natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
At issue here are capital costs, which play a central role in relation to telephone networks, which are, obviously, highly capital
Tu gre za stro�ke kapitala, ki imajo osrednjo vlogo v okviru telefonskih omrežij, ki so očitno visoko kapitalsko intenzivne naprave.
ARCOR they can be passed on and recovered by the notified operator by means of the prices charged to competing operators for access to its local loop.
ARCOR lahko prenese in izterja s cenami, ki jih zaračunava konkurenčnim obratovalcem za dostop do svoje krajevne zanke.
intensive installations. Apparently, depreciation of the assets deployed and interest on the capital invested actually account for the major part of the costs inherent in the provision of telecommunications services.
Odpisi uporabljenih sredstev in obresti od vloženega kapitala obsegajo baje celo največji delež stro�kov opravljanja telekomunikacijskih storitev.
I therefore propose that the Court reply to the second question submitted by the referring court, to the effect that where Article 3(3) of the regulation lays down a requirement that prices charged for local loop access must be set on the basis of costorientation, this also includes imputed interest and costaccounting depreciation.
Sodi�ču torej predlagam, naj na drugo vpra�anje predložitvenega sodi�ča odgovori tako, da člen 3(3) Uredbe s tem, da določa obveznost stro�kovne naravnanosti cen, zaračunanih za dostop do krajevne zanke, zajema tudi računovodske obresti in odpise.
D — The third question
D – Tretje vprašanje
As regards depreciation, this consists of spreading the capital cost of fixed assets subject to wear and tear over time (costs which are generally committed in the form of an initial lump sum) over the economic lifetime of those assets.
Odpisi prikazujejo razpr�itev stro�kov kapitala osnovnih sredstev, podvrženih časovni obrabi (stro�ki, ki praviloma nastanejo v obliki začetnega pav�alnega zneska) v ekonomski življenjski dobi teh sredstev.
This cost spreading, expressed in annual amounts known as ‘depreciation charges’, is set against the income earned, obviously not in the form of an initial lump sum, but throughout the lifetime of the fixed assets used to provide the service in question.
Ta razpr�itev stro�kov, izražena v letnih zneskih, imenovanih „odpisi“, lahko spremlja prihodke, ki očitno ne bodo nastali v obliki začetnega pav�alnega zneska, ampak v življenjski dobi osnovnih sredstev, uporabljenih za opravljanje zadevne storitve.
As regards interest, if a notified operator’s liabilities include finance in the form of loans used, for example, to invest in the local loop, the interest payable to the lenders will naturally form part of the notified operator’s costs.
Glede obresti, če obveznosti prigla�enega obratovalca vključujejo financiranje z najetjem posojila, ki se na primer uporabi za vlaganje v krajevno zanko, bodo obresti, ki se plačajo posojilodajalcem, seveda del stro�kov prigla�enega obratovalca.
This question brings us to the central issue in this case.
To vpra�anje zadeva jedro zadeve.
What basis should be used for calculating interest and depreciation?
Katera podlaga se uporablja za izračun računovodskih odpisov in obresti?
The current replacement value of the assets, expressed in terms of current daily prices at the time of valuation exclusively?
Izključno trenutna nadomestna vrednost sredstev, izražena v dnevnih cenah v trenutku vrednotenja?
Or should depreciation already made prior to the time of valuation be deducted from the replacement value?
Ali pa je treba od te nadomestne vrednosti od�teti odpise, že opravljene pred trenutkom vrednotenja?
There can be no doubt that depreciation and interest on capital invested are costs forming part of an undertaking’s normal business and, therefore, constitute elements of that undertaking’s costs.
Odpisi in obresti od vloženega kapitala so nedvomno stro�ki, ki so del običajnega poslovanja podjetja in tako del stro�kov tega podjetja.
30 — Paragraph 4 of Annex V of Directive 97/33 shows how depreciation and capital costs are to be included in the costaccounting system.
