DOCSLIB.ORG

UP/I 034-03/18-01/015 URBROJ: 580-10/65-2019-008 Zagreb, 20

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UP/I 034-03/18-01/015 URBROJ: 580-10/65-2019-008 Zagreb, 20 KLASA: UP/I 034-03/18-01/015 URBROJ: 580-10/65-2019-008 Zagreb, 20. veljače 2019. Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja, na temelju članka 31., članka 38. stavaka 5. i 9. te članka 58. stavka 1. točke 15. Zakona o zaštiti tržišnog natjecanja („Narodne novine“, br. 79/09 i 80/13), postupajući po inicijativi poduzetnika Optima Grupa d.o.o. Banja Luka, sa sjedištem u Bosni i Hercegovini, Banja Luci, Kralja Alfonsa XIII 37a, za pokretanje postupka utvrđivanja sprječavanja, ograničavanja ili narušavanja tržišnog natjecanja zlouporabom vladajućeg položaja protiv poduzetnika Jadranski naftovod d.d., sa sjedištem u Zagrebu, Miramarska cesta 24, na temelju odluke Vijeća za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja, u sastavu: Mladen Cerovac, mag. iur., predsjednik Vijeća, Vesna Patrlj, dipl. iur., zamjenica predsjednika Vijeća, dr. sc. Mirta Kapural, mr. sc. Ljiljana Pavlic i Denis Matić, dipl. iur., članovi Vijeća, sa sjednice 4/2019., održane 20. veljače 2019., donosi sljedeće RJEŠENJE Inicijativa se odbacuje jer ne postoje uvjeti za pokretanje postupka po službenoj dužnosti. Obrazloženje 1. Inicijativa za pokretanje postupka Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (dalje: Agencija) zaprimila je 21 kolovoza 2018., u smislu članka 37. Zakona o zaštiti tržišnog natjecanja („Narodne novine“, br. 79/09 i 80/13; dalje: ZZTN), inicijativu poduzetnika Optima Grupa d.o.o. Banja Luka, sa sjedištem u Bosni i Hercegovini, Banja Luci, Kralja Alfonsa XIII 37a, zastupanog po odvjetnicima iz odvjetničkog društva [...] (dalje: Optima grupa ili podnositelj inicijative), za pokretanje postupka utvrđivanja zlouporabe vladajućeg položaja protiv poduzetnika Jadranski naftovod d.d., sa sjedištem u Zagrebu, Miramarska cesta 24 (dalje JANAF). Podnositelj inicijative navodi kako je sustav JANAF-a jedini sustav za transport nafte na području Republike Hrvatske i da ne postoje alternativni dobavni pravci niti načini transporta velikih količina nafte. Zbog toga svi korisnici usluga transporta nafte naftovodom u Republici Hrvatskoj, uključujući i podnositelja inicijative, moraju koristiti usluge JANAF-a. Optima grupa koristi JANAF-ov naftovod od terminala u Omišlju do terminala u Slavonskom Brodu od 2008. godine, na temelju jednogodišnjih ugovora o transportu nafte, koji se zaključuju svake godine. Od 2009. do 2015. godine koristila ga je i za dionicu od mađarske granice (Gola) do terminala u Slavonskom Brodu. Podnositelj inicijative smatra da JANAF proizvoljno i netransparentno određuje cijene transporta nafte svojim naftovodom, čime mu je omogućeno da korisnicima nameće nepravedne cijene koje nemaju troškovno opravdanje, što predstavlja zlouporabu vladajućeg položaja prema članku 13. stavku 1. točki 1. ZZTN-a. S obzirom da ne postoji tarifa niti ikakva propisana metodologija za izračun tih cijena, barem koliko je podnositelju inicijative poznato, niti obveze JANAF-a da javno objavljuje svoje cijene ili barem metodologiju njihova izračuna, JANAF-u je također, prema mišljenju Optima grupe, omogućeno da različito tretira različite korisnike naftovoda, odnosno da primjenjuje nejednake uvjete na svoje korisnike, što predstavlja zlouporabu vladajućeg položaja u smislu članka 13. stavka 1. točke 3. ZZTN-a. Podnositelj inicijative navodi kako su na temelju članka 5. stavka 1. Zakona o tržištu nafte i naftnih derivata („Narodne novine“, br. 19/14 i 73/17) energetski subjekti koji obavljaju energetsku djelatnost transporta nafte naftovodom dužni svakoj pravnoj ili fizičkoj osobi koja podnese zahtjev za pristup transportnom sustavu, a koja ispunjava tehničke uvjete za pristup i priključenje, omogućiti pristup na nepristran i razvidan način prema načelu pregovornog pristupa treće