natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
When applying the principle that rates for unbundled access to the local loop are to be set on the basis of costorientation, laid down in Article 3(3) of Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop, in order to determine the calculation basis of the costs of the notified operator, the national regulatory authorities have to take account of actual costs, namely costs already paid by the notified operator and forwardlooking costs, the latter being based, where relevant, on an estimation of the costs of replacing the network or certain parts thereof.
V okviru uporabe načela stro�kovne naravnanosti cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke iz člena 3(3) Uredbe (ES) �t. 2887/2000 o razvezanem dostopu do krajevne zanke morajo nacionalni regulativni organi pri določanju osnove za izračun stro�kov prigla�enega obratovalca upo�tevati dejanske stro�ke, in sicer stro�ke, ki jih je prigla�eni obratovalec že plačal, ter predvidene stro�ke, pri čemer slednji po potrebi temeljijo na oceni stro�kov zamenjave omrežja ali nekaterih njegovih elementov.
In that regard, the calculation basis of costs cannot be based exclusively either on the costs which represent the construction ex nihilo by an operator, other than the notified operator, of a new local access infrastructure for the provision of equivalent telecommunications services (‘the current cost’) or on the costs actually incurred by the notified operator and taking account of depreciation already made (‘the historic cost’).
Glede tega izračun stro�kov ne more temeljiti izključno niti na stro�kih, ki bi jih imel z izgradnjo ex nihilo nove infrastrukture krajevnega dostopa za zagotavljanje enakovrednih telekomunikacijskih storitev (tekoči stro�ki), niti na stro�kih, ki jih prigla�eni obratovalec dejansko nosi ob upo�tevanju izvedene amortizacije (pretekli stro�ki).
In fixing the tariffs for unbundled access to the local loop, account must be taken of the costs which the notified operator had to incur for the investments made in putting its local infrastructures in place.
Pri določanju cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke je namreč treba upo�tevati stro�ke, ki jih je imel prigla�eni obratovalec v okviru naložb, izvedenih za vzpostavitev krajevne infrastrukture.
In that regard, the interest on the capital invested represents the revenue which would have been earned on that capital had it not been invested in the local loop while the interest on loans represents the cost of the debt incurred in connection with investments made in the initial implementation of the local loop.
V zvezi s tem obresti na vloženi kapital pomenijo prihodek, ki bi ga ta kapital prinesel, če ne bi bil vložen v krajevno zanko, medtem ko obresti na posojila pomenijo stro�ke dolga v okviru naložb, izvedenih za vzpostavitev krajevne zanke.
The depreciation of the fixed assets deployed for the construction of the local network, the taking into account of which makes it possible to catch the loss in real value of those assets, relates to the investments made by the notified operator in the initial implementation of the local loop and, consequently, falls within the operating costs which need to be taken into account in accordance with the pricing principle laid down in Article 3(3) of Regulation No 2887/2000.
Amortizacija osnovnih sredstev, uporabljenih za vzpostavitev krajevnega omrežja – z upo�tevanjem katere se nadome�ča zmanj�evanje dejanske vrednosti teh sredstev – pa se nana�a na naložbe, ki jih mora prigla�eni obratovalec izvesti za vzpostavitev krajevne zanke, in zato sodi med stro�ke uporabe, ki jih je treba upo�tevati v skladu z načelom oblikovanja cen iz člena 3(3) Uredbe �t. 2887/2000.
The taking into account of only one or other of those bases is likely to call into question the aim of that regulation, namely to intensify competition through the setting of harmonised conditions for
Izključno upo�tevanje ene ali druge osnove bi namreč lahko ogrozilo cilj te uredbe, in sicer okrepitev konkurence z določitvijo usklajenih pogojev
(see paras 72, 77-80, 84, operative part 1)
(Glej točke 72, od 77 do 80, 84 ter točko 1 izreka.)
unbundled access to the local loop, in order to foster the competitive provision of a wide range of electronic communications services.
za razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke, da se tako pospe�i konkurenčno zagotavljanje �irokega nabora elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev.
Pursuant to Article 4(2)(b) of Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop, the national regulatory authority may request notified operators to supply relevant information on the documents justifying the costs taken into account when applying the principle that rates for unbundled access to the local loop are to be set on the basis of costorientation.
Nacionalni regulativni organ lahko na podlagi člena 4(2)(b) Uredbe �t. 2887/2000 od prigla�enega obratovalca zahteva, da mu predloži primerne informacije o listinah, ki izkazujejo stro�ke, ki se upo�tevajo v okviru uporabe načela stro�kovne naravnanosti cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke.
