natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Den anden beslutning vedrżrte mangler ved anvendelsen af ordningen for kvžg over 30 mneder i Det Forenede Kongerige (1), medens den tredje overensstemmelsesbeslutning vedrżrte betalinger, der var afholdt efter fristens udlżb, og andre regnskabsreguleringer. 
The second related to weaknesses in the application of the Over Thirty Months Scheme in the United Kingdom (1) and the third conformity decision concerned late payments and other bookkeeping adjustments.
Den samlede vžrdi af disse tre overensstemmelsesbeslutninger, som blev truffet i 1999, er forholdsvis beskeden (207 millioner euro); beslutningerne džkker EUGFL-regnskabsrene 1996 til 1998 (tabel 6). 
The combined value of these three conformity decisions taken during 1999 is relatively modest (207 million euro) and they cover the 1996 to 1998 EAGGF years (Table 6).
Eftersom der senere vil kunne tržffes overensstemmelsesbeslutninger, som ogs džkker udgifter for 1996, er det Ń selv for det fżrste r (1996) Ń for tidligt at drage nogen konklusioner om den samlede vžrdi af korrektioner under den reviderede ordning for regnskabsafslutning. 
Since later conformity decisions may also cover 1996 expenditure it is too early to draw conclusions concerning the total value of corrections for even the first year (1996) under the reformed clearance system.
(1) Jf. sžrberetning nr. 19/98 om Fžllesskabets finansiering af visse foranstaltninger truffet som fżlge af BSE-krisen (EFT C 383 af 9.12.1998). 
(1) See Special Report No 19/98 concerning the Community financing of certain measures taken as a result of the BSE crisis (OJ C 383, 9.12.1998).
Disse udgifter afsluttes ved en ny beslutning om regnskabsafslutning, nr der er foretaget yderligere revision af betalingsorganernes regnskaber. 
These expenses are cleared during a second financial decision after more work is done on the accounts of the paying agencies.
(2) I 1991 vedrżrte de fleste af korrektionerne tillžgsafgifter p mžlk i Spanien (452,4 mio. ECU) og Italien (526,8 mio. ECU) (i alt 979,2 mio. 
(2) In 1991, most of the corrections were related to milk super levies in Spain, 452,4 mio ECU, and Italy, 526,8 mio ECU (total of 979,2 mio Ecu).
(3) Fra og med 1996 er det samlede belżb for korrektioner forelżbigt, eftersom der endnu ikke er truffet overensstemmelsesbeslutninger. 
(3) From 1996 on, the total amount of corrections is provisory, there are still conformity decisions to be taken.
(4) Automatisk beregnet belżb for betalinger afholdt efter fristens udlżb (mio. ECU/EUR): Ń 1994: 661,3 Ń 1995: 391,7 Ń 1996: 271,7 Ń 1997: 129,1 Ń 1998: 70,4 NB: belżbene i kursiv er forelżbige. 
(4) Automatic amount for late payments (in mio ECU / EUR): Ń 1994: 661,3 Ń 1995: 391,7 Ń 1996: 271,7 Ń 1997: 129,1 Ń 1998: 70,4 NB: The amounts in italics are provisory.
Vekselkurser 1991: den vekselkurs, der er anvendt i den 24. finansrapport i bilag 23 ČFinansielle resultater af beslutningen om regnskabsafslutning 1991Ç. 
Exchange rates: 1991: exchange rate used in the 24th financial report in Annex 23 ÔFinancial results of 1991 clearance of accounts decisionŐ.
1992, 1993: de vekselkurser, der er anvendt i Revisionsrettens sžrberetninger nr. 1/97 og 2/98 for korrektioner og udskilte belżb samt anmeldte udgifter. 
1992 and 1993: exchange rates used for the Court of Auditors Special Reports No 1/97 and No 2/98 for corrections and disjunctions as well as the expenses declared.
Fra og med 1994: de vekselkurser, der er anvendt af Kommissionen i dennes sammenfattende rapporter. 
From 1994 on: exchange rates used by the Commission in its summary reports.