strane. Pregovorni pristup treće strane podrazumijeva način pristupa sustavu u kojem vlasnik sustava ili operator i treća strana pregovaraju oko komercijalnih uvjeta pristupa sustavu (članak 3. stavak 1. točka 15. Zakona o tržištu nafte i naftnih derivata), što uključuje i cijenu transporta. Za razliku od pregovornog pristupa, postoji i tzv. regulirani pristup treće strane u kojemu su tarife transporta unaprijed poznate. Podnositelj inicijative ističe da je u Republici Hrvatskoj na temelju ranije važećeg Zakona o tržištu nafte i naftnih derivata (koji je prestao važiti 2014. godine) princip određivanja cijene transporta nafte bio drugačiji jer je taj zakon sadržavao i dodatnu odredbu koja je propisivala da se pregovorni pristup treće strane temelji na tarifnom sustavu za transport nafte. Tarifnim sustavom za transport nafte naftovodom („Narodne novine“, br. 39/07) bili su određeni način i kriteriji za utvrđivanje tarifa za transport nafte, značajke metodologije, kategorije korisnika usluga transporta nafte naftovodom te podaci, dokumenti i ostale podloge koji se koriste za utvrđivanje troškova transporta nafte naftovodom, ukupni prihodi energetskog subjekta za transport nafte naftovodom i tarife za transport nafte naftovodom. Tarifni je sustav utvrđivao metodologiju izračuna gornjeg iznosa tarifa za transport nafte naftovodom, pri čemu se rukovodio ostvarenjem određenih ciljeva, kao što su pokriće ukupnih troškova poslovanja transportera, koji su morali biti opravdani, osiguranje investicija, osiguranje prinosa na imovinu te održavanje sigurnosti i zaštita okoliša. Prilikom donošenja novog Zakona o tržištu nafte i naftnih derivata, dio odredbe o temeljenju pregovornog pristupa treće strane na Tarifnom sustavu za transport nafte izostavljen je, a Tarifni je sustav prestao važiti. Stoga se pregovorni pristup treće strane od 2014. godine više ne temelji na Tarifnom sustavu pa se cijena transporta nafte određuje odlukom JANAF-a, koja se donosi na osnovi internog pravilnika JANAF-a o utvrđivanju cijena transporta nafte naftovodom. Podnositelj inicijative smatra da postojeći način određivanja cijena transporta nafte nije u skladu s člankom 5 stavkom 1. Zakona o tržištu nafte i naftnih derivata, koji propisuje da JANAF, kao energetski subjekt, mora korisniku omogućiti pristup naftovodu na nepristran i razvidan način prema načelu pregovornog pristupa treće strane. Podnositelj inicijative očitovao se da se prije zaključenja ugovora o transportu nafte za 2018. godinu, u razdoblju od listopada 2017. do siječnja 2018. godine, u više navrata obraćao JANAF-u kako bi dobio informacije o načinu određivanja visine cijena transporta, no JANAF mu nije dao nikakvo objašnjenje, odnosno jedino je potvrdio da se visina cijene veže uz najavljene (ugovorene) količine nafte koje korisnik planira transportirati u konkretnoj godini, na način da što je veća količina nafte, cijena transporta nafte je niža. Uz to, podnositelj inicijative očitovao se da je cijena transporta nafte određena u američkim dolarima za neto tonu transportirane nafte. Raspon cijena ponuđenih od strane JANAF-a 2 podnositelju inicijative u predmetnom razdoblju bio je od [...] USD/neto toni za [...] tona nafte do [...] USD/neto toni za [...] tona nafte. Optima grupa smatra da navod JANAF-a kako je cijena transporta za veće količine nafte manja nije točan jer je iz dostavljenih ugovora za 2015. i 2016. godinu vidljivo da se cijena za istu količinu nafte ([...]) razlikovala pa je u 2015. godini cijena za transport na dionici Omišalj-Brod bila ugovorena u iznosu od [...] USD/neto toni, dok je za tu istu dionicu za 2016. godinu ugovorena u iznosu od [...] USD/neto toni. To, po mišljenju Optima grupe, također ukazuje na nepostojanje bilo kakvih kriterija za određivanje cijene transporta od strane JANAF-a, odnosno na mogućnost da JANAF cijene određuje proizvoljno i prekomjerno, s ciljem ostvarivanja ekstra profita, a neovisno o troškovima