Since Community law does not contain any provision concerning the accounting documents to be checked, it is the task of the national regulatory authorities alone, in accordance with the law applicable, to examine whether, for the purposes of cost accounting, the documents produced are the most appropriate ones.
Glede na to, da v pravu Skupnosti ni določb v zvezi z računovodskimi listinami, ki bi se preverjale, o tem, ali so predložene listine najprimernej�e za potrebe stro�kovnega računovodstva, v skladu z veljavnim pravom odločajo izključno nacionalni regulativni organi.
First, the possibility for the notified operator to base the calculation basis of costs exclusively on the current costs of its investments enables it to choose those which could enable it to set the rates as high as possible and not to take account of pricing elements which would favour beneficiaries, thereby circumventing the rules concerning the setting of rates for unbundled access to the local loop on the basis of costorientation.
Tako možnost, da za osnovo za izračun stro�kov uporabi izključno tekoče stro�ke svojih naložb, prigla�enemu obratovalcu pravzaprav omogoča, da izbere tiste, na podlagi katerih ima možnost določiti najvi�je mogoče cene za razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke, in da prezre elemente oblikovanja cen, ki bi koristili upravičencem, s čimer dejansko obide pravila o določanju cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke na podlagi stro�kov.
Secondly, if the cost calculation basis were based exclusively on historic costs, which, depending of the age of the network, could potentially lead to account being taken of an almost entirely depreciated network and thus result in a very low tariff, the notified operator would be faced with unjustified disadvantages which is precisely what Regulation No 2887/2000 seeks to prevent.
Če pa se za osnovo za izračun stro�kov uporabijo izključno pretekli stro�ki – kar bi glede na starost omrežja morebiti narekovalo upo�tevanje že skorajda amortiziranega omrežja, to pa bi pomenilo zelo nizke cene – se prigla�eni obratovalec znajde v položaju, ko je neupravičeno o�kodovan, prav to pa je tisto, kar se želi preprečiti z Uredbo �t. 2887/2000.
In the absence of evidence to establish to the required legal standard that the Community legislature opted for either a bottomup or a top-down accounting mode 1, it is for the national regulatory authorities, on the basis of the applicable law, to choose the cost accounting method which they deem most appropriate in a specific case.
Ker ni določb, ki bi z zadostno verjetnostjo izkazovale opredeljenost zakonodajalca Skupnosti za računovodski model od spodaj navzgor ali od zgoraj navzdol, je nacionalnim regulativnim organom dopu�čeno, da na podlagi veljavnega prava izberejo metode stro�kovnega računovodstva, ki se jim zdijo glede na primer najustreznej�e.
Accordingly, when national regulatory authorities are applying the principle that rates for unbundled access to the local loop are to be set on the basis of costorientation, Community law does not preclude them, in the absence of complete and comprehensible accounting documents, from
Zato pravo Skupnosti ne izključuje možnosti, da se nacionalni regulativni organi v okviru uporabe načela stro�kovne naravnanosti cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke, če ni na voljo popolnih in razumljivih računovodskih listin, pri
(see paras 86, 98, 104, 108, 109, 119, operative part 2)
(Glej točke 86, 98, 104, 108, 109, 119 in točko 2 izreka.)
determining the costs on the basis of an analytical bottomup or top-down cost model.
določanju stro�kov oprejo na analitični model stro�kov od spodaj navzgor ali od zgoraj navzdol.
(see paras 127, 131, 132, 134, operative parts 3-4)
(Glej točke 127, 131, 132, 134 ter točki 3 in 4 izreka.)
It is apparent from Article 4(1) and (2) of Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop that, when examining the rates of notified operators for the provision of unbundled access to their local loop in light of the pricing principle laid down in Article 3(3) of that regulation, the national regulatory authorities have a broad discretion concerning the assessment of the various aspects of those tariffs, including the discretion to change prices, and thus the proposed tariffs.
Iz določb člena 4(1) in (2) Uredbe �t. 2887/2000 o razvezanem dostopu do krajevne zanke izhaja, da imajo nacionalni regulativni organi pri preizku�anju cen, ki jih prigla�eni obratovalci zaračunavajo za zagotavljanje razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke, ob upo�tevanju načela oblikovanja cen iz člena 3(3) navedene uredbe �iroke pristojnosti, ki obsegajo presojo različnih vidikov teh cen in celo spreminjanje predlaganih cen.
That broad discretion also relates to the costs incurred by notified operators, such as interest on invested capital and depreciation of fixed assets, the calculation basis of those costs and the cost accounting models used to prove them.
