.
Vsaka država članica sme sprejeti ukrepe v skladu s pravom Skupnosti, s katerimi zagotovi, da izdajatelji televizijskih programov pod njeno sodno pristojnostjo ne raz�irjajo tistih dogodkov, ki v tej državi članici veljajo za dogodke velikega družbenega pomena, na ekskluzivni osnovi, s čimer bi večji delež javnosti v tej državi članici prikraj�ali za možnost spremljanja tak�nih dogodkov prek neposrednega prenosa ali prek poznej�ega prenosa na brezplačni televiziji.
If it does so, the Member State concerned shall draw up a list of designated events, national or non-national, which it considers to be of major importance for society.
Če stori tako, mora zadevna država članica sestaviti seznam določenih nacionalnih ali drugih dogodkov, ki zanjo veljajo kot dogodki velikega družbenega pomena.
It shall do so in a clear and transparent manner in due and effective time.
To stori jasno in pregledno ter pravočasno in učinkovito.
In so doing the Member State concerned shall also determine whether these events should be available via whole or partial live coverage, or where necessary or appropriate for objective reasons in the public interest, whole or partial deferred coverage.
Pri tem zadevna država članica določi tudi to, ali morajo biti tak�ni dogodki dostopni v celotnem ali delnem neposrednem prenosu, ali v primerih, ko je to potrebno ali primerno iz objektivnih razlogov javnega interesa, v celotnem ali delnem poznej�em prenosu.
Member States shall immediately notify to the Commission any measures taken or to be taken pursuant to paragraph 1.
Države članice Komisijo takoj obvestijo o vsakem ukrepu, ki so ga ali ga bodo sprejele v skladu z odstavkom 1.
Within a period of three months from the notification, the Commission shall verify that such measures are compatible with Community law
Komisija v treh letih od dneva obvestila preveri, ali so tak�ni ukrepi skladni s pravom Skupnosti in o
In the present Opinion, I shall show that the Court of First Instance did not, in my view, err in law when finding that Infront had standing to bring the proceedings.
V teh sklepnih predlogih bom prikazal, da Sodi�če prve stopnje pri presoji procesnega upravičenja družbe Infront po mojem mnenju ni napačno uporabilo prava.
II — The facts which gave rise to dispute and communicate them to the other Member States.
II – Dejansko stanje njih obvesti druge države članice.
It shall seek the opinion of the [Contact] Committee established pursuant to Article 23a [composed of representatives of the competent authorities of the Member States].
Komisija zaprosi za mnenje odbora, ki je bil ustanovljen v skladu s členom 23a.
It shall forthwith publish the measures taken in the Official Journal of the Euro­pean Communities and at least once a year the consolidated list of the measures taken by Member States.
Sprejete ukrepe takoj objavi v Uradnem listu Evropskih skupnosti, najmanj enkrat letno pa objavi tudi konsolidirani seznam ukrepov, ki so jih sprejele države članice.
The facts set out in the judgment under appeal which seem to me to be necessary for an understanding of the legal problems raised by the Commission’s appeal are the following.
V izpodbijani sodbi prikazano dejansko stanje, ki je po mojem mnenju nujno za razumevanje v pritožbi navedenih pravnih vpra�anj, je naslednje.
Infront is involved in the acquisition, management and marketing of television broadcasting rights for sporting events and typically purchases those rights from the event’s organiser.
Družba Infront, ki se je prej imenovala KirchMedia WM AG, odkupuje, upravlja in trži pravice televizijskega prenosa �portnih dogodkov in jih ponavadi odkupuje od organizatorjev teh dogodkov.
It resells the rights thus acquired to broadcasters.
Tako pridobljene pravice dalje prodaja izdajateljem televizijskih programov.
Member States shall ensure, by appropriate means, within the framework of their legislation that broadcasters under their jurisdiction do not exercise the exclusive rights purchased by those broadcasters following the date of publication of this Directive in such a way that a substantial proportion of the public in another Member State is deprived of the possibility of following events which are designated by that other Member State in accordance with the preceding paragraphs via whole or partial live coverage or, where necessary or appropriate for objective reasons in the public interest, whole or partial deferred coverage on free television as determined by that other Member State in accordance with paragraph 1.’
Države članice z ustreznimi sredstvi v skladu s svojimi zakonodajami zagotovijo, da izdajatelji televizijskih programov pod njihovo sodno pristojnostjo ne izvajajo ekskluzivnih pravic, ki so jih ti izdajatelji televizijskih programov kupili po datumu objave te direktive, s čimer bi večji delež javnosti v drugi državi članici prikraj�ali za možnost spremljanja dogodkov, ki jih je ta druga država članica določila v skladu s predhodnimi odstavki, bodisi v celotnem ali delnem neposrednem prenosu bodisi v primerih, ko je to potrebno ali primerno iz objektivnih razlogov javnega interesa, v celotnem ali delnem poznej�em prenosu na brezplačni televiziji, kar je ta druga država določila v skladu z odstavkom 1.“
Infront was assigned by its parent company the exclusive broadcasting rights, which that company had acquired from FIFA for a minimum price of CHF 1.4 billion, in respect of the FIFA World Cup finals for the countries of Europe, except the Federal Republic of Germany, for Russia and the other former Republics of the Soviet Union and for Turkey.