koje ima vezano uz pružanje predmetne usluge. Navedeno je, smatra Optima grupa, razvidno i iz ponuda koje joj je JANAF dostavljao svake godine prije zaključenja ugovora, gdje cijene transporta iz ponuda niti jedne godine nisu bile cijene koje su na kraju i ugovorene, pri čemu JANAF nije pružio nikakvo obrazloženje kalkulacije ponuđenih, odnosno ugovorenih cijena. Primjerice, za 2015. godinu JANAF je podnositelju inicijative za količinu od minimalno [...] tona nafte ponudio cijenu transporta na dionici Omišalj-Brod u iznosu od [...] USD/t, dok je ugovorena cijena za tu količinu bila [...] USD/neto toni. Ponuda za 2015. godinu za minimalno [...] tona nafte na istoj dionici transporta bila je [...] USD/t, dok je za minimalno [...] tona nafte u 2018. godini JANAF ponudio [...] USD/t - dakle za manju količinu u 2018. ponudio je nižu cijenu nego za veću količinu u 2015. godini. Za 2017. godinu JANAF je pak ponudio cijenu od [...] USD/t za količinu od minimalno [...] tona, a ugovorena cijena bila je [...] USD/neto toni za količinu [...] ± 10%. Kao dokaze, podnositelj inicijative priložio je ponude JANAF-a od 18. studenog 2014., 18. studenog 2015., 30. rujna 2016. i 9. listopada 2017. Podnositelj inicijative smatra kako tvrdnja JANAF-a da cijena transporta ovisi o ugovorenim količinama, odnosno da JANAF za veću ugovorenu količinu nudi korisniku nižu cijenu transporta, nije točna ni kada se analiziraju cijene koje JANAF nudi drugim korisnicima naftovoda. Prema javno dostupnim podacima, podnositelj inicijative pokušao je prikazati odnos svoje cijene i cijena koje su njegovi konkurenti plaćali za transport nafte JANAF-ovim naftovodom u 2016. godini Tablica 1. Usporedba cijena transporta nafte iz 2016. po korisnicima [...] Izvor: inicijativa zaprimljena 21. kolovoza 2018. Obrada: AZTN Podnositelj inicijative očitovao se da je podatak o ukupnoj cijeni ugovorenog transporta za MOL pribavljen iz priopćenja JANAF-a objavljenog na mrežnoj stranici
Load more

Recommended publications
  • JANAF Oil Pipeline & Storage Company
    JANAF Oil Pipeline & Storage Company JANAF IN EUROPEAN OIL PIPELINE NETWORK 2 JANAF pipeline has significant role in oil supply to refineries of SE & Central Europe 1979-2014 - 201 mil. tons , oil transport JANAF JANAF – ADRIA PIPELINES EU PROJECT OF COMMON INTEREST 3 JANAF is recognized as EU strategic pipeline through project of common interest entitled JANAF-Adria pipelines: reconstruction, upgrade, maintenance and capacity increase of the existing JANAF and Adria oil pipelines linking Croatian Omišalj seaport to the Southern Druzhba JANAF – Adria is one of six oil pipelines PCI and one of 248 energy PCI adopted by EC in 2013 Promoters of the PCI are JANAF (Croatia), MOL (HU) and Transpetrol (SK) JANAF OIL PIPELINE ALLOWS FREE FLOW OF CRUDE OIL ACROSS BORDERS AND SECURE SUPPLY IN EU AND SE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES ENERGY UNION PRINCIPLE 4 Refinery capacities (MT): Total 37,7 MT Rijeka (Croatia) 4,5 Sisak (Croatia) 2,2 Pancevo (Serbia) 4,8 Novi Sad (Serbia) 2,5 Brod (Bosnia and Herz.) 1,3 Szazhalombatta (Hungary) 8,1 Slovnaft (Slovakia) 6,1 Kralupy & Lilvinov (Czech R.) 8,2 JANAF STORES COMPULSORY CRUDE OIL & PETROLEUM PRODUCTS STOCKS 5 Omišalj Terminal 240.000 m3 (crude oil) Sisak Terminal 240.000 m3 (crude oil) Žitnjak, Zagreb Terminal 100.000 m3 (petrolum products) Small shareholders DUUDI / DAB JANAF OIL PIPELINE & 5% 4% HEP 5% DUUDI / RH DUUDI / STORAGE SYSTEMS 11% HZMO 37% COMPANY PROFILE INA 12% 6 CERP 26% JANAF Plc. performs the activities of crude oil transport, as well as storage and reloading of crude oil and petroleum products Designed capacity - 34 million tons of crude oil transported annually (MTA), while the installed capacity amounts to 20 MTA Length of pipeline - 622 km Omišalj-Urinj subsea oil pipeline linking Omišalj Terminal and INA- Oil Refinery Rijeka Reversal flow on the Sisak-Coatian/Hungarian border-Sisak and Omišalj-Sisak sections (permitting procedure under way) Terminals: Crude oil: Omišalj, Sisak, Virje, Slavonski Brod Capacities:1,540 mil.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounting for Regional Poverty Differences in Croatia: Exploring the Role of Disparities in Average Income and Inequality