30 – Točka 4 Priloge V k Direktivi 97/33 kaže, kako so odpisi in finančni stro�ki vključeni v sistem stro�kovnega računovodstva.
The regulation is silent as to the method to be used for calculating costs in order to ensure that prices are cost-orientated. It
Besedilo Uredbe ne pove ničesar o metodi izračuna stro�kov, ki jo je treba uporabiti za upo�tevanje stro�kovne naravnanosti cen.
costorientation of prices, the Community legislature was recommending that reference should be had to the Commission’s position on these matters as set out in those two documents.
Skupnosti pri razlagi osrednjega pojma, kot je stro�kovna naravnanost cen, priporočil, da je treba upo�tevati stali�če, ki ga je Komisija v zvezi s tem sprejela v teh dveh dokumentih.
For example, we find that paragraph 6 of Recommendation 2000/417 concerned with pricing, specifically with regard to capital costs, states that ‘[i]n principle, a forwardlooking approach based on current costs … will foster fair and sustainable competition and provide alternative investment incentives.
V členu 1(6) Priporočila 2000/417 o oblikovanju cen pi�e posebej o stro�kih kapitala, da bo „v prihodnost usmerjen pristop, ki temelji na trenutnih stro�kih […], praviloma okrepil po�teno in trajnostno konkurenco ter ponudil alternativne investicijske spodbude; če pa je lahko kratkoročna posledica tega izkrivljenje konkurence, na primer takrat, ko tarife […] prigla�enega obratovalca ostanejo neuravnove�ene na podlagi tekočih stro�kov, je priporočljivo, da nacionalni regulativni organ […] določi razumno časovno obdobje, potrebno za postopno prilagajanje cen krajevne zanke tekočim stro�kom“.
However, if this could result in distortions of competition in the short term, for example where the notified operator’s tariffs remain unbalanced on the basis of current costs, it is recommended that the national regulatory authority … specify the reasonable time period necessary for the gradual adjustment to current costs of the price of local loops.’
Isto priporočilo opisuje trenutne stro�ke kot stro�ke „izgradnje učinkovite moderne ustrezne infrastrukture“. 32
Despite the absence of express guidance in the regulation concerning the method to be used to calculate costs, Annex V (concerning the costaccounting system for interconnection) of Directive 97/33, which forms an integral part of the regulatory framework which the regulation is intended to complement, seems to allow, for the purpose of assessing prices, either the current replacement cost (that is to say ‘based on estimated replacement costs of equipment or systems’), or costs ‘based on actual expenditure incurred for equipment and systems’.
Čeprav izrecne navedbe v Uredbi glede metode izračuna stro�kov ne obstajajo, se zdi, da Direktiva 97/33, ki je sestavni del regulativnega okvira, ki ga dopolnjuje Uredba, v Prilogi V o sistemu stro�kovnega računovodstva za medomrežno povezovanje dopu�ča, da se lahko pri preverjanju cen uporabijo trenutni nadomestitveni stro�ki (se pravi, stro�ki, „ki temeljijo na oceni nadomestitvenih stro�kov za opremo ali sisteme“) ali stro�ki, „ki temeljijo na dejansko nastalih stro�kih za opremo in sisteme“.
For its part, paragraph 6 of the Commission’s Communication of 26 April 2000 states that, with regard to prices and costs, the national regulatory authorities are required to abide by a series of rules.
Sporočilo Komisije z dne 26. aprila 2000 v točki 6 navaja, da morajo nacionalni regulativni organi glede cen in stro�kov upo�tevati več načel.
Firstly, the rules
Prvič, pravila izračunavanja
In addition, recital (13) of the regulation expressly refers to the Commission Recommendation 2000/417 and the Commission’s Communication of 26 April 2000, 31stating that they give detailed guidance to assist national regulatory authorities in the regulation of local loop access.
Uvodna izjava 13 Uredbe se poleg tega izrecno sklicuje na Priporočilo Komisije 2000/417 in sporočilo Komisije z dne 26. aprila 2000 31, ko navaja, da dajeta podrobne smernice za podporo nacionalnim regulativnim organom glede urejanja dostopa do krajevne zanke.