Družbi Infront je njena matična družba prenesla izključne pravice za prenos sklepnega dela svetovnega prvenstva FIFE za države celinske Evrope z izjemo Zvezne republike Nemčije, Ruske republike, preostalih nekdanjih republik biv�e Sovjetske zveze in Turčije, ki jih je od FIFE pridobila za ceno najmanj 1,4 milijarde �vicarskih frankov.
The United Kingdom notified the Commission on 25 September 1998, then by letter of 5 May 2000, of the measures
Združeno kraljestvo je 25. septembra 1998 in pozneje v dopisu z dne 5. maja 2000 Komisijo obvestilo o ukrepih, sprejetih v
The meaning of ‘broadcaster’ is defined in Article 1(b) of the Directive as ‘the natural or legal person who has editorial responsibility for the composition of schedules of television programmes within the meaning of (a) and who transmits them or has them transmitted by third parties’.
Člen 1(b) Direktive pojem „izdajatelj televizijskih programov“ opredeljuje kot „fizično ali pravno osebo, ki je uredni�ko odgovorna za sestavo televizijskih programov v smislu točke (a) in ki te programe prena�a ali jih zanj prena�ajo tretje osebe.“
On 18 November 2000, the Commission, in accordance with Article 3a(2) of the Directive, published the measures in question.
Komisija je 18. novembra 2000 v skladu s členom 3a(2) Direktive objavila sporne ukrepe.
Those measures include extracts from United Kingdom legislation and the list of events of major importance for society in that Member State, including the FIFA World Cup finals.
Ti ukrepi obsegajo izvlečke zakonodaje Združenega kraljestva ter seznam dogodkov velikega družbenega pomena za to državo članico, med njimi sklepni del svetovnega prvenstva FIFE.
By letter of 22 January 2001, the Commission, in reply to Infront’s requests by letters of 7 and 22 December 2000, informed it that the verification procedure for the measures notified by the United Kingdom had been completed and that the list of events was regarded as being compatible with Community law.
Družba Infront je v dopisu Komisiji z dne 14. julija 2000 predlagala, naj se seznam Združenega kraljestva ne odobri, ker ni združljiv niti s členom 3a Direktive niti z drugimi določbami prava Skupnosti. Trdila je zlasti, da zadevni seznam ni bil izdan jasno in pregledno, da zajema dogodke, ki niso velikega pomena za britansko družbo, da imajo postopki posvetovanja, opravljeni na nacionalni ravni in na ravni Skupnosti, hude pomanjkljivosti in da sporna ureditev velja za nazaj.
By letter of 14 July 2000, addressed to the Commission, Infront submitted that the list drawn up by the United Kingdom could not be approved because it was incompatible both with Article 3a of the Directive and with other provisions of Community law.
V dopisu z dne 22. januarja 2001 je Komisija družbi Infront na njena pisna vpra�anja iz dopisov z dne 7. in 22. decembra 2000 odgovorila, da je postopek preskusa ukrepov, ki jih je sporočilo Združeno kraljestvo, zaključen in da je seznam dogodkov �tela za skladnega s pravom Skupnosti.
On 28 July 2000, the Director-General of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Education and Culture sent a letter to the United Kingdom stating that the measures notified by that Member State concerning the television coverage of events of national interest in the United Kingdom gave rise to no objection on the Commission’s part.
Generalni direktor generalnega direktorata (DG) Komisije „Izobraževanje in kultura“ je Združeno kraljestvo v dopisu z dne 28. julija 2000 obvestil, da Komisija ne nasprotuje ukrepom, ki jih je ta država članica sporočila v zvezi s pokrivanjem televizijskih dogodkov nacionalnega interesa za Združeno kraljestvo.
By letter of 7 November 2000, Infront informed the Commission that it was aware of that approval and complained of the infringement of its property rights.
Družba Infront je 12. februarja 2001 pri Sodi�ču prve stopnje vložila tožbo za razglasitev ničnosti dela oziroma celotne odločbe Komisije, izdane na podlagi člena 3a Direktive, s katero je bila ugotovljena združljivost ukrepov, ki jih je sporočilo Združeno kraljestvo, s pravom Skupnosti.
On 12 February 2001, Infront brought an action before the Court of First Instance for the annulment, in whole or in part, of the Commission’s decision under Article 3a of the Directive that the measures notified by the United Kingdom were compatible with Community law.
