Betekenis van:
severable

Voorbeeldzinnen

1. There can be no question of such a substantive alteration where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme’.
2. Therefore the new scheme altered the aid instrument as a whole, and thus it cannot be clearly severable from the existing aid.
3. There is no substantive alteration of an existing scheme where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme [92].
4. Fourth, and alternatively, the changes made to the social housing system relating to, for example, the so-called additional loans are severable from the general lending system.5.
5. According to the FGI, even if other changes introduced by Law 3220/2004 were to be considered as new aid, it would have to be considered as a severable amendment to the existing aid scheme.
6. The FGI then argues that even if the Commission considered that the severable alterations had to be notified as new aid, their compatibility would have to be assessed for each individual beneficiary on a case-by-case basis [75].
7. In light of the above, the Authority concludes that the alterations to the funding system are of a substantial nature.The described changes alter the aid scheme as such, without being a severable part from the existing schemes [58].
8. It is therefore — and in line with previous Commission practice — not severable from the initial funding regime and does not constitute a substantive amendment provided that the public service mission as such has not substantively been changed.’
9. Recognition or enforcement of a severable part of a judgment shall be granted where recognition or enforcement of that part is applied for, or only part of the judgment is capable of being recognised or enforced under this Convention.
10. There can be no question of such a substantive alteration where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme.’In the assessment of whether a change to an aid measure has the effect of turning hitherto existing aid into new aid, the Commission has examined whether the change is substantive in nature [39].
11. These new structures and objectives determine each support decision and cannot be considered as severable from the formerly existing aid measures.Consequently, the notified alterations are to be classified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
12. In its decision in the German public service broadcasting case, the Commission concluded that increases in the level of the licence fee should not be regarded as new aid: ‘The increase is rather the consequence of an increased financial need of public service broadcasters in fulfilling their public service mission. It is therefore — and in line with previous Commission practice — not severable from the initial funding regime and does not constitute a substantive amendment provided that the public service mission as such has not substantively been changed.’
13. However, even if Law 3220/2004 could be considered as an alteration of an earlier scheme, it is clear that the modifications introduced by this law are of substantial nature, as they do affect the evaluation of the compatibility of the aid measure with the common market [98], and are not purely formal or administrative. Moreover, the modifications applied to all beneficiaries and eligible activities. Therefore the new scheme altered the aid instrument as a whole, and thus it cannot be clearly severable from the existing aid.
14. In its decision in the German public service broadcasting case, the Commission concluded that increases in the level of the licence fee should not be regarded as new aid: ‘The increase is rather the consequence of an increased financial need of public service broadcasters in fulfilling their public service mission. It is therefore — and in line with previous Commission practice — not severable from the initial funding regime and does not constitute a substantive amendment provided that the public service mission as such has not substantively been changed.’ Commission Decision of 24 April 2007, cited above, paragraph 206.
15. […]’In Government of Gibraltar v Commission, the Court of First Instance held that: ‘it is only where the alteration [in national law] affects the actual substance of the original scheme that the latter is transformed into a new aid scheme. There can be no question of such a substantive alteration where the new element is clearly severable from the initial scheme.’In the assessment of whether a change to an aid measure has the effect of turning hitherto existing aid into new aid, the Commission has examined whether the change is substantive in nature [39].