Te �iroke pristojnosti se nana�ajo tudi na stro�ke, ki jih imajo prigla�eni obratovalci, na primer na obresti na vloženi kapital in amortizacijo osnovnih sredstev, na osnovo za izračun teh stro�kov in na modele računovodskega izkaza navedenih stro�kov.
(see para. 159, operative part 6)
(Glej točko 159 in točko 6 izreka.)
The possibility granted to the Member States, in Article 1(4) of Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop, to adopt detailed national measures cannot render inapplicable the principle that rates for unbundled access to the local loop are to be set on the basis of costorientation as laid down in Article 3(3) of that regulation.
Podrobnej�i nacionalni ukrepi, katerih uvedbo državam članicam omogoča člen 1(4) Uredbe �t. 2887/2000 o razve -zanem dostopu do krajevne zanke, ne smejo preprečiti učinkovanja načela stro�kovne naravnanosti cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke iz čle -na 3(3) navedene uredbe.
That possibility of maintaining in force or introducing measures containing more detailed provisions authorises the Member States to lay down provisions of national law giving concrete expression to the principle that rates for access to the local loop are to be set on the basis of costorientation, in the context of the discretion which the Member States enjoy in the field, but, in any event, that discretion cannot derogate from the principles and limits laid down in Article 1(4) of the regulation.
Ta možnost ohranitve ali uvedbe ukrepov s podrobnej�imi določbami države članice poobla�ča, da v svojo nacionalno zakonodajo vnesejo določbe, s katerimi podrobneje opredelijo načelo stro�kovne naravnanosti cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke v okviru diskrecijske pravice, ki jo imajo na tem področju, vendar se s to diskrecijsko pravico v nobenem primeru ne sme kr�iti načel in omejitev, postavljenih v členu 1(4) navedene uredbe.
It is a matter solely for the Member States, within the context of their procedural autonomy, to determine, in accordance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness of judicial protection, the competent court, the nature of the dispute and, consequently, the detailed rules of judicial review with respect to decisions of the national regulatory authorities concerning the authorisation of rates of notified operators for unbundled access to their local loop.
Države članice so v okviru procesne avtonomije, ki jo uživajo, ob upo�tevanju načel enakovrednosti in učinkovitosti sodnega varstva izključno pristojne za določanje pristojnih sodi�č, vrste spora in zato tudi oblike sodnega nadzora v zvezi z odločitvami nacionalnih regulativnih organov o odobritvi cen prigla�enih obratovalcev za razvezani dostop do njihove krajevne zanke.
In those circumstances, the national
Glede na to mora nacionalno sodi�če zagotoviti, da se obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz Uredbe
(see paras 143, 146, 150, operative part 5)
(Glej točke 143, 146, 150 in točko 5 izreka.)
ARCOR regulation, whose rights are potentially affected by it.
ARCOR v smislu navedene uredbe, na katerih pravice lahko take odločitve vplivajo.
(see para.
(Glej točko 178 in točko 8 izreka.)
(see para. 170, operative part 7)
(Glej točko 170 in točko 7 izreka)
Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop must be interpreted as meaning that, during the procedure supervising the pricing for unbundled access to the local loop conducted by a national regulatory authority pursuant to Article 4 of that regulation, it is for the notified operator to provide the evidence that its rates respect the principle that rates are to be set on the basis of costorientation.
Uredbo �t. 2887/2000 o razvezanem dostopu do krajevne zanke je treba razlagati tako, da mora v postopku nadzora nad oblikovanjem cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke, ki ga nacionalni regulativni organ vodi v skladu s členom 4 navedene uredbe, dokaz, da njegove cene upo�tevajo načelo stro�kovne naravnanosti cen, predložiti prigla�eni obratovalec.
On the other hand, it is for the Member States to allocate the burden of proof between the national regulatory authority which made the decision to authorise the rates of the notified operator and the beneficiary challenging that decision.
Države članice pa morajo določiti, kak�na je porazdelitev dokaznega bremena med nacionalnim regulativnim organom, ki je sprejel odločitev o odobritvi cen prigla�enega obratovalca, in upravičencem, ki to odločitev izpodbija.
It is also for the Member States to establish, in accordance with their rules of procedure and the Community principles of effectiveness and equivalence of judicial protection, the rules on the allocation of that burden of proof when a decision of the national regulatory authority authorising the rates of a notified operator for unbundled access to its local loop is challenged before the courts.