2.3.2001 DA De Europžiske Fžllesskabers Tidende C 69/19 FORLIGSPROCEDUREN Baggrund 55. 
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/19 THE CONCILIATION PROCEDURE Background 55.
Forligsproceduren indledes, efter at Kommissionen har fremsendt sine bemžrkninger til medlemsstaten. 
The conciliation procedure begins after the Commission has sent its observations to the Member State.
Som hovedregel oplyses det i skrivelsen, at det overvejes at foretage korrektioner, men der anfżres ingen belżb. 
As a general rule, the letter states that corrections are being considered but the amount is not specified.
Medlemsstaterne skal svare skriftligt og fr derefter lejlighed til at drżfte den foreslede korrektion p bilaterale mżder med Kommissionen. 
Member States must reply in writing and then have an opportunity to discuss the proposed correction during bilateral meetings with the Commission.
Nr disse mżder er afsluttet, meddeler Kommissionen den pgžldende medlemsstat, hvor stor en korrektion den ptžnker at foretage. 
After such meetings the Commission communicates to the Member State the value of the correction it intends to apply.
Medlemsstaten har 30 dage til at beslutte sig for eventuelt at forelžgge sagen for forligsorganet. 
The Member State has 30 days in which to decide whether to take its case to the Conciliation Body.
Der er afsat fire mneder til forligsproceduren, uden at dette i żvrigt berżrer medlemsstatens ret til at indbringe sagen for EF-Domstolen. 
A period of four months is foreseen for conciliation, without prejudice to the Member StateŐs right to appeal to the European Court of Justice.
Forligsorganet blev oprettet i 1994 (1) (organet har fungeret siden september 1994) som led i ČBelle-reformenÇ og er en integreret del af regnskabsafslutningsproceduren. 
The Conciliation Body was established in 1994 (1) (operational from September 1994) as part of the Belle reform and is an integral part of the clearance procedure.
Organets udtalelser er ikke bindende for Kommissionens endelige beslutning om regnskabsafslutning. 
The opinions of the Body are not binding on the CommissionŐs final decision on the clearance of accounts.
Forligsorganet bestr af fem medlemmer, der udpeges af Kommissionen efter hżring af EUGFL-komiten. 
The Conciliation Body is composed of five Members who are nominated by the Commission after consulting the EAGGF Committee.
Proceduren blev anvendt fżrste gang i forbindelse med 1992-regnskabsafslutningen, og sledes fżr proceduren med den sžrskilte rlige beslutning om regnskabsafslutning blev indfżrt i 1996. 
The procedure was applied for the first time with regard to the 1992 clearance of accounts, and as such it pre-dated the introduction of the separate financial clearance decision in 1996.
De fleste af de 120 udtalelser, der var afgivet ved udgangen af 1999, vedrżrer perioden 1992-1995. 
In fact, most of the 120 opinions given by the end of 1999 relate to the period 1992 to 1995.
Retten har tidligere fremsat bemžrkninger om forligsorganets arbejde i sine sžrberetninger om regnskabsafslutningerne for 1992 og 1993 (2), men har ikke tidligere foretaget en samlet gennemgang af, hvordan forligsorganet fungerer. 
The Court has previously commented on the work of the Conciliation Body in its special reports relating to the clearance of accounts for 1992 and 1993 (2) but has not previously undertaken a comprehensive review.
I 1999 foretog kontoret for regnskabsafslutning i GD for Landbrug en evaluering i samarbejde med forligsorganets sekretariat. 
An evaluation was carried out by the DG ÔAgricultureŐ clearance unit in conjunction with the Conciliation BodyŐs secretariatŐs in 1999.
Denne evaluering burde have vžret udfżrt af en mere uafhžngig instans, f.eks. finansinspektżren. 
This evaluation should have been carried out by a more independent service, such as DG ÔFinancial ControlŐ.
I evalueringsrapporten redegżres der for forligsorganets arbejde og de problemer, det er stżdt p. 
The evaluation report describes the work and problems faced by the Conciliation Body.