This reference may, properly, be considered as an indication that, when interpreting a central concept such as
To sklicevanje se lahko upravičeno �teje za opozorilo, da je normodajalec
31 — Recommendation 2000/417 of 25 May 2000 on unbundled access to the local loop: enabling the competitive provision of a full range of electronic communication services, including broadband multimedia and highspeed Internet (OJ 2000 C 272, p. 55).
31 – Razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke, ki omogoča konkurenčno zagotavljanje vseh elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev, vključno s �tiripasovnimi večpredstavnostnimi in z internetnimi storitvami za hitri prenos (UL C 272, str. 55).
32 — See footnote 15 of the recommendation (emphasis added).
32 – Glej opombo 15 v Priporočilu, moj poudarek.
In the annex to a previous Recommendation — Commission Recommendation 98/322/EC of 8 April 1998 (OJ 1998 L 141, p.
V Dodatku k prej�njemu priporočilu – Priporočilo Komisije 98/322/ES z dne 8. aprila 1998 (UL L 141, str.
6) which was adopted on the basis of Directive 97/33 — we find a different interpretation of current costs.
6), ki je bilo sprejeto na podlagi Direktive 97/33 – najdemo drugačen pojem trenutnih stro�kov.
The current cost is described either as the intrinsic value of the asset or the net replacement cost, depending which of these is lower.
Trenutni stro�ki so opisani kot notranja vrednost sredstev oziroma neto nadomestitveni stro�ki, glede na to, kateri so nižji.
The current cost of the asset is limited by the net replacement cost and the latter is described as ‘the cost of replacing the asset with another asset of similar characteristics and age.’ Emphasis added.
Trenutni stro�ki sredstev so omejeni z zneskom neto nadomestitvenih stro�kov, ki so opisani kot „cena, ki se plača za nadomestitev sredstev z drugimi sredstvi, podobne starosti, in s podobnimi značilnostmi“, moj poudarek.
It is on this 1998 recommendation that Arcor has essentially based its position.
Družba Arcor opira svoje stali�če predvsem na to priporočilo iz leta 1998.
ARCOR aims, also show that there are limits inherent in the concept of costorientation and those limits must, in any event, be respected.
ARCOR ki se jim zdi najprimernej�a. Vendar isti elementi in predvsem Uredba, obravnavana z vidika razloga za njeno sprejetje in njenih ciljev, razkrivajo tudi, da obstajajo omejitve pojma stro�kovne naravnanosti, ki se morajo v vsakem primeru upo�tevati.
on costing and pricing should be transparent and objectively based.
stro�kov in cen bi morala biti pregledna ter z objektivnimi temelji.
Secondly, pricing rules should ensure that the incumbent operator is able to cover its relevant costs plus a reasonable return.
Drugič, pravila izračunavanja cen bi morala prvotnemu obratovalcu zagotavljati pokrivanje njegovih stro�kov in primeren donos.
They should also be compatible with the aim of fostering fair and sustainable competition and providing efficient incentives for investment in infrastructure.
Morala bi biti združljiva s ciljem krepitve po�tene in sprejemljive konkurence ter zagotavljati učinkovite spodbude v vlaganje v omrežje infrastrukture.
On this point, in the same Communication, the Commission also states that, in principle, this aim can be achieved by adopting a pricing system based on current costs.
Komisija poleg tega v istem sporočilu glede tega trdi, da se ta cilj načeloma lahko zagotovi s sistemom oblikovanja cen, ki temelji na tekočih stro�kih.
This Communication uses the same concept of current costs, which was also used in Recommendation 2000/417.
To sporočilo upo�teva isti pojem tekočih stro�kov, ki je bil izražen v Priporočilu 2000/417.
Lastly, the pricing rules must ensure that there is no market distortion, in particular margin squeezes between the prices of wholesale and retail services offered by the incumbent.