Države članice morajo v skladu s svojimi procesnimi pravili in ob upo�tevanju skupnostnih načel učinkovitosti in enakovrednosti sodnega varstva določiti tudi pravila porazdelitve tega dokaznega bremena za primer sodnega izpodbijanja odločitve nacionalnega regulativnega organa o odobritvi cen prigla�enega obratovalca za razvezani dostop do njegove krajevne zanke.
Article 4(1) of Regulation No 2887/2000 on unbundled access to the local loop, read in conjunction with Article 5a(3) of Council Directive 90/387 on the establishment of the internal market for telecommunications services through the implementation of open network provision, as amended by Directive 97/51, requires that the national courts interpret and apply the domestic rules of procedure governing the bringing of appeals in such a way that a decision of the national regulatory authority concerning the authorisation of rates for unbundled access to the local loop may be challenged before the courts, not only by the undertaking to which such a decision is addressed but also by beneficiaries, within the meaning of that
Člen 4(1) Uredbe �t. 2887/2000 o razvezanem dostopu do krajevne zanke, v zvezi s členom 5a(3) Direktive 90/387/EGS o vzpostavitvi notranjega trga za telekomunikacijske storitve z uvedbo zagotavljanja odprtosti omrežij, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 97/51/ES, zahteva, da nacionalna sodi�ča notranja procesna pravila, ki urejajo vlaganje pritožb, razlagajo in uporabljajo tako, da lahko odločitev nacionalnega regulativnega organa o odobritvi cen razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke sodno izpodbija ne le podjetje, ki je naslovnik take odločitve, temveč tudi upravičenci
(see para. 192, operative part 9)
(Glej točko 192 in točko 9 izreka.)
OPINION OF MR MADURO — CASE C-55/06
POIARESA MADURA – ZADEVA C-55/06
1 delivered on 18 July 2007
POIARESA MADURA, predstavljeni 18. julija 2007 1
Council of 18 December 2000 on unbundled access to the local loop 2 (‘the regulation’).
Sveta z dne 18. decembra 2000 o razvezanem dostopu do krajevne zanke 2.
I — The facts, the legal background and the questions referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling
I – Dejansko stanje, pravni okvir in Sodišču predložena vprašanja za predhodno odločanje
The background to the case which gave rise to the present referral from the Verwaltungsgericht Köln (Administrative Court, Cologne) (Germany) may be summarised as follows: according to Community and national law, the former monopoly operator of a fixed telephone network is required to permit competing operators to use its local network.
Ozadje tega predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe Verwaltungsgericht Köln (Nemčija) lahko povzamemo tako: nekdanji monopolni obratovalec fiksnega telefonskega omrežja mora v skladu s pravom Skupnosti in z nacionalnim pravom konkurenčnim obratovalcem omogočiti uporabo svojega krajevnega omrežja.
However, that operator is charging a price which a competing operator, as a beneficiary of access to the network, is disputing as being too high.
Vendar pa zahteva ceno, ki jo konkurenčni obratovalec, upravičen do dostopa do omrežja, izpodbija kot previsoko.
This is the situation which prompted the Verwaltungsgericht Köln to submit to the Court wide-ranging and analytical set of questions which relate, directly or indirectly, to the interpretation of a key concept involved in the liberalisation of the provision of telecommunications ser -vices in Europe: namely the principle that the prices charged for unbundled access to the local loop (that is to say the copper wire pair circuits connecting subscribers to the nearest distributors), should be set on the basis of ‘cost-orientation’.
Zato je Verwaltungsgericht Köln dobilo priložnost, da Sodi�ču postavi obsežna in analitična vpra�anja, ki neposredno in posredno zadevajo razlago ključnega pojma v okviru liberalizacije opravljanja telekomunikacijskih storitev v Evropi: in sicer ali so zahtevane cene za razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke (to so bakreni žični pari, ki povezujejo naročnike z najbližjimi glavnimi razdelilniki) „stro�kovno“ naravnane.
These are the circumstances in which the Court has been called upon for the first time to consider the interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 2887/2000 of the European Parliament and of the
Sodi�če mora v teh okoli�činah prvič obravnavati razlago Uredbe (ES) �t. 2887/2000 Evropskega parlamenta in
According to that Article, notified operator means ‘operators of fixed public telephone networks that have been designated by their national regulatory authority as having significant market power in the provision of fixed public telephone networks.’
V skladu s tem členom gre za „obratovalc[a] fiksnih javnih telefonskih omrežij, ki [ga] je [njegov] nacionalni regulativni organ imenoval za obratovalc[a] s pomembno tržno močjo pri zagotavljanju fiksnih javnih telefonskih omrežij“.