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Accounting for regional poverty differences in Croatia: Exploring the role of disparities in average income and inequality Rubil, Ivica The Institute of Economics, Zagreb 16 January 2013 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/43827/ MPRA Paper No. 43827, posted 16 Jan 2013 11:16 UTC ACCOUNTING FOR REGIONAL POVERTY DIFFERENCES IN CROATIA: EXPLORING THE ROLE OF DISPARITIES IN AVERAGE INCOME AND INEQUALITY Ivica Rubil The Institute of Economics, Zagreb January 2013 Abstract The prevalence of poverty in a given population is determined by both the level of average income and the shape of income distribution. Accordingly, the difference in poverty between two populations can be attributed to disparities in their average incomes and in the levels of income inequality. In this paper, we decompose the differences in relative poverty between each of the twenty-one Croatian counties and Croatia as a whole into the contributions of the mean income and income inequality, using the Household Budget Survey data for 2010. The decomposition framework that we utilize here is one usually applied for decompositions of intertemporal poverty changes, and is based on the concept of Shapley value from cooperative game theory. Poverty is measured by three conventional measures – the headcount ratio, the poverty gap, and the squared poverty gap – and robustness of the results to switching from one measure to another is discussed. The results of decompositions show that in most cases both the mean income and inequality differences contribute to poverty variation across the counties, relative to poverty in Croatia as a whole. When poverty is measured by the headcount ratio, the income contribution dominates the inequality contribution, while when we switch to the other two measures, which give more weight to poorer among the poor, the inequality contribution starts to dominate.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia Atlas
    FF II CC SS SS Field Information and Capital Elevation Coordination Support Section (Above mean sea level) Division of Operational Services UNHCR Country Office Croatia / National Office 3,250 to 4,000 metres Sources: / Liaison Office 2,500 to 3,250 metres UNHCR, Global Insight digital mapping 1,750 to 2,500 metres © 1998 Europa Technologies Ltd. UNHCR Field Office As of December 2009 1,000 to 1,750 metres UNHCR Field Unit 750 to 1,000 metres The boundaries and names shown International boundary 500 to 750 metres and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement Main road 250 to 500 metres or acceptance by the United Nations. Secondary road 0 to 250 metres g Name_of_the_workspace.WOR !! Villach !! !! !! !! Below mean sea level !! !! Davograd Railway !! Marcali !! Orosháza !! Maribor !! Szank !! !! Cortina d'Ampezzo !! !! !! Mursko Sredisce !! Kalocsa!! Kecel !! Mindszent !! !! !! Kiskunmajsa !! !! Nagykanizsa !! Jesenice Tolna !! Kiskunhalas !! !! Ptuj !! !! Hajós !! !! Hódmezövásárhely!! !! !! !! Tolmezzo !! Böhönye !! !! !! !! !! !! Cakovec !! !! Sostanj !! !! !! Forraaskut !! !! Kaposvár !! !! Balotaszállás!! !! !! !! !! Mezöhe !! Varazdin HUNGARY!! !! Jánoshalma !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! Legrad !! !! Ruzsa !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! Gemona del Friuli !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! Csurgó !! !! Szeged !! Kranj !! Celje !! Nagyatád !! !! !! Ivanec !! !! SLOVENIA !! !! !! Makó !! Durmanec !! Komló !! Maniago !! !! !! !! !! !! !! Koprivnica !! Baja !! Horgos !! Nadlac ! !! Belluno !!