Nazadnje, pravila izračunavanja cen bi morala zagotoviti, da ne pride do izkrivljanja trga, zlasti do krčenja marž med cenami veleprodajnih in drobnoprodajnih storitev, ki jih ponuja prvotni obratovalec.
Next, the Commission points out that, in some cases, these principles may conflict with each other.
Komisija nato opozarja, da si lahko ta načela v nekaterih primerih nasprotujejo.
In those circumstances, national regulatory authorities may have to consider transitional measures that avoid distorting competition in the short term.
V takih okoli�činah je mogoče, da bodo morali nacionalni regulativni organi preučiti prehodne ukrepe, ki se kratkoročno izogibajo izkrivljanju konkurence.
Fundamentally, it is important to bear in mind that a decision such as that at issue here, which set rates for access to the notified operator’s local loop, must be reached by striking a balance between two conflicting principles.
V bistvu je treba upo�tevati, da se mora odločba, kot se obravnava v tej zadevi, ki določa cene dostopa do krajevne zanke prigla�enega obratovalca, sprejeti z iskanjem ravnovesja med nasprotnima načeloma.
On the one hand, the essential purpose of the regulation is to ensure effect- ive and immediate unbundling of local loop access and the consequent fostering of competition on the local access market.
Na eni strani je bistveni cilj Uredbe, da se zagotovi dejanski in takoj�en razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke ter posledično spodbujanje konkurence na trgu krajevnega dostopa.
But, on the other, the approved rates must not be set at such a level that they might deter investment in infrastructure.
Na drugi strani pa dovoljene cene ne smejo biti na taki ravni, da bi preprečevale vlaganje v infrastrukture.
When properly interpreted, the concept of costorientation laid down in the regulation thus sets as a limit the requirement that a decision approving rates for access based on costorientation must be reached as a result of the balanced and proportionate consideration of these two principles. 33
Pravilno razložen pojem stro�kovne naravnanosti iz Uredbe tako kot omejitev nalaga, da se odločba o odobritvi cen dostopa glede na stro�ke sprejme na podlagi uravnove�enega in sorazmernega upo�tevanja teh dveh načel. 33
By adopting a method of calculating the costs represented by depreciation and interest, which is based exclusively on the
Sprejetje metode izračuna stro�kov, ki predstavljajo odpise in obresti, ki temeljijo
33 — See, in the same vein, the position adopted by the Court in SENA, cited above, paragraph 36 and, more recently, Case C-192/04 Lagardère Active Broadcast [2005] ECR I-7199, paragraph 49.
33 – Glej v enakem smislu stali�če, ki ga je Sodi�če sprejelo v zgoraj navedeni sodbi SENA, točka 36, in pred kratkim v sodbi z dne 14. julija 2005 v zadevi Lagardère Active Broadcast (C-192/04, ZOdl., str. I-7199, točka 49).
The evidential background which I have just presented shows that the national regulatory authorities have considerable discretion in selecting and applying the method for calculating the relevant costs of the notified operation which they consider to be most appropriate, depending on the specific circumstances of each Member State at the time when prices are being assessed.
Elementi, ki sem jih predstavil, razkrivajo, da imajo nacionalni regulativni organi �iroko diskrecijsko pravico, da glede na okoli�čine v vsaki državi članici v trenutku preučitve cen izberejo in uporabijo metodo izračuna stro�kov prigla�enega obratovalca,
A situation could, for example, arise in which the existing network, although fully depreciated, was, at the time the obligation requiring unbundling of local loop access was imposed, very close to the end of its useful life and, therefore, of very low intrinsic value.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da je Komisija v Odločbi 2003/707/ES ugotovila, da so cene, ki se izpodbijajo v tej zadevi in so bile določene z odločbo nem�kega regulativnega organa z dne 30. marca 2001, povzročile zmanj�anje marže, in sicer s kr�itvijo člena 82 ES, ki jo je družba Deutsche Telekom izvajala do maja 2003.
a significant price reduction which would persuade them to change their telecommunications services provider.
