Apr 8, 2008

Naknada za uporabu cestovne infrastrukture u Sloveniji

Slobodna Dalmacija izvješćuje o uvođenju vignetta za korištenje cestovne infrastrukture u Sloveniji. Problem je u tome što se ne predviđa mogućnost plaćanja za kratko korištenje od npr. 10 dana kao u Austriji, već je potrebno kupiti vinjetu za najmanje 6 mjeseci po cijeni od € 35.

Postavlja se pitanje je li takvo rješenje neproporcionalno ograničenje slobode kretanja usluga zbog toga što usluge kojima se primatelji usluga iz drugih država članica koriste samo povremeno ili jednokratno čini manje atraktivnim. Npr. Korisnik turističkih usluga koji jednom godišnje putuje na odmor iz Češke Republike na Bled mora platiti € 35 za korištenje cca. 15 km autoceste.

Možda je moguća argumentacija analogijom iz para. 37 presude u predmetu Dirk Rüffert:

37 As the Advocate General stated at point 103 of his Opinion, by requiring undertakings performing public works contracts and, indirectly, their subcontractors to apply the minimum wage laid down by the ‘Buildings and public works’ collective agreement, a law such as the Landesvergabegesetz may impose on service providers established in another Member State where minimum rates of pay are lower an additional economic burden that may prohibit, impede or render less attractive the provision of their services in the host Member State. Therefore, a measure such as that at issue in the main proceedings is capable of constituting a restriction within the meaning of Article 49 EC.


Drugim riječima, ako je minimalna naknada za korištenje cestovne infrastrukture viša od one u državi korisnika usluga, takva mjera može predstavljati restrikciju u smislu Čl. 49 EC koju je potrebno opravdati.


Poduzeća koja naplaćuju naknadu za korištenje cestovne infrastrukture smatraju se emanacijom države (vidi Commission v. Austria, C-205/98).


U istom predmetu ECJ je interpretirao Direktivu 93/89 te pojasnio u koju se svrhu može naplaćivati cestarina (caveat, ta Direktiva se primjenjuje samo na određena teretna vozila).


A Member State which does not apply the tolls demanded for the full itinerary on a motorway only in order to cover the costs linked with the construction, operation and development of that motorway fails to fulfil its obligation under Article 7(h) of Directive 93/89 on the application by Member States of taxes on certain vehicles used for the carriage of goods by road and tolls and charges for the use of certain infrastructures. The infrastructure network concerned within the meaning of that provision refers only to the section of the infrastructure for the use of which the toll is paid and not to all the sections of the motorway which form part of the same financing system.



Osim što je vjerovatno suprotna Čl. 49 UEZ, slovenska mjera je suprotna i Sporazumu o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju, tj. stand-still klauzuli iz Čl. 57.

Article 57
1. The Parties shall not take any measures or actions which render the conditions for the supply of services by Community and Croatian nationals or companies which are established in a Party other than that of the person for whom the services are intended significantly more restrictive as compared to the situation existing on the day preceding the day of entry into force of the Agreement.

Ukratko, otežava se pristup tržištu usluga za korisnike usluga iz Hrvatske.



2 comments:

Q said...

Slovenija je dobila ‘žuti karton’ Europske komisije zbog neravnopravnog položaja u kojem su se našli vozači u tranzitu, uvođenjem vinjeta...

Link: http://www.jutarnji.hr/dogadjaji_dana/clanak/art-2008,4,18,,116521.jl

Q said...

Još o vinjetama - iz austrijske perspektive http://www.jutarnji.hr/dogadjaji_dana/clanak/art-2008,5,9,slo_vinjete,118897.jl