    [Show full text]
  • Current Radiological Situation in Slavonski Brod, Croatia: Is There a Reason for Concern? 206 Arh Hig Rada Toksikol 2017;68:206-211
    Petrinec B, et al. Current radiological situation in Slavonski Brod, Croatia: is there a reason for concern? 206 Arh Hig Rada Toksikol 2017;68:206-211 Original article DOI: 10.1515/aiht-2017-68-2992 Current radiological situation in Slavonski Brod, Croatia: is there a reason for concern? Branko Petrinec1, Isabela Tišma2, Marko Šoštarić1, Marina Poje Sovilj2, Dinko Babić1, Vanja Radolić2, Igor Miklavčić2, and Branko Vuković2 Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health, Zagreb1, J. J. Strossmayer University in Osijek, Department of Physics, Osijek2, Croatia [Received in May 2017; Similarity Check in May 2017; Accepted in July 2017] For years, the town of Slavonski Brod in Croatia has been facing serious problems with air pollution, which is usually attributed to an oil refinery across the Sava River in Bosnia and Herzegovina. While the air quality is being monitored rigorously with regard to nonradioactive matter, no attention has been paid to the possibility of a coincidental radioactive pollution. This study is the first to have addressed this issue. We measured ambient dose rate equivalents at 150 sites and found that none exceeded 120 nSv h-1, while the average was 80 nSv h-1. Gamma-ray spectrometry of the collected river water and soil samples did not reveal any unusual radioactivity either. In other words, we have found no evidence of radioactive pollution that would endanger the health of the residents of Slavonski Brod. KEY WORDS: air quality; ambient dose rate equivalent; gamma ray spectrometry; oil refinery; radioactive pollution Slavonski Brod is a Croatian town of 65,000 residents, The aim of our study, however, was not to identify the situated on the left bank of the Sava River at the border source of the pollution or enter the debate about its social with Bosnia and Herzegovina (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Example of Positioning Intermodal Terminals On
    N.Brnjac,I.Æavar:ExampleofPositioningIntermodalTerminalsonInlandWaterways NIKOLINABRNJAC,Ph.D. IntermodalTransport E-mail:[email protected] Review IVANAÆAVAR,B.Eng. Accepted:Apr.21,2009 E-mail:[email protected] Approved:Oct.22,2009 UniversityofZagreb, FacultyofTransportandTrafficSciences Vukeliæeva4,HR-10000Zagreb,RepublicofCroatia N.Brnjac,I.Æavar:ExampleofPositioningIntermodalTerminalsonInlandWaterways 433-439 EXAMPLEOFPOSITIONINGINTERMODAL TERMINALSONINLANDWATERWAYS ABSTRACT and identifies the main problems and bottlenecks of the process and the operation at terminals. Still, the Positioning of intermodal terminals is of key importance time losses and high costs do not refer only to the pro- since it affects the very investment into the terminal, ecological, cesses at terminals. Attention needs to be directed to physical issues and the costs of the operation of individual ter- the entire intermodal chain. The integration of all the minals. Detailed analysis has to be performed by decision-mak- participants in intermodal transport by using informa- ing regarding the siting of intermodal terminals. The work ana- lyzes the relevant criteria necessary for the siting of intermodal tion systems and communication technologies (carri- terminals. The problem of the proposed research is the structure ers, logistic service providers, rail operators, inter- of intermodal systems in the Republic of Croatia with the case modal operators, terminal operators, forwarding study of inland waterways. The research and the study of the agents, agents, shippers,
    [Show full text]
  • Sisak , V2 Sisak - Croatia Flood - 02/04/2013 Reference Map - Detail Production Date: 11/04/2013 Austria Hungary N " Slovenia Zagreb 0 Au ' Podravska Varazdin Dr 3 !