ARCOR tions for unbundled access to the local loop, to foster the competitive provision of a wide range of electronic communications services.
ARCOR pogojev za razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke, da bi se pospe�ilo konkurenčno zagotavljanje �irokega nabora elektronskih komunikacijskih storitev.
Arcor AG & Co KG, (‘Arcor’) is a beneficiary within the meaning of Article 2(b) of the regulation. According to that provision, ‘beneficiary’ means ‘a third party duly authorised … or entitled to provide communications services under national legislation, and which is eligible for unbundled access to a local loop’. The concept of ‘local loop’ is defined by Article 2(c) of the regulation as ‘the physical twisted metallic pair circuit connecting the network termination point at the subscriber’s premises to the main distribution frame or equivalent facility in the fixed public telephone network.’ 2.
Družba Arcor AG & Co. KG (v nadaljevanju: Arcor) je upravičenec v smislu člena 2(b) Uredbe. V skladu s to določbo je upravičenec „tretj[a] oseb[a], ki je ustrezno poobla�čena […] ali upravičena do opravljanja komunikacijskih storitev po nacionalni zakonodaji in ima pravico do razvezanega dostopa do krajevne zanke“. Pojem „krajevna zanka“ je v členu 2(c) Uredbe opredeljen kot „fizični vod posukanih kovinskih parov v fiksnem javnem telefonskem omrežju, ki povezuje omrežno priključno točko v naročnikovih objektih z glavnim razdelilnikom ali enakovredno napravo“. 2.
This Regulation shall apply to unbundled access to the local loops and related facilities of notified operators as defined in Article 2(a).
Ta uredba se uporablja za razvezani dostop do krajevnih zank in pripadajočih zmogljivosti prigla�enih obratovalcev, kot je določeno v členu 2(a).
Arcor provides ISDN telephone connections to final customers, but these can only be used if it has access to the relevant local loop on the Deutsche Telekom telecommunications network.
Družba Arcor zagotavlja telefonske povezave ISDN končnim uporabnikom, povezave, ki pa se lahko uporabljajo samo, če ima dostop do ustrezne krajevne zanke v telekomunikacijskem omrežju družbe Deutsche Telekom.
This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to the obligations for notified operators to comply with the principle of nondiscrimination, when using the fixed public telephone network in order to provide high speed access and transmission services to third parties in the same manner as they provide for their own services or to their associated companies, in accordance with Community provisions.
Ta uredba se uporablja brez poseganja v obveznosti prigla�enih obratovalcev, da v skladu s predpisi Skupnosti izpolnijo načelo nediskriminacije, kadar z uporabo fiksnega javnega telefonskega omrežja za tretje osebe zagotavljajo hitre dostopovne in prenosne storitve na enak način, kot jih zagotavljajo za svoje lastne storitve ali za svoja povezana podjetja.
Article 1 of the regulation, entitled ‘Aim and scope’, is worded as follows:
Člen 1 Uredbe, z naslovom „Cilj in področje uporabe“, določa:
This Regulation aims at intensifying competition and stimulating technologi- cal innovation on the local access market, through the setting of harmonised condi-
Cilj te uredbe je okrepiti konkurenco in spodbuditi tehnolo�ke inovacije na trgu krajevnega dostopa z določitvijo usklajenih
This Regulation is without prejudice to the rights of Member States to maintain or introduce measures in conformity with Community law which contain more detailed provisions than those set out in this Regulation and/or are outside the scope of this Regulation inter alia with respect to other types of access to local infrastructures.’
Ta uredba ne posega v pravice držav članic, da v skladu z zakonodajo Skupnosti ohranijo ali uvedejo ukrepe, ki vsebujejo podrobnej�e določbe, kot so tiste, ki jih vsebuje ta uredba in/ali ne spadajo v področje uporabe te uredbe, med drugim v zvezi z drugimi vrstami dostopa do lokalnih infrastruktur.“
According to Article 3 of the regulation, entitled ‘Provision of unbundled access’: access to the local loop and related facilities set on the basis of cost-orientation.’
Člen 3 Uredbe, z naslovom „Zagotavljanje razvezanega dostopa“, določa:
According to German law and in particu- lar Paragraph 24(1) and (2) of the Tele- communications Law (Telekommunikationsgesetz) of 25 July 1996, 3 rates are to be
Brez poseganja v člen 4(4) prigla�eni obratovalci zaračunavajo cene za razvezani dostop do krajevne zanke in do pripadajočih zmogljivosti na podlagi stro�kovne naravnanosti.“