De stżrste problemer bestr i at f de forskellige tjenestegrene i Kommissionen til at blive enige inden for den frist p fire mneder, der er fastsat (3); desuden er det et stort arbejde at gennemg de ČnyeÇ oplysninger, der fżrst forelžgges af medlemsstaterne, nr forligsproceduren er indledt. 
The main problems that the Conciliation Body has to contend with are getting the different Commission services to agree, within the four-month deadline (3), and dealing with ÔnewŐ information that is submitted by the Member States at the time of conciliation and not before.
Retten er enig i mange af bemžrkningerne i rapporten, men drager andre konklusioner ud fra de data, den indeholder. 
The Court agrees with many of the points made in the report but draws different conclusions from the data it contains.
Retten baserer disse konklusioner p en undersżgelse af en stikprżve p 50 udtalelser fra forligsorganet. Resultaterne af denne undersżgelse fremgr af det fżlgende. 
The reasons for these differences are set out in the following paragraphs and are based on an examination of a sample of 50 of the opinions given by the Conciliation Body.
Forligsorganets rolle 60. 
Role of the Conciliation Body 60.
ČBelle-arbejdsgruppenÇ anbefalede en obligatorisk ordning i form af et uafhžngigt rdgivende organ, der skulle gżre det muligt for Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne at forhandle sig frem til et udenretligt forlig. 
The Belle group recommended a mandatory mechanism in the form of an independent consultative body to enable the Commission and the Member States to settle out of court by negotiation.
Det, der rent faktisk blev oprettet i henhold til Kommissionens beslutning 94/442/EF (4), var et forligsorgan, som har til opgave at Čforsżge at forlige Kommissionens og den pgžldende medlemsstats divergerende opfattelserÇ med hensyn til de korrektioner, Kommissionen har foreslet i forbindelse med regnskabsafslutningsproceduren. 
What was actually established under Commission Decision 94/442/EC (4) was a Conciliation Body whose remit is Ôto try to reconcile the divergent positions of the Commission and the Member State concernedŐ with regard to corrections proposed by the Commission in the context of the clearance of accounts procedure.
I december 1995 udarbejdede formanden for forligsorganet en rapport om det fżrste r, organet havde fungeret. 
In December 1995, the President of the Conciliation Body produced a report on the first year of its operation.
Det stod allerede da klart, at det ikke var lykkedes organet at opn endelige forlig. 
It had already become clear that the Body had failed to bring about definitive settlements.
Rapporten indgik i grundlaget for Kommissionens arbejdspapir (5), hvori det erkendes, at det nok var urealistisk at forvente, at der generelt kunne indgs forlig, men Kommissionen afviste samtidig enhver tanke om voldgift, som ville betyde, at forligsorganets udtalelser blev bindende. 
This report provided input for the CommissionŐs reflections paper (5), which recognised that conciliation was essentially unrealistic but rejected any thought of the idea of arbitration, which would imply that the opinions of the Conciliation Body would be binding.
I stedet foreslog Kommissionen, at forligsorganet skulle koncentrere sig om de argumenter, der blev fremsat af parterne, vurdere deres gyldighed og komme med forslag til, hvad der efter organets opfattelse ville vžre en rimelig korrektion. 
Instead it proposed that the Conciliation Body concentrate on the arguments put forward by both sides, evaluate their validity and recommend what it considers to be an appropriate correction.
Arbejdspapiret indeholdt ogs et forslag til žndring af beslutningen om oprettelse af forligsorganet for at give artikel 1, stk. 1, litra c), stżrre vžgt; Heri str der, at forligsorganet skal udarbejde en rapport og komme med alle relevante bemžrkninger, sfremt tvisten fortsat bestr helt eller delvis. 
The reflections paper included a proposal to modify the Decision setting up the Conciliation Body in order to give greater emphasis to Article 1(c), which requires the Conciliation Body to draw up a report and explain any points of dispute unresolved.
Forslaget blev ikke vedtaget. 
The proposal was not adopted.