    605000 607500 610000 612500 16°20'0"E 16°21'0"E 16°22'0"E 16°23'0"E 16°24'0"E 16°25'0"E 16°26'0"E 16°27'0"E GLIDE number: N/A Activation ID: EMSR-035 Product N.: 01Sisak , v2 Sisak - Croatia Flood - 02/04/2013 Reference Map - Detail Production date: 11/04/2013 Austria Hungary N " Slovenia Zagreb 0 au ' Podravska Varazdin Dr 3 !. 0 0 3 ^ ° 0 0 5 0 0 4 Varazdinska 5 5 Savinjska Hungary 4 4 Krapina zupanija N " 0 0 !. Serbia 0 5 5 ' 3 Slovenia Bosnia 3 ° Krapinsko-zagorska and 5 !( 4 S ava zupanija Herzegovina Mur Spodnjeposavska Bjelovar !. CroatiVairovitica Zagreb Adriatic Sea !.Montenegro Dolenjska ^ Italy Albania Zagrebacka Bjelovarsko-bilogorska zupanija zupanija Karlovac !. Sisak !. Pozesko-slavenska zupanija Karlovacka Croatia Pozega !. zupanija Sisacko-moslavacka zupanija Brodsko-posavska zupanija Federacija Bosnia and Republika Bosna i Srpska Hercegovina Herzegovina Cartographic Information 1:15000 Full color ISO A1, low resolution (100 dpi) 0 0,25 0,5 1 km N " 0 ' 2 3 ° Map Coordinate System: WGS 1984 UTM Zone 33N 5 4 Graticule: WGS 84 geographical coordinates N " ± 0 ' 2 3 ° 5 4 Legend General Information Settlements Transportation Area of Interest Commercial Railway !( Industrial Primary Road 0 0 Residential Secondary Road 0 0 Point of Interest 5 5 2 !( 2 4 4 Hydrology Local Road 0 0 4 Educational 5 5 River !( 9 Institutional !( !( N " 0 ' 1 3 ° 5 4 N " 0 ' 1 3 ° 5 4 Map Information Severe floods have stricken northern and central part of Croatia and have caused damage in !( several river basins and agricultural areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration Sea and River Ports – the Challenge of the Croatian Transport System for the 21St Century Integracija Morskih I Ri
    Integration Sea and River Ports – the Challenge of the Croatian Transport System for the 21st Century Integracija morskih i riječnih luka – izazov hrvatskog prometnog sustava za 21. stoljeće Maja Krčum Veljko Plazibat Gorana Jelić Mrčelić University of Split University of Split University of Split Faculty of Maritime Studies Faculty of Maritime Studies Faculty of Maritime Studies e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] DOI 10.17818/NM/2015/4.2 UDK 656.615(497.5)”20” Review / Pregledni rad Paper accepted / Rukopis primljen: 20. 7. 2015. Summary This paper discusses the indicators of development possibilities for sea ports of KEY WORDS national importance which are opened for public traffic: Rijeka, Ploče, Zadar, Split logistic networks and Dubrovnik, as well as for inland water ports: Vukovar, Osijek, Slavonski Brod and indicators of development Sisak. Development of traffic and logistic integration processes have been proposed possibilities for Croatian sea and river ports, based upon development factors analyses. Croatian development directions sea ports Rijeka, Ploče and inland water cargo ports Osijek, Vukovar, Slavonski Brod ports in the Republic of Croatia and Sisak have been analysed as delivery/forwarding points (nodes), taking into account the directions of goods flows, the participation in the traffic of goods, and all other relevant indicators. The integrated and coordinated approach to the ports and other subjects in the logistic chain redirects the traffic from roads to railways and inland waterways as energy efficient and environmentally – friendly forms of transportation, increases business rationality and optimal organisation users and transportation entities. Sažetak U ovom radu su analizirani pokazatelji razvojnih mogućnosti morskih luka koje su KLJUČNE RIJEČI otvorene za javni promet kao što su Rijeka, Ploče, Zadar, Split i Dubrovnik, te luke na unutarnjim vodama: Vukovar, Osijek, Slavonski Brod i Sisak.