35Ne da bi vnaprej sodili o njeni izključno na vrednosti nadomestitve po trenutnih cenah krajevnega omrežja z enakovrednim učinkovitim in sodobnim omrežjem – se pravi, na bruto nadomestitvenih stro -�kih sredstev –, lahko upo�teva potrebno ravnovesje med obema načeloma.
In this connection, it is worth pointing out that, in Decision 2003/707/EC, the Commission took the view that the rates being contested in the present case, which were set by the decision of the German regulatory authority of 30 March 2001, had resulted in a margin squeeze contrary to Article 82 EC, committed by Deutsche Telekom over the period up to May 2003.
Pomislimo lahko predvsem na položaj, v katerem je bilo obstoječe, čeprav popolnoma amortizirano omrežje v trenutku, ko je bila naložena obveznost razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke, zelo blizu konca svoje življenjske dobe in tako z zelo nizko notranjo vrednostjo.
34This Commission decision is currently the subject of an action before the Court of First Instance.
V takih okoli�činah se lahko dejstvo, da nacionalni regulativni organ daje prednost modelu, ki temelji na bruto nadomestitvenih stro�kih, izkaže za popolnoma upravičeno in sorazmerno, če je spodbujanje k vlaganju v izgradnjo nove infrastrukture cilj, ki je res prednosten.
35Without prejudging the merits of the decision, it may legitimately raise doubts concerning the extent to which the rates approval decision at issue secures investment in infrastructure in a balanced and proportionate manner in relation to the regulation’s primary objective of fostering competition on the market for access to the local metallic wire loop.
utemeljenosti, lahko ta odločba upravičeno zbuja dvom o tem, v kolik�nem obsegu sporna odločba o odobritvi cen zagotavlja uravnove�eno in sorazmerno vlaganje v infrastrukturo glede na primarni cilj Uredbe, da se spodbuja konkurenca na trgu žičnega dostopa do krajevnega omrežja.
However, where, as seems to be the case here, we are dealing with a local network which is usable and is used in practice, and which still has significant intrinsic value and is already depreciated (at least partially), use of the calculation method based on gross replacement cost on the face of it attaches disproportionate importance to investment incentives.
Vendar, kadar se kot v tem primeru obravnava krajevno omrežje, ki je uporabno in se uporablja v praksi s �e precej�njo notranjo in že (vsaj delno) amortizirano vrednostjo, uporaba metode izračuna, ki temelji na bruto nadomestitvenih stro�kih, prima facie daje nesorazmeren pomen spodbujanju k vlaganju.
The Community concept of costorientation in fact requires equivalent consideration to be given to both of the principles described above.
Skupnostni pojem stro�kovne naravnanosti namreč zahteva uravnove�eno upo�tevanje obeh navedenih načel.
Where, with regard to access to an existing and usable local network such as the Deutsche Telekom network, a national regulatory authority uses gross replacement cost in order to determine the interest and depreciation which the rates must cover, the rates approval decision in question cannot leave any room for doubts as to whether a balance has been struck between creating investment incentives (which the adoption of such
Kadar se nacionalni regulativni organ v okviru dostopa do obstoječega in uporabnega krajevnega omrežja, kot je omrežje družbe Deutsche Telekom, opre na bruto nadomestitvene stro�ke za določitev obresti in odpisov, ki jih morajo pokriti cene, zadevna odločba o odobritvi cen ne sme zbujati dvomov o upo�tevanju ravnovesja med spodbujanjem k vlaganju (ki ga sprejetje take metode očitno
34 — Decision of 21 May 2003 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty (Cases COMP/C-1/37.578, 37.579 — Deutsche Telekom AG) (OJ 2003 L 263, p. 9).
34 – Odločba z dne 21. maja 2003 o postopku na podlagi člena 82 Pogodbe ES (Zadeve COMP/C-1/37.578, 37.579 – Deutsche Telekom AG, UL L 263, str. 9).