Forligsorganet har udtalt sig i tilfžlde, hvor der efter dets opfattelse var foreslet urimeligt store korrektioner, men har aldrig bent givet udtryk for, at nogle korrektioner burde have vžret hżjere, selv om artikel 1, stk. 1, litra c), ikke udelukker noget sdant. 
Whilst the Conciliation Body has commented on what it considers to be excessive corrections, it has never openly stated that the corrections should have been higher, although it is not precluded from doing so under Article 1(c).
Vurdering af forligsorganets indsats 62. 
Performance measurement of the Conciliation Body 62.
I et forsżg p at mle den mervžrdi, forligsorganet har til-fżrt, og vurdere dets effektivitet, nžvner evalueringsrapporten en ržkke kriterier: overholdelse af den fastsatte tidsfrist p fire mneder, de opnede resultater, indvirkningen p, hvor mange sager der indbringes for EF-Domstolen, og den finansielle effekt. 
A number of criteria have been mentioned in the evaluation report in an attempt to measure the added value and effectiveness of the Conciliation Body: meeting the four-month deadline, outcome, impact on the number of cases submitted to the European Court of Justice and financial impact.
Retten har foretaget sin egen analyse af, hvordan disse kriterier er opfyldt. 
The Court has carried out its own analysis of these issues.
Firemnedersfristen 63. 
The four-month deadline 63.
Som hovedregel skal forligsorganet udsende sin rapport inden udlżbet af en frist p fire mneder. 
As a general rule, the Conciliation Body should issue its report within the four-month deadline.
I 25 af de 120 sager er fristen imidlertid blevet forlžnget med en eller to mneder (i et enkelt 4 (5) Se fodnote 1. ( ) FR/06/95/50800000. 
However, 25 of the 120 cases have been granted an extension of one or two months (in one case, four months) when the Commission has agreed to such 4 (5) See footnote 1. ( ) FR/06/95/50800000.
P00. 
P00.
(1) 2 ( ) 3 () Kommissionens beslutning 94/442/EF af 1. juli 1994 (EFT L 182 af 16.7.1994, s. 
(1) 2 ( ) 3 () Commission Decision 94/442/EC of 1 July 1994 (OJ L 182, 16.7.1994, p.
Sžrberetning nr. 1/97 (EFT C 52 af 12.2.1997) og sžrberetning nr. 2/98 (EFT C 121 af 20.4.1998). 
Special Report No 1/97 (OJ C 52, 12.2.1997) and Special Report No 2/98 (OJ C 121, 20.4.1998).
Dette punkt er tidligere blevet ppeget af formanden for forligsorganet i dennes rapport (december 1995) om det fżrste r, proceduren var i kraft. 
A point previously made by the President of the Conciliation Body in his report (December 1995) on the first year of operation of the procedure.
C 69/20 DA De Europžiske Fžllesskabers Tidende 2.3.2001 tilfžlde med fire mneder), fordi Kommissionen havde accepteret en anmodning herom fra medlemsstaterne for at give dem mere tid til at fremlžgge deres bevismateriale. 
C 69/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.3.2001 a request from the Member States in order to allow them more time to submit their evidence.
Selv ved udlżbet af denne forlžngede frist kunne kun 20 % af de 25 sager rent faktisk afsluttes. 
Even at the end of this extended period only 20 % of the 25 cases concerned result in an effective conclusion.
Det tager gennemsnitligt yderligere fem mneder for Kommissionen at tržffe en overensstemmelsesbeslutning, der formaliserer de korrektioner, som har vžret til behandling i forligsorganet. 
It takes on average a further five months for the Commission to take a conformity decision formalising the corrections that have been considered by the Conciliation Body.
Som fżlge af spidsbelastningsperioder i forligsorganet kan det ske, at sagerne forsinkes og ikke som forudset kan medtages i en overensstemmelsesbeslutning. 
Due to peaks in the workload of the Conciliation Body, cases may be delayed and cannot be included as foreseen in the submission for a conformity decision.
F.eks. kunne 18 sager (277 millioner euro) ikke medtages i den fjerde overensstemmelsesbeslutning (1), fordi de stadig var til behandling i forligsorganet. 