Družba Infront je Komisijo z dopisom z dne 7. novembra 2000 obvestila, da je seznanjena s to odobritvijo, in opozorila na kr�itev njene lastninske pravice.
By separate document of 11 June 2001, the Commission raised an objection, under Article 114 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, to the admissibility of that action.
Komisija je v dopisu z dne 11. junija 2001 podala ugovor nedopustnosti tožbe na podlagi člena 114 Poslovnika Sodi�ča prve stopnje.
The Court reserved its decision on that objection for the final judgment.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je odločitev o tem ugovoru pridržalo do končne razsodbe.
It also granted the Kingdom of Denmark, the French Republic, the United Kingdom, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union leave to intervene in support of the forms of order sought by the Commission.
Prav tako je Kraljevini Danski, Francoski republiki in Združenemu kraljestvu ter Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu Evropske unije dovolilo intervencijo v podporo predlogom Komisije.
The Council lodged no pleading.
Svet ni podal predlogov.
The Court of First Instance held that the contested letter produced legal effects for the Member States since it envisaged publication in the Official Journal of the measures notified to the Commission and such publication triggered the mechanism for mutual recognition laid down by Article 3a(3) of the Directive.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je menilo, da ustvarja izpodbijani dopis pravne posledice za države članice, s tem da predvideva objavo Komisiji sporočenih ukrepov v Uradnem listu in da ta objava sproža postopek vzajemnega priznavanja, določen v členu 3a(3) Direktive.
It stated that publication informed the Member States of the existence of those measures and enabled them to comply with their obligations under that provision. 6
Pojasnilo je, da ta objava državam članicam omogoča seznanitev z ukrepi in izpolnitev obveznosti iz navedene določbe. 6
IV — The judgment under appeal
IV – Izpodbijana sodba
In the Court of First Instance’s view, Article 3a(2) of the Directive confers on the Commission the power to make a decision, notwithstanding the fact that the provision does not expressly refer to the adoption by the Commission of a ‘decision’. 7
Sodi�če prve stopnje meni, da ima Komisija na podlagi člena 3a(2) pristojnost odločanja, čeprav v tej določbi ni izrecno navedeno, da ta institucija sprejme „odločbo“. 7
The Court of First Instance held that the contested measure was the letter of 28 July 2000, in which the Commission informed the United Kingdom that the measures adopted by that Member State under Article 3a of the Directive were compatible with Community law.
Spomnilo je na to, da �tejejo v skladu z ustaljeno sodno prakso za akte ali odločitve,
The Court of First Instance then examined Infront’s standing to bring the proceedings.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je nato preizkusilo procesno upravičenje družbe Infront.
It held that Infront was directly and individually concerned by the contested letter for the following reasons.
Štelo je, da jo izpodbijani dopis neposredno in posamično zadeva iz naslednjih razlogov.
As regards the first case, the Court of First Instance held that Infront was not directly concerned by the contested measure because the approval, by the Commission, of the measures notified by the United Kingdom had no bearing on their applicability in that Member State. 9
Sodi�če prve stopnje je v zvezi s prvim primerom presodilo, da izpodbijani akt družbe Infront ni neposredno zadeval, ker s strani Komisije izdana odobritev ukrepov, ki jih je sporočilo Združeno kraljestvo, ne vpliva na njihovo veljavnost v tej državi članici. 9
The Court of First Instance noted, first of all, that it has consistently been held that, in order to be of direct concern to an individual within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC, the Community measure in question must directly affect the applicant’s legal situation and its implementation must be purely automatic and result from Community rules alone without the application of other intermediate rules. 8
Sodi�če prve stopnje je najprej opozorilo na to, da lahko sporni akt Skupnosti, v smislu člena 230(4) ES, posameznika neposredno zadeva le, če učinkuje neposredno na njegov pravni položaj in njegovo izvajanje nastopi samodejno ter izhaja že iz zakonodaje Skupnosti, ne da bi bili za njegovo uporabo potrebni drugi izvedbeni ukrepi. 8
It noted, in that regard, that the measures entered into force in the United Kingdom prior to their notification to the Commission and were therefore capable of producing legal effects there before such notification.
V zvezi s tem je navedlo, da so začeli ukrepi v tej državi članici veljati, preden so bili sporočeni Komisiji, in bi torej v njej lahko učinkovali tudi pred tem.
It concluded that the Commission, by the contested letter, could neither grant the United Kingdom prior authorisation to adopt those measures nor authorise their retrospective maintenance, but only enabled that State to profit from their mutual recognition by the other Member States. 10
Na podlagi tega je sklepalo, da Komisija z izpodbijanim aktom Združenemu kraljestvu ne bi mogla izdati niti predhodne odobritve navedenih ukrepov niti njihove odobritve za nazaj, temveč bi tej državi članici le omogočila, da njene ukrepe vzajemno priznajo druge države članice. 10