    [Show full text]
  • CROATIA Dino Mujadžević 1 1 Muslim Populations the Last National
    CROATIA Dino Mujadžević 1 1 Muslim Populations The last national census from 2011 for the Republic of Croatia provides very reliable data on the number and dispersion of Muslim population and other religions, as well as ethnic groups, in this country. There are 62,977 persons in Croatia who identified themselves as Muslims, which is 1.47% of the total population of 4,284,889. This is a fairly significant increase from 54,814 persons according to 1991 census and 56,777 (1.28% of total population) according to 2001 census.2 According to administra- tive division the largest part of Muslim population resides in the city of Zagreb (18,044; 2,28%) and the following counties (županije):3 Primorsko- goranska (Rijeka; 10,667; 3.60%), Istarska (Pula; 9,965; 4.79%), Sisačko- moslavačka (Sisak; 4,140; 2.40%), Dubrovačko-neretvanska (Dubrovnik, 2,927, 2.39%), Vukovarsko-srijemska (Vukovar; 2,619; 1.46%), Karlovačka (Karlovac; 2,163; 1.68%). Muslims are largely concentrated in urban areas, most notably in the capital and the largest industrial centre Zagreb and other major towns and industrial centres in mainland Croatia: Sisak (2,442; 5.11%), Slavonski Brod (1,173; 1.98%) and Karlovac (705; 1.27%). Muslims are significantly present in ports, industrial and tourist centers of Northern Adriatic: Rijeka (5,820; 4.52%), Pula (3.275; 5.70%), Labin (1,243; 10.68%), Vodnjan (858; 14.02%), Poreč (710; 4.25%), Umag (669; 4.97%), Raša (569; 17.88%), Rovinj (507, 3.55%), Buzet (240; 3.91%) and Buje (207; 3.99%).
    [Show full text]
  • THE ROMAN CITY of SISCIA Sisak CROATIA
    THE ROMAN CITY OF SISCIA Sisak CROATIA THE ROMAN CITY OF SISCIA Sisak CROATIA Document adopted by the Ministry of Culture of Croatia on 28 January 2010 Integrated Rehabilitation Project Plan/Survey of the Architectural and Archaeological Heritage (IRPP/SAAH) 1 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................3 1. THE SITE.............................................................................................................................................4 2. THE PROPOSAL.................................................................................................................................7 3. THE OUTCOME..................................................................................................................................8 4. THE REASON .....................................................................................................................................9 5. RESPONSIBILITY ...............................................................................................................................9 6. PARTICIPATION...............................................................................................................................10 7. THE RISKS........................................................................................................................................11 8. THE COSTS......................................................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial (Regional) Differences of Demographic Development of the Republic of Croatia
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Nejašmić, Ivo; Njegač, Dražen Conference Paper Spatial (Regional) Differences of Demographic Development of the Republic of Croatia 41st Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "European Regional Development Issues in the New Millennium and their Impact on Economic Policy", 29 August - 1 September 2001, Zagreb, Croatia Provided in Cooperation with: European Regional Science Association (ERSA) Suggested Citation: Nejašmić, Ivo; Njegač, Dražen (2001) : Spatial (Regional) Differences of Demographic Development of the Republic of Croatia, 41st Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "European Regional Development Issues in the New Millennium and their Impact on Economic Policy", 29 August - 1 September 2001, Zagreb, Croatia, European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Louvain-la-Neuve This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/115281 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.
    [Show full text]
  • ASSESSMENT Croatia 2010
    SIGMA Support for Improvement in Governance and Management A joint initiative of the OECD and the European Union, principally financed by the EU ASSESSMENT Croatia 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW ............................................................................................................. 2 CIVIL SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ..................................................................................................... 5 INTEGRITY ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 PUBLIC EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL ................................................................................. 11 PUBLIC PROCUREMENT ................................................................................................................................. 14 POLICY-MAKING AND CO-ORDINATION ........................................................................................................ 20 This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and they do not necessarily reflect the views of the OECD and its member countries or of the beneficiary countries participating in the Sigma Programme SIGMA Assessment Croatia Democracy and the Rule of Law 2010 DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW The Government’s actions during the period under review focused on recovering
    [Show full text]
  • ACFC 2Nd State Report Croatia
    April 2004 ACFC/SR/II(2004)002 SECOND REPORT SUBMITTED BY CROATIA PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25, PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES (Received on 13 April 2004) ACFC/SR/II(2004)002 Table of contents: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 6 PART I.............................................................................................................................. 11 From the report of the Ministry of Justice ........................................................................ 11 From the report of the Office for National Minorities of the Government of the Republic of Croatia .......................................................................................................................... 20 From the report of the Commission on Relations with Religious Communities.............. 34 From the report of the Central State Administration Bureau............................................ 38 From the report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .......................................................... 38 From the report of the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports .................................. 38 Albanian national minority ............................................................................................... 43 PART II............................................................................................................................. 46 Answers to the Questionnaire of the Advisory
    [Show full text]