For example, 18 conciliation cases (277 million euro) had to be excluded from the fourth conformity decision (1) because they were still being dealt with by the Conciliation Body.
Selve regnskaberne justeres gennemsnitligt to mneder efter datoen for overensstemmelsesbeslutningen. 
The accounts themselves are adjusted, on average, two months after the date of the conformity decision.
En typisk korrektion tager derfor et r, fra den indbringes for forligsorganet, og til den konteres medlemsstaten. 
The typical correction therefore takes a year from the time it is submitted for conciliation until it is charged to the Member State.
Retten har ikke fundet noget, der underbygger pstanden i evalueringsrapporten om, at forligsproceduren har gjort det muligt for Kommissionen at tržffe sine beslutninger hurtigere. 
The Court has found no evidence to support the claim made in the evaluation report that conciliation has enabled the Commission to reach decisions within a reduced timescale.
Resultater 65. 
Outcome 65.
Den samlede vžrdi af de 279 korrektioner, der i alt blev meddelt medlemsstaterne i den periode, evalueringsrapporten omfatter, er 2 436,2 millioner euro; 125 korrektioner, svarende til 1 636,2 millioner euro (to tredjedele), er blevet indbragt for forligsorganet. 
The total value of all 279 corrections proposed for the period under review shown in the evaluation report is 2 436,2 million euro of which 125 corrections corresponding to 1 636,2 million euro (two thirds) were submitted for conciliation.
Under forligsproceduren blev det samlede belżb nedsat med 275 millioner euro (17 %). 
During the conciliation process this total was reduced by 275 million euro (17 %).
Det fremgr af evalueringsrapporten, at det er lykkedes at opn forlig i 17 % af de 120 sager, idet medlemsstaterne accepterede de foreslede korrektioner, eller Kommissionen nedsatte korrektionerne eller trak dem tilbage. 
The evaluation report claims that 17 % of the 120 cases have been successfully reconciled in so far as the Member State accepted the proposed corrections or the Commission reduced or withdrew them.
Fire korrektioner blev ikke desto mindre efterfżlgende indbragt for EF-Domstolen (2), og flere blev opgivet, fordi Kommissionen nedsatte den foreslede korrektion inden den fżrste hżring. 
Four corrections were nevertheless subsequently taken to the European Court of Justice (2) and several were dropped because the Commission reduced the proposed correction before a conciliation hearing took place.
I 26 % af sagerne er forligsorganet enig i den korrektion, Kommissionen har foreslet, og i 50 % af sagerne er forligsorganet enig i, at en korrektion er berettiget, men p et lavere niveau end det foreslede. Kommissionen fastholder imidlertid sin holdning. 
In 26 % of cases the Body agrees with the correction proposed by the Commission, and for 50 % of the cases, agrees that a correction is warranted at a lower level than the one proposed, but the Commission maintains its position.
Mange af disse sager er ligeledes blevet indbragt for EF-Domstolen. 
Many of these cases are also taken to the European Court of Justice.
I 10 % af sagerne kan forligsorganet ikke n frem til en konklusion, fordi det ikke har den fornżdne juridiske kompetence, eller fordi der ikke foreligger tilstržkkelige oplysninger. 
In 10 % of cases the Body cannot reach a conclusion because it is not competent in legal matters or there is insufficient information to enable it to do so.
Fire medlemsstater (Gržkenland, Spanien, Frankrig og Italien) tegner sig for 70 % af alle de sager, der blev forelagt for forligsorganet (80 % i vžrdi). 
Four Member States (Greece, Spain, France and Italy) account for 70 % of all cases submitted to the Conciliation Body (80 % by value).
Det stemmer ogs med deres andel i de samlede korrektioner, der er foretaget (figur 1). 
This is also in line with their share of the total corrections imposed (Graph 1).
De opnede nedsžttelser er af tilsvarende stżrrelse mlt i forhold til den samlede nedsžttelse, nemlig ca. 200 millioner euro (75 %). 
The benefits in terms of reduced corrections are proportional, some 200 million euro (75 %) of the total reduction.