See, in particular, recitals (24), (199), (207) (211) and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of that decision.
Glej predvsem uvodne izjave 24, 199, 207 in 211 ter člene 1, 2 in 3 te odločbe.
The adoption of such a method is likely to reduce the margin for new competing entrants to the market to offer consumers
Sprejetje take metode lahko zmanj�a maržo konkurenčnih obratovalcev, ki so
ARCOR a method is clearly intended to achieve) and the fostering of competition on the market for local loop access.
ARCOR želi zagotoviti) in spodbujanjem konkurence na trgu dostopa do krajevne zanke.
The lack of competition at local loop level in Europe, as at 1 January 2001, was precisely the reason why the regulation was adopted, and everything indicates that, at the time of the rates approval decision in question, 30 March 2001, competition on the local network market in Germany was very limited.
Prav neobstoj konkurence na ravni krajevne zanke v Evropi 1. januarja 2001 je bil razlog za sprejetje Uredbe in vse kaže, da je bila 30. marca 2001, v času zadevne odobritve cen, v Nemčiji konkurenca na trgu krajevnega omrežja zelo majhna.
To avoid such ‘duplicate’ costs, two options will be open to a competing operator.
Da bi se izognil takim „dvojnim“ stro�kom, ima konkurenčni obratovalec dve možnosti.
Firstly, it can start building its own network and decide not to request access to the notified operator’s local loop.
Najprej lahko začne izgradnjo svojega omrežja in se odreče zahtevi po dostopu do krajevne zanke prigla�enega obratovalca.
This option is likely to help the notified operator to maintain its dominant position on the local access network, which is precisely the opposite of what the regulation is intended to achieve.
Taka možnost lahko prigla�enemu obratovalcu olaj�a ohranitev prevladujočega položaja na ravni krajevnega dostopa, kar je ravno v nasprotju s tem, kar želi doseči Uredba.
Alternatively, the competing operator will have the option of deciding not to build its own network and to request access.
Konkurenčni obratovalec ima �e drugo možnost, da se odpove izgradnji svojega omrežja in zahteva dostop.
In this case, it will be required to pay the notified operator a charge which, as it is based on gross replacement cost, is designed to enable the notified operator to build a new network.
V tem primeru mora prigla�enemu obratovalcu plačati ceno, katere namen je, ker temelji na bruto nadomestitvenih stro�kih, omogočiti prigla�enemu obratovalcu, da zgradi novo omrežje.
However, it is clear that the notified operator is obviously not obliged to do this, and is thus free to use the proceeds from the charges received for any other purpose.
Vendar je jasno, da prigla�eni obratovalec tega očitno ni zavezan storiti in tako lahko prihodek od cen uporabi v katere koli druge namene.
It must be acknowledged that the adoption of a calculation method based exclusively on current replacement costs means that, in order to gain access to the existing network, competing operators have to pay the same amount that they would have to pay in order to build a new equivalent network.
Treba je ugotoviti, da sprejetje metode izračuna, ki temelji izključno na trenutnih nadomestitvenih stro�kih, zahteva, da morajo konkurenčni obratovalci za dostop do obstoječega omrežja plačati isti znesek, kot ga morajo plačati za gradnjo enakovrednega novega omrežja.
The above considerations show that, unless the rates approval decision clearly demonstrates that the two principles referred to have been properly taken into account in a balanced manner, then, in circumstances in which the notified operator’s network is still operational and usable, the adoption of a method based on gross replacement cost is incompatible with the principle of costorientation and the aims of the regulation.
Te ugotovitve razkrivajo, da sprejetje metode, ki temelji na bruto nadomestitvenih stro�kih, ko je krajevno omrežje prigla�enega obratovalca �e operativno in uporabno, ni združljivo z načelom stro�kovne naravnanosti in cilji Uredbe, razen če zahtevek za odobritev cen jasno kaže, da sta se obe navedeni načeli ustrezno in uravnoteženo upo�tevali.