De fleste af de korrektioner, der blev forelagt for forligsorganet, var baseret p faste satser Ń for perioden 1992-1995 var der tale om 60 % efter antal og 70 % efter vžrdi. 
Most of the corrections submitted for conciliation were based on flat rates Ń for the period 1992 to 1995, 60 % by number and 70 % by value.
Efter kritik fra Den Europžiske Revisionsret og Europa-Parlamentet blev denne fremgangsmde opgivet. 
Following criticism by the European Court of Auditors and the European Parliament, this approach was abandoned.
Det fremgr af de seneste sager, at hvis forbedringerne ikke har haft den żnskede virkning, kan korrektionerne for de pgžldende mangler gentages fra det ene r til det nžste. 
More recent cases demonstrate that unless improvements have had the desired effect, corrections for weaknesses may be repeated from one year to the next.
(1) 2 ( ) Kommissionens beslutning 2000/216/EF af 1. marts 2000 (EFT L 67 af 15.3.2000, s. 
(1) Commission Decision 2000/216/EC of 1 March 2000 (OJ L67, 2 15.3.2000, p.
37). Gržkenland 28, 48, 65 og Italien 94. 
37). ( ) Greece 28, 48, 65 and Italy 94.
3 () De faste korrektioner er p 2, 5, 10 og 25 %. 
3 () The flat rates are 2%, 5%, 10% and 25%.
2.3.2001 DA De Europžiske Fžllesskabers Tidende C 69/21 Figur 1 Samlet belżb for korrektioner i beslutningerne og vžrdien af de sager, der er indbragt for forligsorganet Ń pr. medlemsstat (1992-1995) Mio. ECU/EUR 1 000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Samlet belżb for korrektioner i beslutningerne fra 1992 til 1995 Samlet belżb for sager indbragt for forligsorganet I E F EL UK IRL D NL P B DK L Medlemsstater EF -Domstolen 71. 
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/21 Graph 1 Total amount of corrections in the decisions and value of the cases submitted to the Conciliation Body, per Member State (1992-1995) Mio ECU/EUR 1 000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Total amount of corrections in the decisions from 1992 to 1995 Total amount of cases submitted to the Conciliation Body I E F EL UK IRL D NL P B DK L Member States State, it is for that State to show that the conditions for obtaining the financing refused by the Commission are fulfilledŐ.
EF-Domstolen kan kun afgżre, om en korrektion skal opretholdes eller annulleres. 
The European Court of Justice can only decide whether to uphold or annul.
Den kan ikke foresl at žndre belżbet for den pgžldende korrektion, men i en enkelt sag (C-253/97 vedrżrende 96/IT/044 Ń olivenolie) anfżrte Domstolen, at en stżrre korrektion kunne have vžret berettiget. 
It cannot recommend a change to the actual amount of the correction although in one case (C-253/97 concerning 96/IT/044 (olive oil)), it has stated that a higher correction could have been justified.
BESLUTNINGER OM REGNSKABSAFSLUTNING Korrektioner som resultatindikator 74. 
CLEARANCE DECISIONS Corrections as a performance indicator 74.
Under den reviderede ordning har korrektionerne forelżbig vžret vžsentligt mindre end under den gamle (figur 2). 
Under the reformed system the corrections have until now been considerably lower than they were under the old system (Graph 2).
Europa-Parlamentet og udvalget af uafhžngige eksperter har udtrykt bekymring over, at korrektionerne er blevet mindre. 
The European Parliament and the Committee of Independent Experts have expressed concern at the falling level of corrections.
De ser det som et tegn p, at Kommissionens kontor for regnskabsafslutning ikke er s effektivt som tidligere, fordi der ikke foretages s mange kontroller, og/eller fordi kvaliteten af disse er faldet. 
They read this as a sign that the CommissionŐs clearance of accounts unit may not be as effective as it was as a result of a decrease in coverage and/or quality of controls.
Der er ikke fundet noget, der kan underbygge en sdan teori. 
There is little evidence to support such a theory.